Critically Ill Patients With the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study

Are Mycoplasma pneumoniae coinfections frequent in COVID-19 patients? A systematic review

Understanding the proportion of SARS-CoV-2 patients with Mycoplasmapneumoniae coinfection is crucial for treating patients suffering from coronavirus disease (COVID-19), help to ensure responsible use of antibiotics and minimize the negative consequences of overuse. In addition, this knowledge could have an impact on empirical antibiotic management guidelines for patients with COVID-19. This systematic review aimed to identify the prevalence of M. pneumoniae in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). A bibliographic search of studies published in Spanish or English was conducted using the PubMed search engine. Fourteen articles from different continents (America, Asia and Europe) were included, involving a total of 5855 patients in these studies. The mean age of COVID-19 patients with M. pneumoniae was 48 years old (range 1-107), most of whom were male. The detection of laboratory-confirmed M. pneumoniae infection varied between 0 and 33.3%. Most of patients referred fever, cough, and dyspnea, and received empirical antibiotic treatment. Bacterial coinfection was not associated with increased ICU admission and mortality. The prevalence of coinfection showed extremely dissimilar figures according to the population studied and diagnostic criteria. However, it is important to develop Latin American studies, given the heterogeneity observed in the studies conducted in different countries. Standardized definitions should be developed in order to be able to assess the impact of coinfections in patients with a diagnosis of COVID-19.

Evaluation of Serial Procalcitonin Levels for the Optimization of Antibiotic Use in Non-Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients

BACKGROUND

Procalcitonin (PCT) has been used as a biomarker to guide antibiotic therapy in various patient populations. However, its role in optimizing antibiotic use in COVID-19 patients has not been well studied to date. Thus, we aimed to evaluate the use of serial PCT monitoring as an antimicrobial stewardship tool for COVID-19 patients.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 240 COVID-19 patients who were admitted to a tertiary medical institution in Saudi Arabia between January 2020 and February 2022. Patients who received empiric antibiotic therapy for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and had serial procalcitonin levels were included. The patients were divided into two groups: the normal procalcitonin arm (PCT level < 0.5 ng/mL) and the elevated PCT arm (PCT level > 0.5 ng/mL). The primary and secondary outcomes were the effect of PCT monitoring on the duration of antibiotic exposure and the length of hospital stay, respectively. To measure the accuracy of PCT, the receiver-operating characteristic area under the curve (ROC-AUC) was determined.

RESULTS

Among the included patients, 142 were in the normal procalcitonin arm (median PCT, 0.12 ng/mL), and 78 were in the elevated PCT arm (median PCT, 4.04 ng/mL). The baseline characteristics were similar between the two arms, except for the higher prevalence of kidney disease in the elevated PCT arm. There was no statistically significant difference in the duration of antibiotic exposure between the normal and elevated PCT arms (median duration: 7 days in both arms). However, the length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the normal PCT arm (median stay, 9 days) than in the elevated PCT arm (median stay, 13 days; p = 0.028). The ROC-AUC value was 0.54 (95% CI: 0.503-0.595).

CONCLUSIONS

Serial PCT monitoring did not lead to a reduction in the duration of antibiotic exposure in COVID-19 patients. However, it was associated with a shorter hospital stay. These findings suggest that PCT monitoring may be useful for optimizing antibiotic use and improving outcomes in COVID-19 patients. While PCT-guided algorithms have the potential to enable antibiotic stewardship, their role in the context of COVID-19 treatment requires further investigation.

Interactions among microorganisms open up a new world for anti-infectious therapy

The human microbiome, containing bacteria, fungi, and viruses, is a community that coexists peacefully with humans most of the time, but with the potential to cause disease under certain conditions. When the environment changes or certain stimuli are received, microbes may interact with each other, causing or increasing the severity of disease in a host. With the appropriate methods, we can make these microbiota work for us, creating new applications for human health. This review discusses the wide range of interactions between microorganisms that result in an increase in susceptibility to, severity of, and mortality of diseases, and also briefly introduces how microorganisms interact with each other directly or indirectly. The study of microbial interactions and their mechanisms has revealed a new world of treatments for infectious disease. The regulation of the balance between intestinal flora, the correct application of probiotics, and the development of effective drugs by symbiosis all demonstrate the great contributions of the microbiota to human health and its powerful potential value. Consequently, the study of interactions between microorganisms plays an essential role in identifying the causes of diseases and the development of treatments.

Relationship between the Pre-ECMO and ECMO Time and Survival of Severe COVID-19 Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is the etiology of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is used to support gas exchange in patients who have failed conventional mechanical ventilation. However, there is no clear consensus on the timing of ECMO use in severe COVID-19 patients.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to compare the differences in pre-ECMO time and ECMO duration between COVID-19 survivors and non-survivors and to explore the association between them.

METHODS

PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, and other sources were searched until 21 October 2022. Studies reporting the relationship between ECMO-related time and COVID-19 survival were included. All available data were pooled using random-effects methods. Linear regression analysis was used to determine the correlation between pre-ECMO time and ECMO duration. The meta-analysis was registered with PROSPERO under registration number CRD42023403236.

RESULTS

Out of the initial 2473 citations, we analyzed 318 full-text articles, and 54 studies were included, involving 13,691 patients. There were significant differences between survivors and non-survivors in the time from COVID-19 diagnosis (standardized mean difference (SMD) = -0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI): [-0.53, -0.29], p < 0.00001), hospital (SMD = -0.53, 95% CI: [-0.97, -0.09], p = 0.02) and intensive care unit (ICU) admission (SMD = -0.28, 95% CI: [-0.49, -0.08], p = 0.007), intubation or mechanical ventilation to ECMO (SMD = -0.21, 95% CI: [-0.32, -0.09], p = 0.0003) and ECMO duration (SMD = -0.18, 95% CI: [-0.30, -0.06], p = 0.003). There was no statistical association between a longer time from symptom onset to ECMO (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.05, 95% CI: [0.99, 1.12], p = 0.11) or time from intubation or mechanical ventilation (MV) and the risk of mortality (highest vs. lowest time groups odds ratio (OR) = 1.18, 95% CI: [0.78, 1.78], p = 0.42; per one-day increase OR = 1.14, 95% CI: [0.86, 1.52], p = 0.36; HR = 0.99, 95% CI: [0.95, 1.02], p = 0.39). There was no linear relationship between pre-ECMO time and ECMO duration.

CONCLUSION

There are differences in pre-ECMO time between COVID-19 survivors and non-survivors, and there is insufficient evidence to conclude that longer pre-ECMO time is responsible for reduced survival in COVID-19 patients. ECMO duration differed between survivors and non-survivors, and the timing of pre-ECMO does not have an impact on ECMO duration. Further studies are needed to explore the association between pre-ECMO and ECMO time in the survival of COVID-19 patients.

Molecular Typing and Resistance Profile of Acinetobacter baumannii Isolates during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Findings from the "EPIRADIOCLINF" Project

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been a shift in focus towards controlling the spread of SARS-CoV-2, which has resulted in the neglect of traditional programs aimed at preventing healthcare-associated infections and combating antimicrobial resistance. The present work aims to characterize the colonization or infection with Acinetobacter baumannii of COVID-19 patients and to identify any clonality between different isolates. Specifically, data and resistance profiles of A. baumannii isolates were prospectively collected from patients recruited by the EPIRADIOCLINF project. Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) and multi-locus sequence typing (MLST) were used for molecular typing. Overall, we analyzed 64 isolates of A. baumannii from 48 COVID-19 patients. According to our analysis, we have identified the spread of a clonally related isolate, referred to as B. The PFGE pattern B includes four subtypes: B1 (consisting of 37 strains), B2 (11), B3 (5), and B4 (2). Furthermore, in the isolates that were examined using MLST, the most observed sequence type was ST/281. In terms of resistance profiles, 59 out of the total isolates (92.2%) were found to be resistant to gentamicin, carbapenems, ciprofloxacin, and tobramycin. The isolation and identification of A. baumannii from COVID-19 patients, along with the high levels of transmission observed within the hospital setting, highlight the urgent need for the implementation of effective prevention and containment strategies.

Artificial Intelligence: A Next-Level Approach in Confronting the COVID-19 Pandemic

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) which caused coronavirus diseases (COVID-19) in late 2019 in China created a devastating economical loss and loss of human lives. To date, 11 variants have been identified with minimum to maximum severity of infection and surges in cases. Bacterial co-infection/secondary infection is identified during viral respiratory infection, which is a vital reason for morbidity and mortality. The occurrence of secondary infections is an additional burden to the healthcare system; therefore, the quick diagnosis of both COVID-19 and secondary infections will reduce work pressure on healthcare workers. Therefore, well-established support from Artificial Intelligence (AI) could reduce the stress in healthcare and even help in creating novel products to defend against the coronavirus. AI is one of the rapidly growing fields with numerous applications for the healthcare sector. The present review aims to access the recent literature on the role of AI and how its subfamily machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) are used to curb the pandemic’s effects. We discuss the role of AI in COVID-19 infections, the detection of secondary infections, technology-assisted protection from COVID-19, global laws and regulations on AI, and the impact of the pandemic on public life.

Neutrophil extracellular traps are increased after extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support initiation and present in thrombus: A preclinical study using sheep as an animal model

BACKGROUND

The balance between thrombosis and hemostasis is a difficult issue during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support. The pathogenesis leading to thrombotic complications during ECMO support is not well understood. Neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs) were reported to participate in thrombosis and have a key role in inflammation. This study aimed to explore the role of NETs in thrombosis during ECMO support and investigate NETs as a predictive biomarker for thrombotic complications during ECMO assistance.

METHODS

Ten ovine models of ECMO support were established. Animals were then randomly divided into 2 groups (5 sheep/group): venoarterial (VA) ECMO group and venovenous (VV) ECMO group. The venous blood samples were collected at different time points. Markers of NETs were detected in plasma, neutrophils, and thrombi from the vessels and membrane. Moreover, circulating NETs levels in 8 adults treated in the intensive care unit (ICU) who received VA-ECMO and 8 healthy controls were detected; patient survival was also recorded.

RESULTS

In vivo study showed that neutrophils and NETs markers (dsDNA and citH3) levels were significantly elevated 6 h after ECMO compared to baseline. Isolated neutrophils from fresh blood at 6 h could release more NETs. dsDNA and citH3 levels were significantly higher in the VA mode than in the VV mode. NETs were found in thrombi from the vessel and membrane. Clinical data further revealed that dsDNA, citH3, and nucleosomes were higher in patients who received ECMO than in healthy controls.

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest NETs might be associated with thrombus during ECMO support, especially in the VA mode. These findings provide new insight into preventing thrombotic complications by targeting NETs. Also, NETs may potentially become an early warning biomarker for thrombosis under ECMO assistance.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) associated bacterial coinfection: Incidence, diagnosis and treatment

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) emerged as a pandemic that spread rapidly around the world, causing nearly 500 billion infections and more than 6 million deaths to date. During the first wave of the pandemic, empirical antibiotics was prescribed in over 70% of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. However, research now shows a low incidence rate of bacterial coinfection in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, between 2.5% and 5.1%. The rate of secondary infections was 3.7% in overall, but can be as high as 41.9% in the intensive care units. Over-prescription of antibiotics to treat COVID-19 patients fueled the ongoing antimicrobial resistance globally. Diagnosis of bacterial coinfection is challenging due to indistinguishable clinical presentations with overlapping lower respiratory tract symptoms such as fever, cough and dyspnea. Other diagnostic methods include conventional culture, diagnostic syndromic testing, serology test and biomarkers. COVID-19 patients with bacterial coinfection or secondary infection have a higher in-hospital mortality and longer length of stay, timely and appropriate antibiotic use aided by accurate diagnosis is crucial to improve patient outcome and prevent antimicrobial resistance.

Bloodstream and respiratory coinfections in patients with COVID-19 on ECMO

BACKGROUND

Although several studies have characterized the risk of coinfection in COVID pneumonia, the risk of the bloodstream and respiratory coinfection in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) supports severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is poorly understood.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of patients with COVID-19 ARDS on ECMO at a single center between January 2020 and December 2021. Patient characteristics and clinical outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

Of 44 patients placed on ECMO support for COVID-19 ARDS, 30 (68.2%) patients developed a coinfection, and 14 (31.8%) patients did not. Most patients underwent venovenous ECMO (98%; 43/44) cannulation in the right internal jugular vein (98%; 43/44). Patients with coinfection had a longer duration of ECMO (34 [interquartile range, IQR: 19.5, 65] vs. 15.5 [IQR 11, 27.3] days; p = .02), intensive care unit (ICU; 44 [IQR: 27,75.5] vs 31 [IQR 20-39.5] days; p = .03), and hospital (56.5 [IQR 27,75.5] vs 37.5 [IQR: 20.5-43.3]; p = .02) length of stay. When stratified by the presence of a coinfection, there was no difference in hospital mortality (37% vs. 29%; p = .46) or Kaplan-Meier survival (logrank p = .82). Time from ECMO to first positive blood and respiratory culture were 12 [IQR: 3, 28] and 10 [IQR: 1, 15] days, respectively. Freedom from any coinfection was 50 (95% confidence interval: 37.2-67.2)% at 15 days from ECMO initiation.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a high rate of co-infections in patients placed on ECMO for COVID-19 ARDS. Although patients with coinfections had a longer duration of extracorporeal life support, and longer length of stays in the ICU and hospital, survival was not inferior.

Streptococcus pneumoniae Coinfection in COVID-19 in the Intensive Care Unit: A Series of Four Cases

Bacterial coinfections in patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia are uncommon, when compared to coinfections with other respiratory viruses. For example, the prevalence of bacterial coinfections in hospitalized seasonal influenza patients can exceed 30%, whereas the prevalence of bacterial coinfections in SARS-CoV-2 infection is less than 4%. Bacterial coinfections increase the severity of respiratory viral infections and have been associated with higher mortality and morbidity. Current literature shows that diagnostic testing and antibiotic therapy for bacterial infections are not necessary upon admission in majority of patients with SARS-CoV-2 patients. It is however important for the clinician to be cognizant of these coinfections since missing the diagnosis may pose a substantial risk to vulnerable COVID-19 patients. In that light, we present four cases of Streptococcus pneumoniae coinfections complicating confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections.

Prevalence of bacterial coinfection and patterns of antibiotics prescribing in patients with COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Evidence around prevalence of bacterial coinfection and pattern of antibiotic use in COVID-19 is controversial although high prevalence rates of bacterial coinfection have been reported in previous similar global viral respiratory pandemics. Early data on the prevalence of antibiotic prescribing in COVID-19 indicates conflicting low and high prevalence of antibiotic prescribing which challenges antimicrobial stewardship programmes and increases risk of antimicrobial resistance (AMR).

AIM

To determine current prevalence of bacterial coinfection and antibiotic prescribing in COVID-19 patients.

DATA SOURCE

OVID MEDLINE, OVID EMBASE, Cochrane and MedRxiv between January 2020 and June 2021.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY

English language studies of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 patients which reported (a) prevalence of bacterial coinfection and/or (b) prevalence of antibiotic prescribing with no restrictions to study designs or healthcare setting.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults (aged ≥ 18 years) with RT-PCR confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19, regardless of study setting.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis. Proportion (prevalence) data was pooled using random effects meta-analysis approach; and stratified based on region and study design.

RESULTS

A total of 1058 studies were screened, of which 22, hospital-based studies were eligible, compromising 76,176 of COVID-19 patients. Pooled estimates for the prevalence of bacterial co-infection and antibiotic use were 5.62% (95% CI 2.26-10.31) and 61.77% (CI 50.95-70.90), respectively. Sub-group analysis by region demonstrated that bacterial co-infection was more prevalent in North American studies (7.89%, 95% CI 3.30-14.18).

CONCLUSION

Prevalence of bacterial coinfection in COVID-19 is low, yet prevalence of antibiotic prescribing is high, indicating the need for targeted COVID-19 antimicrobial stewardship initiatives to reduce the global threat of AMR.

Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation during Respiratory Pandemics: Past, Present, and Future

The role of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in the management of severe acute respiratory failure, including acute respiratory distress syndrome, has become better defined in recent years in light of emerging high-quality evidence and technological advances. Use of ECMO has consequently increased throughout many parts of the world. The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, however, has highlighted deficiencies in organizational capacity, research capability, knowledge sharing, and resource use. Although governments, medical societies, hospital systems, and clinicians were collectively unprepared for the scope of this pandemic, the use of ECMO, a highly resource-intensive and specialized form of life support, presented specific logistical and ethical challenges. As the pandemic has evolved, there has been greater collaboration in the use of ECMO across centers and regions, together with more robust data reporting through international registries and observational studies. Nevertheless, centralization of ECMO capacity is lacking in many regions of the world, and equitable use of ECMO resources remains uneven. There are no widely available mechanisms to conduct large-scale, rigorous clinical trials in real time. In this critical care review, we outline lessons learned during COVID-19 and prior respiratory pandemics in which ECMO was used, and we describe how we might apply these lessons going forward, both during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and in the future.

Mortality in patients with COVID-19 requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a worldwide pandemic and significant public health issue. The effectiveness of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in treating COVID-19 patients has been called into question.

AIM

To conduct a meta-analysis on the mortality of COVID-19 patients who require ECMO.

METHODS

This analysis adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyzes 2020 (PRISMA) and has been registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (number CRD42020227414). A quality assessment for all the included articles was performed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Studies with tenor more COVID-19 patients undergoing ECMO were included. The random-effects model was used to obtain the pooled incidence of mortality in COVID-19 patients receiving ECMO. The source of heterogeneity was investigated using subgroup and sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

We identified 18 articles with 1494 COVID-19 patients who were receiving ECMO. The score of the quality assessment ranged from 5 to 8 on the NOS. The majority of patients received veno-venous ECMO (93.7%). Overall mortality was estimated to be 0.31 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.24-0.39; I² = 84.8%] based on random-effect pooled estimates. There were significant differences in mortality between location groups (33.0% vs 55.0% vs 37.0% vs 18.0%, P < 0.001), setting groups (28.0% vs 34.0%, P < 0.001), sample size (37.0% vs 31.0%, P < 0.001), and NOS groups (39.0% vs 19.0%, P < 0.001). However, both subgroup analyses based on location, setting, and sample size, and sensitivity analysis failed to identify the source of heterogeneity. The funnel plot indicated no evident asymmetry, and the Egger's (P = 0.95) and Begg's (P = 0.14) tests also revealed no significant publication bias.

CONCLUSION

With more resource assessment and risk-benefit analysis, our data reveal that ECMO might be a feasible and effective treatment for COVID-19 patients.

Severe Infections Due to Respiratory Viruses

Severe viral infections may result in severe illnesses capable of causing acute respiratory failure that could progress rapidly to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), related to worse outcomes, especially in individuals with a higher risk of infection, including the elderly and those with comorbidities such as asthma, diabetes mellitus and chronic respiratory or cardiovascular disease. In addition, in cases of severe viral pneumonia, co-infection with bacteria such as Streptococcus pneumoniae and Staphylococcus aureus is related to worse outcomes. Respiratory viruses like influenza, rhinovirus, parainfluenza, adenovirus, metapneumovirus, respiratory syncytial virus, and coronavirus have increasingly been detected. This trend has become more prevalent, especially in critically ill patients, due to the availability and implementation of molecular assays in clinical practice. Respiratory viruses have been diagnosed as a frequent cause of severe pneumonia, including cases of community-acquired pneumonia, hospital-acquired pneumonia, and ventilator-associated pneumonia. In this review, we will discuss the epidemiology, diagnosis, clinical characteristics, management, and prognosis of patients with severe infections due to respiratory viruses, with a focus on influenza viruses, non-influenza viruses, and coronaviruses.

Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus

The past two decades have witnessed the emergence of three zoonotic coronaviruses which have jumped species to cause lethal disease in humans: severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 1 (SARS-CoV-1), Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV), and SARS-CoV-2. MERS-CoV emerged in Saudi Arabia in 2012 and the origins of MERS-CoV are not fully understood. Genomic analysis indicates it originated in bats and transmitted to camels. Human-to-human transmission occurs in varying frequency, being highest in healthcare environment and to a lesser degree in the community and among family members. Several nosocomial outbreaks of human-to-human transmission have occurred, the largest in Riyadh and Jeddah in 2014 and South Korea in 2015. MERS-CoV remains a high-threat pathogen identified by World Health Organization as a priority pathogen because it causes severe disease that has a high mortality rate, epidemic potential, and no medical countermeasures. MERS-CoV has been identified in dromedaries in several countries in the Middle East, Africa, and South Asia. MERS-CoV-2 causes a wide range of clinical presentations, although the respiratory system is predominantly affected. There are no specific antiviral treatments, although recent trials indicate that combination antivirals may be useful in severely ill patients. Diagnosing MERS-CoV early and implementation infection control measures are critical to preventing hospital-associated outbreaks. Preventing MERS relies on avoiding unpasteurized or uncooked animal products, practicing safe hygiene habits in health care settings and around dromedaries, community education and awareness training for health workers, as well as implementing effective control measures. Effective vaccines for MERS-COV are urgently needed but still under development.

Fibrosis-4 index and mortality in coronavirus disease 2019: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND/AIMS

In this meta-analysis, we aimed to evaluate the prognostic value of fibrosis-4 index (FIB-4) in COVID-19.

METHODS

We performed a comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases on 26 November 2020. FIB-4 was calculated by [age (years) × AST (IU/L)]/[platelet count (109/L) × √ALT (U/L)]. A value above cutoff point was considered high and a value below cutoff point was considered low. The main outcome was mortality, the association between high FIB-4 and mortality was reported in odds ratio (OR). Sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic OR (DOR), area under the curve (AUC) were generated.

RESULTS

There were 963 patients from five studies included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. Meta-analysis showed that high FIB-4 was associated with increased mortality [OR 3.96 (2.16-7.27), P < 0.001; I2: 41.3%]. High FIB-4 was associated mortality with a sensitivity of 0.56 (0.40-0.70), specificity of 0.80 (0.72-0.86), PLR 2.8 (1.8-4.2), NLR 0.55 (0.39-0.78), DOR 5 (2-10), and AUC of 0.77 (0.73-0.81). Fagan's nomogram indicated that for a pre-test probability (mortality) of 30%, a high FIB-4 was associated with 54% post-test probability and a low FIB-4 was associated with 19%, respectively. The funnel-plot analysis was asymmetrical, trim-and-fill analysis by imputation of a study on the left side using linear estimator resulted in an OR of 3.48 (1.97-6.14). Egger's test showed no indication of small-study effects (P = 0.881).

CONCLUSION

High FIB-4 was associated with mortality in patients with COVID-19.

Clinical Characteristics, Complications and Outcomes of Patients with Severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Related to COVID-19 or Influenza Requiring Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation-A Retrospective Cohort Study

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) represents a viable therapy option for patients with refractory acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Currently, veno-venous (vv) ECMO is frequently used in patients suffering from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). VV-ECMO was also frequently utilised during the influenza pandemic and experience with this complex and invasive treatment has increased worldwide since. However, data on comparison of clinical characteristics and outcome of patients with COVID-19 and influenza-related severe ARDS treated with vv-ECMO are scarce. This is a retrospective analysis of all consecutive patients treated with vv/(veno-arterial)va-ECMO between January 2009 and January 2021 at the University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf in Germany. All patients with confirmed COVID-19 or influenza were included. Patient characteristics, parameters related to ICU and vv/va-ECMO as well as clinical outcomes were compared. Mortality was assessed up to 90 days after vv/va-ECMO initiation. Overall, 113 patients were included, 52 (46%) with COVID-19 and 61 (54%) with influenza-related ARDS. Median age of patients with COVID-19 and influenza was 58 (IQR 53-64) and 52 (39-58) years (p < 0.001), 35% and 31% (p = 0.695) were female, respectively. Charlson Comorbidity Index was 3 (1-5) and 2 (0-5) points in the two groups (p = 0.309). Median SAPS II score pre-ECMO was 27 (24-36) vs. 32 (28-41) points (p = 0.009), and SOFA score was 13 (11-14) vs. 12 (8-15) points (p = 0.853), respectively. Median P/F ratio pre-ECMO was 64 (46-78) and 73 (56-104) (p = 0.089); pH was 7.20 (7.16-7.29) and 7.26 (7.18-7.33) (p = 0.166). Median days on vv/va-ECMO were 17 (7-27) and 11 (7-20) (p = 0.295), respectively. Seventy-one percent and sixty-nine percent had renal replacement therapy (p = 0.790). Ninety-four percent of patients with COVID-19 and seventy-seven percent with influenza experienced vv/va-ECMO-associated bleeding events (p = 0.004). Thirty-four percent and fifty-five percent were successfully weaned from ECMO (p = 0.025). Ninety-day mortality was 65% and 57% in patients with COVID-19 and influenza, respectively (p = 0.156). Median length of ICU stay was 24 (13-44) and 28 (16-14) days (p = 0.470), respectively. Despite similar disease severity, the use of vv/va-ECMO in ARDS related to COVID-19 and influenza resulted in similar outcomes at 90 days. A significant higher rate of bleeding complications and thrombosis was observed in patients with COVID-19.

Clinical Characteristics, Complications and Outcomes of Patients with Severe Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Related to COVID-19 or Influenza Requiring Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation-A Retrospective Cohort Study

Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) represents a viable therapy option for patients with refractory acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Currently, veno-venous (vv) ECMO is frequently used in patients suffering from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). VV-ECMO was also frequently utilised during the influenza pandemic and experience with this complex and invasive treatment has increased worldwide since. However, data on comparison of clinical characteristics and outcome of patients with COVID-19 and influenza-related severe ARDS treated with vv-ECMO are scarce. This is a retrospective analysis of all consecutive patients treated with vv/(veno-arterial)va-ECMO between January 2009 and January 2021 at the University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf in Germany. All patients with confirmed COVID-19 or influenza were included. Patient characteristics, parameters related to ICU and vv/va-ECMO as well as clinical outcomes were compared. Mortality was assessed up to 90 days after vv/va-ECMO initiation. Overall, 113 patients were included, 52 (46%) with COVID-19 and 61 (54%) with influenza-related ARDS. Median age of patients with COVID-19 and influenza was 58 (IQR 53–64) and 52 (39–58) years (p < 0.001), 35% and 31% (p = 0.695) were female, respectively. Charlson Comorbidity Index was 3 (1–5) and 2 (0–5) points in the two groups (p = 0.309). Median SAPS II score pre-ECMO was 27 (24–36) vs. 32 (28–41) points (p = 0.009), and SOFA score was 13 (11–14) vs. 12 (8–15) points (p = 0.853), respectively. Median P/F ratio pre-ECMO was 64 (46–78) and 73 (56–104) (p = 0.089); pH was 7.20 (7.16–7.29) and 7.26 (7.18–7.33) (p = 0.166). Median days on vv/va-ECMO were 17 (7–27) and 11 (7–20) (p = 0.295), respectively. Seventy-one percent and sixty-nine percent had renal replacement therapy (p = 0.790). Ninety-four percent of patients with COVID-19 and seventy-seven percent with influenza experienced vv/va-ECMO-associated bleeding events (p = 0.004). Thirty-four percent and fifty-five percent were successfully weaned from ECMO (p = 0.025). Ninety-day mortality was 65% and 57% in patients with COVID-19 and influenza, respectively (p = 0.156). Median length of ICU stay was 24 (13–44) and 28 (16–14) days (p = 0.470), respectively. Despite similar disease severity, the use of vv/va-ECMO in ARDS related to COVID-19 and influenza resulted in similar outcomes at 90 days. A significant higher rate of bleeding complications and thrombosis was observed in patients with COVID-19.

Kinetics of antibody response in critically ill patients with Middle East respiratory syndrome and association with mortality and viral clearance

The objective of this study is to examine the IgG antibody response in critically ill patients with the Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) and to examine the association of early antibody response with mortality and viral clearance. We collected blood samples from 40 consecutive real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) confirmed critically ill MERS patients on ICU days 1, 3, 7, 14 and 28. MERS-CoV antibodies were detected by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), using wells coated with MERS-CoV S1 antigen. Patients were admitted to ICU after a median (Q1, Q3) of 9 (4, 13) days from onset of symptoms with an admission Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score of 11 (6.5, 12). Among the study cohort, 38 patients (95%) received invasive ventilation, 35 (88%) vasopressors, 21 (53%) renal replacement therapy and 17 (43%) corticosteroids. Median (Q1,Q3) ELISA optical density (OD) ratio significantly increased with time (p < 0.001) from 0.11 (0.07, 1.43) on day 1; to 0.69 (0.11, 2.08) on day 3, 2.72 (1.84, 3.54) on day 7, 2.51 (0.35, 3.35) on day 14 and 3.77 (3.70, 3.84) on day 28. Early antibody response (day 1-3) was observed in 13/39 patients (33%) and was associated with lower mortality (hazard ratio: 0.31, 95% CI 0.10, 0.96, p = 0.04) but was not associated with faster clearance of MERS-CoV RNA. In conclusion, among critically ill patients with MERS, early antibody response was associated with lower mortality but not with faster clearance of MERS-CoV RNA. These findings have important implications for understanding pathogenesis and potential immunotherapy.

Acute Kidney Injury and Renal Replacement Therapy in COVID-19 Versus Other Respiratory Viruses: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a potentially fatal complication of Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19). Binding of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus responsible for COVID-19, to its viral receptor, angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), results in viral entry and may cause AKI.

OBJECTIVES

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the frequencies of AKI and renal replacement therapy (RRT) in critically ill COVID-19 patients and compared those frequencies with patients who were infected by respiratory viruses that bind or downregulate ACE2 (ACE2-associated viruses) and viruses that do not bind nor downregulate ACE2 (non-ACE2-associated viruses).

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

SETTING

Observational studies on COVID-19 and other respiratory viral infections reporting AKI and RRT were included. The exclusion criteria were non-English articles, non-peer-reviewed articles, review articles, studies that included patients under the age of 18, studies including fewer than 10 patients, and studies not reporting AKI and RRT rates.

PATIENTS

Adult COVID-19, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), and influenza patients.

MEASUREMENTS

We extracted the following data from the included studies: author, year, study location, age, sex, race, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, chronic kidney disease, shock, vasopressor use, mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, ICU mortality, AKI, and RRT.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed and EMBASE for articles reporting AKI or RRT. AKI was defined by authors of included studies. Critical illness was defined by ICU admission. We performed a random effects meta-analysis to calculate pooled estimates for the AKI and RRT rate within each virus group using a random intercept logistic regression model.

RESULTS

Of 23 655 hospitalized, critically ill COVID-19 patients, AKI frequencies were not significantly different between COVID-19 patients (51%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 44%-57%) and critically ill patients infected with ACE2-associated (56%, 95% CI: 37%-74%, P = .610) or non-ACE2-associated viruses (63%, 95% CI: 43%-79%, P = .255). Pooled RRT rates were also not significantly different between critically ill, hospitalized patients with COVID-19 (20%, 95% CI: 16%-24%) and ACE2-associated viruses (18%, 95% CI: 8%-33%, P = .747). RRT rates for both COVID-19 and ACE2-associated viruses were significantly different (P < .001 for both) from non-ACE2-associated viruses (49%, 95% CI: 44%-54%). After adjusting for shock or vasopressor use, AKI and RRT rates were not significantly different between groups.

LIMITATIONS

Limitations of this study include the heterogeneity of definitions of AKI that were used across different virus studies. We could not match severity of infection or do propensity matching across studies. Most of the included studies were conducted in retrospective fashion. Last, we did not include non-English publications.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that viral ACE2 association does not significantly alter the rates of AKI and RRT among critically ill patients admitted to the ICU. However, the rate of RRT is lower in patients with COVID-19 or ACE2-associated viruses when compared with patients infected with non-ACE2-binding viruses, which might partly be due to the lower frequencies of shock and use of vasopressors in these two virus groups. Prospective studies are necessary to demonstrate whether modulation of the ACE2 axis with Renin-Angiotensin System inhibitors impacts the rates of AKI and whether they are beneficial or harmful in COVID-19 patients.

The story of critical care in Asia: a narrative review

Background

Asia has more critically ill people than any other part of our planet. The aim of this article is to review the development of critical care as a specialty, critical care societies and education and research, the epidemiology of critical illness as well as epidemics and pandemics, accessibility and cost and quality of critical care, culture and end-of-life care, and future directions for critical care in Asia.

Main body

Although the first Asian intensive care units (ICUs) surfaced in the 1960s and the 1970s and specialisation started in the 1990s, multiple challenges still exist, including the lack of intensivists, critical care nurses, and respiratory therapists in many countries. This is aggravated by the brain drain of skilled ICU staff to high-income countries. Critical care societies have been integral to the development of the discipline and have increasingly contributed to critical care education, although critical care research is only just starting to take off through collaboration across groups. Sepsis, increasingly aggravated by multidrug resistance, contributes to a significant burden of critical illness, while epidemics and pandemics continue to haunt the continent intermittently. In particular, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has highlighted the central role of critical care in pandemic response. Accessibility to critical care is affected by lack of ICU beds and high costs, and quality of critical care is affected by limited capability for investigations and treatment in low- and middle-income countries. Meanwhile, there are clear cultural differences across countries, with considerable variations in end-of-life care. Demand for critical care will rise across the continent due to ageing populations and rising comorbidity burdens. Even as countries respond by increasing critical care capacity, the critical care community must continue to focus on training for ICU healthcare workers, processes anchored on evidence-based medicine, technology guided by feasibility and impact, research applicable to Asian and local settings, and rallying of governments for support for the specialty.

Conclusions

Critical care in Asia has progressed through the years, but multiple challenges remain. These challenges should be addressed through a collaborative approach across disciplines, ICUs, hospitals, societies, governments, and countries.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40560-021-00574-4.

Potential Effects of Coronaviruses on the Liver: An Update

The coronaviruses that cause notable diseases, namely, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), middle east respiratory syndrome (MERS) and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), exhibit remarkable similarities in genomic components and pathogenetic mechanisms. Although coronaviruses have widely been studied as respiratory tract pathogens, their effects on the hepatobiliary system have seldom been reported. Overall, the manifestations of liver injury caused by coronaviruses typically involve decreased albumin and elevated aminotransferase and bilirubin levels. Several pathophysiological hypotheses have been proposed, including direct damage, immune-mediated injury, ischemia and hypoxia, thrombosis and drug hepatotoxicity. The interaction between pre-existing liver disease and coronavirus infection has been illustrated, whereby coronaviruses influence the occurrence, severity, prognosis and treatment of liver diseases. Drugs and vaccines used for treating and preventing coronavirus infection also have hepatotoxicity. Currently, the establishment of optimized therapy for coronavirus infection and liver disease comorbidity is of significance, warranting further safety tests, animal trials and clinical trials.

Effectiveness of corticosteroids to treat severe COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies

Objectives

To assess the effects of corticosteroid therapy for patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

Methods

We comprehensively searched articles published in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, China Biology Medicine (CBM), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, and VIP databases from January 1, 2019, to March 20, 2021.

Results

A total of 6771 patients from eight prospective studies were included in our meta-analysis. The results showed that corticosteroid therapy was associated with lower mortality in severe COVID-19 (OR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.54–0.92, P = 0.009; I² = 54.5%). Since the proportion of the RECOVERY (Randomized Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy) trial included in the meta-analysis was as high as 71.88%, we removed it and recalculated the pooled OR. The results of the remaining seven studies still suggested such a survival benefit (OR = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.44–0.96, P = 0.030; I² = 59.8%). Furthermore, subgroup analysis suggested that the pooled OR of three studies using corticosteroids in the early stages of treatment was much lower (OR = 0.37, 95% CI = 0.25–0.57, P < 0.001; I² = 47.8%). However, after excluding the RECOVERY trial, the pooled OR of the remaining four studies with unspecific administration timing of corticosteroid therapy no longer supported this result (OR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.69–1.17, P = 0.415; I² = 0.0%).

Conclusions

In this meta-analysis, evidence based on seven randomized controlled trials and one prospective cohort study indicates that corticosteroid therapy was associated with a reduction in the mortality of severe COVID-19, especially when administered at an earlier time.

Clinical and laboratory findings of COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to systematically review all COVID-19 publications to summarize the clinical features, assess comorbidities, prevalence, and disease outcomes.

METHODS

Included were all COVID-19 published studies between January 1 to July 20, 2020. The random effect model was used to calculate the pooled prevalence and corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). Publication bias was assessed using the funnel plot for the standard error by logit event.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 46.8 years (95% CI, 41.0-52.6) and males comprised 54.0% (95% CI, 51.3-56.7). Total co-morbidities prevalence was 29.5% (95% CI, 19.0-36.6), with diabetes mellitus being the most prevalent 13.8% (95% CI, 8.7-21.1), followed by hypertension 11.7% (95% CI, 5.7-22.6), and cardiovascular disease 9.7% (95% CI, 6.5-14.2). The most common clinical manifestations were fever, 82.0% (95% CI, 67.7-90.8), cough 54.3% (95% CI, 45.5-62.9), fatigue 30.2% (95% CI, 23.3-38.1), sputum 28.5% (95% CI, 21.2-37.2), sore throat 21.7% (95% CI, 14.6-31.0), and headache 11.0% (95% CI, 7.9-15.2). The most common COVID-19 serious complications were RNA Anemia 98.2% (95% CI, 96.2-99.2), hospitalization 83.7% (95% CI, 76.0-89.3), bilateral pneumonia 70.9% (95% CI, 58.2-81.0); of those hospitalized 43.5% (95% CI, 24.9-64.2) were discharged. Fatality accounted for 10.5% (95% CI 6.8-16.1).

CONCLUSION

Patients infected with COVID-19 coronavirus showed a wide range of clinical presentation with non-specific symptoms.

Acinetobacter baumannii Infections in Times of COVID-19 Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has generated an overuse of antimicrobials in critically ill patients. Acinetobacter baumannii frequently causes nosocomial infections, particularly in intensive care units (ICUs), where the incidence has increased over time. Since the WHO declared the COVID-19 pandemic on 12 March 2020, the disease has spread rapidly, and many of the patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 needed to be admitted to the ICU. Bacterial co-pathogens are commonly identified in viral respiratory infections and are important causes of morbidity and mortality. However, we cannot neglect the increased incidence of antimicrobial resistance, which may be attributed to the excess use of antimicrobial agents during the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients with COVID-19 could be vulnerable to other infections owing to multiple comorbidities with severe COVID-19, prolonged hospitalization, and SARS-CoV-2-associated immune dysfunction. These patients have acquired secondary bacterial infections or superinfections, mainly bacteremia and urinary tract infections. This review will summarize the prevalence of A. baumannii coinfection and secondary infection in patients with COVID-19.

Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Used in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome with COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction

Protective pulmonary mechanical ventilation, higher positive end-expiratory pressure, neuromuscular blockade, prone positioning, and pulmonary recruitment procedures are all strategies in severe COVID-19 cases. Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO) can be seen as an alternative to traditional treatment in certain patients when conventional therapy fails. We present a study that intends to systematically review and meta-analysis ECMO use in COVID-19 patients.

Methods

We search major medical databases (Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, MedRxiv) for clinical trials that were released between January 2020 until February 2021, had full-text availability, were written in English, and humans studies.

We used National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) quality evaluation methods for retrospective cohort and cross-sectional studies to evaluate the quality of the articles. In addition, we used the Mantel–Haenszel random-effects meta-analysis of using RevMan 5.4.

Results

A total of 33 studies involving 3090 patients were included in the systematic review and six studies in the meta-analysis. There were 828 patients admitted to the ICU, of which 779 patients had ARDS (94%). Of the total study, 527 patients received ECMO therapy (17%). ARDS incidence was associated with complications during ICU care compared to non-ICU care (OR 107.98; 95% CI 55.51–210.03; p < 0.00001). Indirect comparisons, the incidence of mortality was associated with ECMO compared with non-ECMO (OR 15.79; 95% CI 4.21–59.28; p < 0.0001).

Conclusion

The incidence of ARDS was associated with complications during ICU stay, and the incidence of mortality was associated with ECMO. Further study about mechanisms involving illness and death of patients from COVID-19 is needed.

Consenso ECMO colombiano para paciente con falla respiratoria grave asociada a COVID-19

Antecedentes y objetivos

La epidemia de COVID-19 ha creado un desafío sin precedentes en el sistema de salud, generando una demanda creciente. Alrededor del 5% de los pacientes diagnosticados con esta infección requieren ingreso a cuidados intensivos principalmente para soporte ventilatorio con ventilación mecánica por un síndrome de dificultad respiratoria aguda (SDRA) de moderado a grave. Las mortalidades reportadas pueden ser muy altas. Las dos principales causas de muerte en esta infección son la hipoxemia refractaria asociada al SDRA y el shock con insuficiencia orgánica múltiple. La oxigenación con membrana extracorpórea (ECMO) se ha utilizado en pacientes con hipoxemia refractaria sin respuesta a manejo con ventilación mecánica protectora, ventilación en posición prono y relajación muscular. La Organización Mundial de la Salud recomienda considerar ECMO en pacientes adultos y pediátricos con COVID-19 y SDRA refractario, si hay un equipo de expertos disponible.

Métodos

Se utilizó la metodología de consenso formal para generar el Consenso ECMO en la infección SARS-CoV-2 con la mejor evidencia disponible. El desarrollo del consenso combina las técnicas de selección, síntesis, evaluación y gradación de la evidencia: formulación de la pregunta PICO [P - Paciente, Problema o Población. I - Intervención. C - Comparación, control. O - Outcome(s) (muerte)], estrategias de búsqueda sistemática y técnicas de síntesis (metaanálisis).

La evaluación de la calidad de la evidencia y la graduación de la fuerza de las recomendaciones se realizó con la estrategia GRADE, generando al final recomendaciones para los tópicos más relevantes del manejo del paciente con COVID-19 candidato a ECMO y por técnica de consenso formal (Delphi).

Resultados

El consenso colombiano para pacientes con falla respiratoria grave asociada a COVID-19 proporciona un resumen de la evidencia sobre el uso de ECMO en insuficiencia respiratoria hipoxémica aguda grave asociada con la infección SARS-CoV-2, dando recomendaciones sobre sus indicaciones, contraindicaciones, consideraciones y la implementación del grupo ECMOred Colombia.

Conclusiones

El consenso colombiano de ECMO es un documento de guía y consulta para el manejo de pacientes con insuficiencia respiratoria aguda grave refractaria y disfunción cardiovascular asociada con COVID-19 candidatos para ECMO.

Course of illness and outcomes in older COVID-19 patients treated with HFNC: a retrospective analysis

Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) has rapidly spread worldwide and causes high mortality of elderly patients. High-flow nasal cannula therapy (HFNC) is an oxygen delivery method for severely ill patients. We retrospectively analyzed the course of illness and outcomes in 110 elderly COVID-19 patients (≥65 years) treated with HFNC from 6 hospitals. 38 patients received HFNC (200 mmHg < PaO₂/FiO₂ ≤ 300 mmHg, early HFNC group), and 72 patients received HFNC (100 mmHg < PaO₂/FiO₂ ≤ 200 mmHg, late HFNC group). There were no significant differences of sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) scores and APECH II scores between early and late HFNC group on admission. Compared with the late HFNC group, patients in the early HFNC group had a lower likelihood of developing severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), longer time from illness onset to severe ARDS and shorter duration of viral shedding after illness onset, as well as shorter lengths of ICU and hospital stay. 24 patients died during hospitalization, of whom 22 deaths (30.6%) were in the late HFNC group and 2 (5.3%) in the early HFNC group. The present study suggested that the outcomes were better in severely ill elderly patients with COVID-19 receiving early compared to late HFNC.

H1N1 exposure during the convalescent stage of SARS-CoV-2 infection results in enhanced lung pathologic damage in hACE2 transgenic mice

ABSTRACTThe risk of secondary infection with SARS-CoV-2 and influenza A virus is becoming a practical problem that must be addressed as the flu season merges with the COVID-19 pandemic. As SARS-CoV-2 and influenza A virus have been found in patients, understanding the in vivo characteristics of the secondary infection between these two viruses is a high priority. Here, hACE2 transgenic mice were challenged with the H1N1 virus at a nonlethal dose during the convalescent stage on 7 and 14 days post SARS-CoV-2 infection, and importantly, subsequent H1N1 infection showed enhanced viral shedding and virus tissue distribution. Histopathological observation revealed an extensive pathological change in the lungs related to H1N1 infection in mice recovered from SARS-CoV-2 infection, with severe inflammation infiltration and bronchiole disruption. Moreover, upon H1N1 exposure on 7 and 14 dpi of SARS-CoV-2 infection, the lymphocyte population activated at a lower level with T cell suppressed in both PBMC and lung. These findings will be valuable for evaluating antiviral therapeutics and vaccines as well as guiding public health work.

Nanobased Platforms for Diagnosis and Treatment of COVID-19: From Benchtop to Bedside

Human respiratory viral infections are the leading cause of morbidity and mortality around the world. Among the various respiratory viruses, coronaviruses (e.g., SARS-CoV-2) have created the greatest challenge and most frightening health threat worldwide. Human coronaviruses typically infect the upper respiratory tract, causing illnesses that range from common cold-like symptoms to severe acute respiratory infections. Several promising vaccine formulations have become available since the beginning of 2021. Nevertheless, achievement of herd immunity is still far from being realized. Social distancing remains the only effective measure against SARS-CoV-2 infection. Nanobiotechnology enables the design of nanobiosensors. These nanomedical diagnostic devices have opened new vistas for early detection of viral infections. The present review outlines recent research on the effectiveness of nanoplatforms as diagnostic and antiviral tools against coronaviruses. The biological properties of coronavirus and infected host organs are discussed. The challenges and limitations encountered in combating SARS-CoV-2 are highlighted. Potential nanodevices such as nanosensors, nanobased vaccines, and smart nanomedicines are subsequently presented for combating current and future mutated versions of coronaviruses.

Extensive microbiological respiratory tract specimen characterization in critically ill COVID-19 patients

Microbial co‐infections may contribute to the pulmonary deterioration in COVID‐19 patients needing intensive care treatment. The present study portrays the extent of co‐infections in COVID‐19 ICU patients. Conventional culture, molecular detections for atypical aetiologies, QiaStat‐Dx® respiratory panel V2 detecting 21 respiratory pathogens and ribosomal DNA genes 16S/18S amplicon‐based microbiome analyses were performed on respiratory samples from 34 COVID‐19 patients admitted to the ICU. Potential pathogens were detected in seven patients (21%) by culturing, in four patients (12%) by microbiome analysis and in one patient (3%) by respiratory panel. Among 20 patients receiving antibiotics prior to ICU admission, fungi (3 Candidaalbicans, 1 C. tropicalis, 1 C. dubliniensis) were cultured in 5 (15%) endotracheal aspirates. Among 14 patients who were antibiotic‐naive at ICU admission, two patients (6%) had bacterial respiratory pathogens (Staphylococcusaureus, Streptococcuspseudopneumoniae) cultured in their endotracheal aspirates. Microbiome analysis recognized four potential respiratory pathogens (3 Haemophilusinfluenza, 1 Fusobacterium necrophorum) isolated in samples from four other patients (12%). QiaStat‐Dx® respiratory panel V2 detected adenovirus in one patient (3%). The prevalence of pulmonary microbial co‐infections is modest among COVID‐19 patients upon admission to ICU. Microbiome analysis complements conventional microbial diagnostics in characterization of respiratory co‐infections.

Possible solutions for oxygenation support in critically ill patients with COVID-19

Purpose

Due to the large number of patients with respiratory deficiency during the COVID-19 pandemic, several governments and their respective health care services have been studying ways to complement the care provided by offering immediate solutions. In view of this, the aim of this study was to carry out a systematic review of the advantages and disadvantages of possible solutions in oxygenation support.

Methods

This systematic review used the PRISMA-P methodology and sought to list alternatives in oxygenation support that are being applied and studied worldwide. A bibliographic search was conducted in the MEDLINE and Cochrane Central databases, using the keywords SARS-CoV-2, COVID19, or coronavirus; combined with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), mechanical ventilation, mechanical ventilation support, low-cost, anesthesia, anesthesia machine, and ventilation therapy. The records were also found in the gray literature.

Results

The search found 85 publications of which 41 articles were considered after excluding duplicate articles, reading the title and summary, and reading the articles in full. The oxygenation supports identified in these publications were the following: ECMO, shared mechanical ventilator, fast or low-cost production equipment, high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC), non-invasive ventilation, and use of anesthesia equipment as a mechanical ventilator.

Conclusion

This study demonstrated the importance of a trained clinical team in the application of technologies. The alternatives found for support oxygenation require a more robust clinical evaluation to demonstrate their efficacy and safety for the COVID-19 patient.

The human pandemic coronaviruses on the show: The spike glycoprotein as the main actor in the coronaviruses play

Three coronaviruses (CoVs) have threatened the world population by causing outbreaks in the last two decades. In late 2019, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged and caused the coronaviruses to disease 2019 (COVID-19), leading to the ongoing global outbreak. The other pandemic coronaviruses, SARS-CoV and Middle East respiratory syndrome CoV (MERS-CoV), share a considerable level of similarities at genomic and protein levels. However, the differences between them lead to distinct behaviors. These differences result from the accumulation of mutations in the sequence and structure of spike (S) glycoprotein, which plays an essential role in coronavirus infection, pathogenicity, transmission, and evolution. In this review, we brought together many studies narrating a sequence of events and highlighting the differences among S proteins from SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, and SARS-CoV-2. It was performed here, analysis of S protein sequences and structures from the three pandemic coronaviruses pointing out the mutations among them and what they come through. Additionally, we investigated the receptor-binding domain (RBD) from all S proteins explaining the mutation and biological importance of all of them. Finally, we discuss the mutation in the S protein from several new isolates of SARS-CoV-2, reporting their difference and importance. This review brings into detail how the variations in S protein that make SARS-CoV-2 more aggressive than its relatives coronaviruses and other differences between coronaviruses.

Characterization of Bacterial and Fungal Infections in Hospitalized Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019 and Factors Associated With Health Care-Associated Infections

Background

Patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are at increased risk of health care–associated infections (HAIs), especially with prolonged hospital stays. We sought to identify incidence, antimicrobial susceptibilities, and outcomes associated with bacterial/fungal secondary infections in a large cohort of patients with COVID-19.

Methods

We evaluated adult patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between 2 March and 31 May 2020 and hospitalized >24 hours. Data extracted from medical records included diagnoses, vital signs, laboratory results, microbiological data, and antibiotic use. Microbiologically confirmed bacterial and fungal pathogens from clinical cultures were evaluated to characterize community- and health care–associated infections, including describing temporal changes in predominant organisms on presentation and throughout hospitalization. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to investigate risk factors for HAIs.

Results

A total of 3028 patients were included and accounted for 899 positive clinical cultures. Overall, 516 (17%) patients with positive cultures met criteria for infection. Community-associated coinfections were identified in 183 (6%) patients, whereas HAIs occurred in 350 (12%) patients. Fifty-seven percent of HAIs were caused by gram-negative bacteria and 19% by fungi. Antibiotic resistance increased with longer hospital stays, with incremental increases in the proportion of vancomycin resistance among enterococci and ceftriaxone and carbapenem resistance among Enterobacterales. Intensive care unit stay, invasive mechanical ventilation, and steroids were associated with HAIs.

Conclusions

HAIs occur in a small proportion of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and are most often caused by gram-negative and fungal pathogens. Antibiotic resistance is more prevalent with prolonged hospital stays. Antimicrobial stewardship is imperative in this population to minimize unnecessary broad-spectrum antibiotic use.

Bacterial coinfections in coronavirus disease 2019

Bacterial coinfections increase the severity of respiratory viral infections and were frequent causes of mortality in influenza pandemics but have not been well characterized in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The aim of this review was to identify the frequency and microbial etiologies of bacterial coinfections that are present upon admission to the hospital and that occur during hospitalization for COVID-19. We found that bacterial coinfections were present in <4% of patients upon admission and the yield of routine diagnostic tests for pneumonia was low. When bacterial coinfections did occur, Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus pneumoniae, and Haemophilus influenzae were the most common pathogens and atypical bacteria were rare. Although uncommon upon admission, bacterial infections frequently occurred in patients with prolonged hospitalization, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Klebsiella spp., and S. aureus were common pathogens. Antibacterial therapy and diagnostic testing for bacterial infections are unnecessary upon admission in most patients hospitalized with COVID-19, but clinicians should be vigilant for nosocomial bacterial infections.

Co-infection in critically ill patients with COVID-19: an observational cohort study from England

Introduction. During previous viral pandemics, reported co-infection rates and implicated pathogens have varied. In the 1918 influenza pandemic, a large proportion of severe illness and death was complicated by bacterial co-infection, predominantly Streptococcus pneumoniae and Staphylococcus aureus.Gap statement. A better understanding of the incidence of co-infection in patients with COVID-19 infection and the pathogens involved is necessary for effective antimicrobial stewardship.Aim. To describe the incidence and nature of co-infection in critically ill adults with COVID-19 infection in England.Methodology. A retrospective cohort study of adults with COVID-19 admitted to seven intensive care units (ICUs) in England up to 18 May 2020, was performed. Patients with completed ICU stays were included. The proportion and type of organisms were determined at <48 and >48 h following hospital admission, corresponding to community and hospital-acquired co-infections.Results. Of 254 patients studied (median age 59 years (IQR 49-69); 64.6 % male), 139 clinically significant organisms were identified from 83 (32.7 %) patients. Bacterial co-infections/ co-colonisation were identified within 48 h of admission in 14 (5.5 %) patients; the commonest pathogens were Staphylococcus aureus (four patients) and Streptococcus pneumoniae (two patients). The proportion of pathogens detected increased with duration of ICU stay, consisting largely of Gram-negative bacteria, particularly Klebsiella pneumoniae and Escherichia coli. The co-infection/ co-colonisation rate >48 h after admission was 27/1000 person-days (95 % CI 21.3-34.1). Patients with co-infections/ co-colonisation were more likely to die in ICU (crude OR 1.78,95 % CI 1.03-3.08, P=0.04) compared to those without co-infections/ co-colonisation.Conclusion. We found limited evidence for community-acquired bacterial co-infection in hospitalised adults with COVID-19, but a high rate of Gram-negative infection acquired during ICU stay.

Multimodality treatment in immunocompromised patients with severe COVID-19: the role of IL-6 inhibitor, intravenous immunoglobulin, and haemoperfusion

Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) is known to be associated with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Multiple anti-inflammatory therapies such as tocilizumab, corticosteroids, intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), and haemoadsorption or haemoperfusion have been used to combat this life-threatening condition. However, immunocompromised hosts are often omitted from research studies, and knowledge on the clinical efficacy of these therapies in immunocompromised patients is therefore limited. We report two cases of immunocompromised patients with severe COVID-19-related CRS requiring mechanical ventilation who were treated with multimodality treatment consisting of tocilizumab, IVIG, and haemoperfusion. Within 48 h, both patients showed clinical improvement with PaO2:FiO2 ratio and haemodynamic stability. Both survived to discharge. There were no adverse events following these therapies. In conclusion, combined therapeutic modalities, possibly tailored to individual inflammatory profiles, are promising treatment for severe COVID-19 infection in the immunocompromised host. Timely administration of adjunctive therapies that alleviate overwhelming inflammation may provide the best outcome.

Computational evidence for nitro derivatives of quinoline and quinoline N-oxide as low-cost alternative for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection

A new and more aggressive strain of coronavirus, known as SARS-CoV-2, which is highly contagious, has rapidly spread across the planet within a short period of time. Due to its high transmission rate and the significant time–space between infection and manifestation of symptoms, the WHO recently declared this a pandemic. Because of the exponentially growing number of new cases of both infections and deaths, development of new therapeutic options to help fight this pandemic is urgently needed. The target molecules of this study were the nitro derivatives of quinoline and quinoline N-oxide. Computational design at the DFT level, docking studies, and molecular dynamics methods as a well-reasoned strategy will aid in elucidating the fundamental physicochemical properties and molecular functions of a diversity of compounds, directly accelerating the process of discovering new drugs. In this study, we discovered isomers based on the nitro derivatives of quinoline and quinoline N-oxide, which are biologically active compounds and may be low-cost alternatives for the treatment of infections induced by SARS-CoV-2.

Severe liver dysfunction complicating course of COVID-19 in the critically ill: multifactorial cause or direct viral effect?

Background

SARS-CoV-2 caused a pandemic and global threat for human health. Presence of liver injury was commonly reported in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, reports on severe liver dysfunction (SLD) in critically ill with COVID-19 are lacking. We evaluated the occurrence, clinical characteristics and outcome of SLD in critically ill patients with COVID-19.

Methods

Clinical course and laboratory was analyzed from all patients with confirmed COVID-19 admitted to ICU of the university hospital. SLD was defined as: bilirubin ≥ 2 mg/dl or elevation of aminotransferase levels (> 20-fold ULN).

Results

72 critically ill patients were identified, 22 (31%) patients developed SLD. Presenting characteristics including age, gender, comorbidities as well as clinical presentation regarding COVID-19 overlapped substantially in both groups. Patients with SLD had more severe respiratory failure (paO₂/FiO_2: 82 (58–114) vs. 117 (83–155); p < 0.05). Thus, required more frequently mechanical ventilation (95% vs. 64%; p < 0.01), rescue therapies (ECMO) (27% vs. 12%; p = 0.106), vasopressor (95% vs. 72%; p < 0.05) and renal replacement therapy (86% vs. 30%; p < 0.001). Severity of illness was significantly higher (SAPS II: 48 (39–52) vs. 40 (32–45); p < 0.01). Patients with SLD and without presented viremic during ICU stay in 68% and 34%, respectively (p = 0.002). Occurrence of SLD was independently associated with presence of viremia [OR 6.359; 95% CI 1.336–30.253; p < 0.05] and severity of illness (SAPS II) [OR 1.078; 95% CI 1.004–1.157; p < 0.05]. Mortality was high in patients with SLD compared to other patients (68% vs. 16%, p < 0.001). After adjustment for confounders, SLD was independently associated with mortality [HR3.347; 95% CI 1.401–7.999; p < 0.01].

Conclusion

One-third of critically ill patients with COVID-19 suffer from SLD, which is associated with high mortality. Occurrence of viremia and severity of illness seem to contribute to occurrence of SLD and underline the multifactorial cause.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13613-021-00835-3.

Risk and predictive factors of prolonged viral RNA shedding in upper respiratory specimens in a large cohort of COVID-19 patients admitted to an Italian reference hospital

Background

Limited data are available about the predictors and outcomes associated with prolonged SARS-CoV-2 RNA shedding (VS).

Methods

A retrospective study including COVID-19 patients admitted to an Italian hospital between March 1 and July 1, 2020. Predictors of viral clearance (VC) and prolonged VS from the upper respiratory tract were assessed by Poisson regression and logistic regression analyses. The causal relation between VS and clinical outcomes was evaluated through an inverse probability weighted Cox model.

Results

The study included 536 subjects. The median duration of VS from symptoms onset was 18 days. The estimated 30-day probability of VC was 70.2%. Patients with comorbidities, lymphopenia at hospital admission, or moderate/severe respiratory disease had a lower chance of VC. The development of moderate/severe respiratory failure, delayed hospital admission after symptoms onset, baseline comorbidities, or D-dimer >1000 ng/mL at admission independently predicted prolonged VS. The achievement of VC doubled the chance of clinical recovery and reduced the probability of death/mechanical ventilation.

Conclusions

Respiratory disease severity, comorbidities, delayed hospital admission and inflammatory markers negatively predicted VC, which resulted to be associated with better clinical outcomes. These findings highlight the importance of prompt hospitalization of symptomatic patients, especially where signs of severity or comorbidities are present.

Liver disease and outcomes among COVID-19 hospitalized patients - A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been a challenge globally. In severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) epidemic 60% of patients had hepatic injury, due to phylogenetic similarities of the viruses it is assumed that COVID-19 is associated with acute liver injury. In this meta-analysis, we aim to study the occurrence and association of liver injury, comorbid liver disease and elevated liver enzymes in COVID-19 confirmed hospitalizations with outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from observational studies describing comorbid chronic liver disease, acute liver injury, elevated aspartate aminotransferase (AST), alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels and outcomes of COVID-19 hospitalized patients from December 1, 2019, to June 30, 2020 was extracted following PRISMA guidelines. Adverse outcomes were defined as admission to intensive care unit (ICU), oxygen saturation <90%, invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), severe disease and in-hospital mortality. Odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were obtained.

RESULTS

24 studies with 12,882 confirmed COVID-19 patients were included. Overall prevalence of CM-CLD was 2.6%, COVID-19-ALI was 26.5%, elevated AST was 41.1% and elevated ALT was 29.1%. CM-CLD had no significant association with poor outcomes (pooled OR: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.71-1.29; p=0.78). COVID-19-ALI (1.68;1.04-2.70; p=0.03), elevated AST (2.98; 2.35-3.77; p<0.00001) and elevated ALT (1.85;1.49-2.29; p<0.00001) were significantly associated with higher odds of poor outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis suggests that acute liver injury and elevated liver enzymes were significantly associated with COVID-19 severity. Future studies should evaluate changing levels of biomarkers amongst liver disease patients to predict poor outcomes of COVID-19 and causes of liver injury during COVID-19 infection.

Characteristics of COVID-19 patients with bacterial coinfection admitted to the hospital from the emergency department in a large regional healthcare system

Introduction

The rate of bacterial coinfection with SARS‐CoV‐2 is poorly defined. The decision to administer antibiotics early in the course of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection depends on the likelihood of bacterial coinfection.

Methods

We performed a retrospective chart review of all patients admitted through the emergency department with confirmed SARS‐CoV‐2 infection over a 6‐week period in a large healthcare system in the United States. Blood and respiratory culture results were abstracted and adjudicated by multiple authors. The primary outcome was the rate of bacteremia. We secondarily looked to define clinical or laboratory features associated with bacteremia.

Results

There were 542 patients admitted with confirmed SARS‐CoV‐2 infection, with an average age of 62.8 years. Of these, 395 had blood cultures performed upon admission, with six true positive results (1.1% of the total population). An additional 14 patients had positive respiratory cultures treated as true pathogens in the first 72 h. Low blood pressure and elevated white blood cell count, neutrophil count, blood urea nitrogen, and lactate were statistically significantly associated with bacteremia. Clinical outcomes were not statistically significantly different between patients with and without bacteremia.

Conclusions

We found a low rate of bacteremia in patients admitted with confirmed SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. In hemodynamically stable patients, routine antibiotics may not be warranted in this population.

Features of Etiology of Community-Acquired Pneumonia Associated with COVID-19

Objective: comparative study of the etiological structure of community-acquired pneumonia in SARSCoV-2 “+”and SARS-CoV-2 “-“ patients who sought help from medical organizations in the Rostov Region.

Materials and methods. Biological material from 508 patients diagnosed with community-acquired pneumonia who were on outpatient treatment or in hospitals in Rostov-on-Don was studied. Verification of respiratory viruses, including SARS-CoV-2 RNA, as well as M. pneumoniae, C. pneumoniae, and L. pneumophila was performed by polymerase chain reaction in nasopharyngeal smears. Bacteriological analysis of sputum was carried out using differential diagnostic media, identification of isolated pathogens was carried out using time-of-flight mass spectrometry on Autoflex (Bruker Daltonics) with BioTyper 3.0 software.

Results and discussion. During the spread of a new coronavirus infection in the Rostov Region, the main etiological agent of community-acquired pneumonia is the new SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus. Specific character of pneumonia in patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 is a higher incidence of mixed infection of both viral and bacterial etiology. Against the background of detection of a new coronavirus infection in patients with pneumonia, cases of detection of other types of coronaviruses have been registered (HKU-1,OC43, HL-63 and 229Е). The most common etiological agent of bacterial pneumonia in patients was Streptococcus spp., both in patients with COVID-19-associated pneumonia and in patients who tested negative for SARS-CoV-2. Coronavirus patients represent a high risk group for the development of mycotic lung lesions. 

Chemokine Regulation During Epidemic Coronavirus Infection

SARS-CoV-2 (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus-2) is the third coronavirus to emerge as a cause of severe and frequently fatal pneumonia epidemics in humans, joining SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV (Middle East Respiratory Syndrome-coronavirus). As with many infectious diseases, the immune response to coronavirus infection may act as a double-edged sword: necessary for promoting antiviral host defense, but, if not appropriately regulated, also able to incite life-threatening immunopathology. Key immunoregulatory mediators include the chemokines, a large family of leukocyte chemoattractants that coordinate leukocyte infiltration, positioning and activation in infected tissue by acting at specific G protein-coupled receptors. Here, we compare the involvement of chemokines and chemokine receptors during infection with the three epidemic coronaviruses and discuss their potential value as biomarkers and targets for therapeutic development.

A Comprehensive Summary of the Knowledge on COVID-19 Treatment

Currently, the world is challenged by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Epidemiologists and researchers worldwide are invariably trying to understand and combat this precarious new disease. Scrutinizing available drug options and developing potential new drugs are urgent needs to subdue this pandemic. Several intervention strategies are being considered and handled worldwide with limited success, and many drug candidates are yet in the trial phase. Despite these limitations, the development of COVID-19 treatment strategies has been accelerated to improve the clinical outcome of patients with COVID-19, and some countries have efficiently kept it under control. Recently, the use of natural and traditional medicine has also set the trend in coronavirus treatment. This review aimed to discuss the prevailing COVID-19 treatment strategies available globally by examining their efficacy, potential mechanisms, limitations, and challenges in predicting a future potential treatment candidate and bridging them with the effective traditional Chinese medicine (TCM). The findings might enrich the knowledge on traditional alternative medication and its complementary role with Western medicine in managing the COVID-19 epidemic.

Hospital Mortality and Resource Implications of Hospitalisation with COVID-19 in London, UK: A Prospective Cohort Study

Background

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) had a significant impact on the National Health Service in the United Kingdom (UK), with over 35 000 cases reported in London by July 30, 2020. Detailed hospital-level information on patient characteristics, outcomes, and capacity strain is currently scarce but would guide clinical decision-making and inform prioritisation and planning.

Methods

We aimed to determine factors associated with hospital mortality and describe hospital and ICU strain by conducting a prospective cohort study at a tertiary academic centre in London, UK. We included adult patients admitted to the hospital with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 and followed them up until hospital discharge or 30 days. Baseline factors that are associated with hospital mortality were identified via semiparametric and parametric survival analyses.

Results

Our study included 429 patients: 18% of them were admitted to the ICU, 52% met criteria for ICU outreach team activation, and 61% had treatment limitations placed during their admission. Hospital mortality was 26% and ICU mortality was 34%. Hospital mortality was independently associated with increasing age, male sex, history of chronic kidney disease, increasing baseline C-reactive protein level, and dyspnoea at presentation. COVID-19 resulted in substantial ICU and hospital strain, with up to 9 daily ICU admissions and 41 daily hospital admissions, to a peak census of 80 infected patients admitted in the ICU and 250 in the hospital. Management of such a surge required extensive reorganisation of critical care services with expansion of ICU capacity from 69 to 129 beds, redeployment of staff from other hospital areas, and coordinated hospital-level effort.

Conclusions

COVID-19 is associated with a high burden of mortality for patients treated on the ward and the ICU and required substantial reconfiguration of critical care services. This has significant implications for planning and resource utilisation.

Critically ill patients with diabetes and Middle East respiratory syndrome: a multi-center observational study

BACKGROUND

Diabetes is a risk factor for infection with coronaviruses. This study describes the demographic, clinical data, and outcomes of critically ill patients with diabetes and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS).

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was conducted at 14 hospitals in Saudi Arabia (September 2012-January 2018). We compared the demographic characteristics, underlying medical conditions, presenting symptoms and signs, management and clinical course, and outcomes of critically ill patients with MERS who had diabetes compared to those with no diabetes. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to determine if diabetes was an independent predictor of 90-day mortality.

RESULTS

Of the 350 critically ill patients with MERS, 171 (48.9%) had diabetes. Patients with diabetes were more likely to be older, and have comorbid conditions, compared to patients with no diabetes. They were more likely to present with respiratory failure requiring intubation, vasopressors, and corticosteroids. The median time to clearance of MERS-CoV RNA was similar (23 days (Q1, Q3: 17, 36) in patients with diabetes and 21.0 days (Q1, Q3: 10, 33) in patients with no diabetes). Mortality at 90 days was higher in patients with diabetes (78.9% versus 54.7%, p < 0.0001). Multivariable regression analysis showed that diabetes was an independent risk factor for 90-day mortality (odds ratio, 2.09; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-3.72).

CONCLUSIONS

Half of the critically ill patients with MERS have diabetes; which is associated with more severe disease. Diabetes is an independent predictor of mortality among critically patients with MERS.

Variation in outcome of invasive mechanical ventilation between different countries for patients with severe COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

COVID 19 is the most recent cause of Adult respiratory distress syndrome ARDS. Invasive mechanical ventilation IMV can support gas exchange in patients failing non-invasive ventilation, but its reported outcome is highly variable between countries. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis on IMV for COVID-associated ARDS to study its outcome among different countries.

METHODS

CENTRAL, MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus were systematically searched up to August 8, 2020. Studies reporting five or more patients with end point outcome for severe COVID 19 infection treated with IMV were included. The main outcome assessed was mortality. Baseline, procedural, outcome, and validity data were systematically appraised and pooled with random-effect methods. Subgroup analysis for different countries was performed. Meta-regression for the effect of study timing and patient age and were tested. Publication bias was examined. This trial was registered with PROSPERO under registration number CRD42020190365.

FINDINGS

Our electronic search retrieved 4770 citations, 103 of which were selected for full-text review. Twenty-one studies with a combined population of 37359 patients with COVID-19 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. From this population, 5800 patients were treated by invasive mechanical ventilation. Out of those, 3301 patients reached an endpoint of ICU discharge or death after invasive mechanical ventilation while the rest were still in the ICU. Mortality from IMV was highly variable among the included studies ranging between 21% and 100%. Random-effect pooled estimates suggested an overall in-hospital mortality risk ratio of 0.70 (95% confidence interval 0.608 to 0.797; I2 = 98%). Subgroup analysis according to country of origin showed homogeneity in the 8 Chinese studies with high pooled mortality risk ratio of 0.97 (I2 = 24%, p = 0.23) (95% CI = 0.94-1.00), similar to Italy with a low pooled mortality risk ratio of 0.26 (95% CI 0.08-0.43) with homogeneity (p = 0.86) while the later larger studies coming from the USA showed pooled estimate mortality risk ratio of 0.60 (95% CI 0.43-0.76) with persistent heterogeneity (I2 = 98%, p<0.001). Meta-regression showed that outcome from IMV improved with time (p<0.001). Age had no statistically significant effect on mortality (p = 0.102). Publication bias was excluded by visualizing the funnel plot of standard error, Egger's test with p = 0.714 and Begg&Mazumdar test with p = 0.334.

INTERPRETATION

The study included the largest number of patients with outcome findings of IMV in this current pandemic. Our findings showed that the use of IMV for selected COVID 19 patients with severe ARDS carries a high mortality, but outcome has improved over the last few months and in more recent studies. The results should encourage physicians to use this facility when indicated for severely ill COVID-19 patients.