1
|
Aghajanian S, Shafiee A, Akhondi A, Abadi SRF, Mohammadi I, Ehsan M, Mohammadifard F. The effect of COVID-19 on Multiple Sclerosis relapse: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2024; 81:105128. [PMID: 37979408 DOI: 10.1016/j.msard.2023.105128] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/13/2023] [Revised: 07/08/2023] [Accepted: 11/04/2023] [Indexed: 11/20/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Multiple Sclerosis (MS) is a chronic autoimmune disease, affecting over 2.5 million people worldwide. There has been growing concern about the impact of COVID-19 on the clinical course of MS. However, these findings remain controversial, and there is a lack of high-quality evidence to establish the relationship between COVID-19 and MS. METHODS A comprehensive search was done to identify relevant studies reporting relapse rate in patients with MS (pwMS), those comparing the relapse rate of COVID-19 pwMS and MS controls, and studies investigating the effect of COVID-19 on relapse rate of pwMS. The results were presented as proportion of COVID-19 pwMS experiencing relapse and odds ratio determining the impact of COVID-19 on relapse rate. RESULTS Fourteen studies were included in the analyses. The proportion of COVID-19 positive pwMS with relapse was 7.71 per 100 cases (95 % confidence interval, CI: 4.41-13.89, I2=96 %). Quantitative evaluation of studies with pwMS without COVID-19 did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference in relapse rate of patients with COVID-19 (OR: 0.75, 95 %CI: 0.44-1.29, I2= 54 %). Subgroup and sensitivity analyses did not alter the lack of significance of association between COVID-19 and MS relapse. Sensitivity analysis excluding the outlying study was largely in favor of no difference between the groups (OR:1.00, 95 %CI: 0.72-1.38, I2=34 %) CONCLUSION: The results of this review does not suggest that COVID-19 influences the relapse rate in pwMS. While the findings alleviate the concerns regarding the co-occurrence of the diseases, further studies are needed to investigate the effects of confounding factors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sepehr Aghajanian
- Student Research Committee, School of Medicine, Alborz University of Medical Sciences, Iran; Neuroscience Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
| | - Arman Shafiee
- Student Research Committee, School of Medicine, Alborz University of Medical Sciences, Iran
| | - Amirhossein Akhondi
- Student Research Committee, School of Medicine, Alborz University of Medical Sciences, Iran
| | | | - Ida Mohammadi
- Student Research Committee, School of Medicine, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Iran
| | | | - Fateme Mohammadifard
- Student Research Committee, School of Medicine, Alborz University of Medical Sciences, Iran
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Li Z, Xue Y, Li L, Li C. Methylprednisolone or dexamethasone? How should we choose to respond to COVID-19?: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Medicine (Baltimore) 2023; 102:e34738. [PMID: 37682199 PMCID: PMC10489360 DOI: 10.1097/md.0000000000034738] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/04/2023] [Accepted: 07/24/2023] [Indexed: 09/09/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Methylprednisolone (MP) and dexamethasone (DXM) are commonly prescribed hormone drugs for treating coronavirus pandemic disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, but conflicting results from previous studies and meta-analyses on their efficacy and safety necessitate further investigation. Therefore, in this study, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to enhance the level of evidence and compare the efficacy and safety of MP and DXM in COVID-19 patients. METHODS We conducted a comprehensive search of PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases to retrieve randomized clinical trials. Our primary outcome measure was all-cause mortality, with secondary outcomes including admission to the intensive care unit, length of hospital stay, mechanical ventilation, and adverse events. RESULTS This study analyzed six randomized controlled trials involving 1403 patients (MP group: 704; DXM group: 699). The results of the analysis showed no significant differences in mortality rates, admission to intensive care units, hospitalization time, mechanical ventilation, or adverse events between the MP and DXM groups (P > .05). However, a significant difference was observed in the incidence of hyperglycemia between these 2 groups (RR = 1.78, 95% CI [1.09, 2.89], P = .02, I2 = 78%). CONCLUSION The results of this meta-analysis showed that there was no difference in mortality, ICU admission rate, hospital stay, mechanical ventilation, or adverse events between MP and DXM in the treatment of COVID-19. The incidence of hyperglycemia with methylprednisolone was higher than that with dexamethasone.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zhengning Li
- The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, Guangxi, People’s Republic of China
| | - Yuan Xue
- Liuzhou People’s Hospital, Liuzhou, Guangxi, People’s Republic of China
| | - Laodong Li
- The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, Guangxi, People’s Republic of China
| | - Chaoqian Li
- The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, Guangxi, People’s Republic of China
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Hong S, Wang H, Li S, Liu J, Qiao L. A systematic review and meta-analysis of glucocorticoids treatment in severe COVID-19: methylprednisolone versus dexamethasone. BMC Infect Dis 2023; 23:290. [PMID: 37147596 PMCID: PMC10162003 DOI: 10.1186/s12879-023-08280-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/03/2022] [Accepted: 04/26/2023] [Indexed: 05/07/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The preferred agent of glucocorticoids in the treatment of patients with severe COVID-19 is still controversial. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of methylprednisolone and dexamethasone in the treatment of patients with severe COVID-19. METHODS By searching the electronic literature database including PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science, the clinical studies comparing methylprednisolone and dexamethasone in the treatment of severe COVID-19 were selected according to the inclusion criteria and exclusion criteria. Relevant data were extracted and literature quality was assessed. The primary outcome was short-term mortality. The secondary outcomes were the rates of ICU admission and mechanical ventilation, PaO2/FiO2 ratio, plasma levels of C-reactive protein (CRP), ferritin, and neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio, hospital stay, and the incidence of severe adverse events. Statistical pooling applied the fixed or random effects model and reported as risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). Meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.1.0. RESULTS Twelve clinical studies were eligible, including three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nine non-RCTs. A total of 2506 patients with COVID-19 were analyzed, of which 1242 (49.6%) received methylprednisolone and 1264 (50.4%) received dexamethasone treatment. In general, the heterogeneity across studies was significant, and the equivalent doses of methylprednisolone were higher than that of dexamethasone. Our meta-analysis showed that methylprednisolone treatment in severe COVID-19 patients was related to significantly reduced plasma ferritin and neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio compared with dexamethasone, and that no significant difference in other clinical outcomes between the two groups was found. However, subgroup analyses of RCTs demonstrated that methylprednisolone treatment was associated with reduced short-term mortality, and decreased CRP level compared with dexamethasone. Moreover, subgroup analyses observed that severe COVID-19 patients treated with a moderate dose (2 mg/kg/day) of methylprednisolone were related to a better prognosis than those treated with dexamethasone. CONCLUSIONS This study showed that compared with dexamethasone, methylprednisolone could reduce the systemic inflammatory response in severe COVID-19, and its effect was equivalent to that of dexamethasone on other clinical outcomes. It should be noted that the equivalent dose of methylprednisolone used was higher. Based on the evidence of subgroup analyses of RCTs, methylprednisolone, preferably at a moderate dose, has an advantage over dexamethasone in the treatment of patients with severe COVID-19.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shukun Hong
- Department of Intensive Care Unit, Shengli Oilfield Central Hospital, Dongying, China.
| | - Hongye Wang
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Shengli Oilfield Central Hospital, Dongying, China
| | - Shuyuan Li
- Department of Intensive Care Unit, Shengli Oilfield Central Hospital, Dongying, China
| | - Jian Liu
- Department of Intensive Care Unit, Shengli Oilfield Central Hospital, Dongying, China
| | - Lujun Qiao
- Department of Intensive Care Unit, Shengli Oilfield Central Hospital, Dongying, China.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Kellogg D, Gutierrez GC, Small CE, Stephens B, Sanchez P, Beg M, Keyt HL, Restrepo MI, Attridge RL, Maselli DJ. Safety and efficacy of methylprednisolone versus dexamethasone in critically ill patients with COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome: a retrospective study. Ther Adv Infect Dis 2023; 10:20499361231153546. [PMID: 36818803 PMCID: PMC9936170 DOI: 10.1177/20499361231153546] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/05/2022] [Accepted: 01/11/2023] [Indexed: 02/18/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Corticosteroids (CSs), specifically dexamethasone (DEX), are the treatment of choice for severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) due to COVID-19 pneumonia (CARDS). However, data from both ARDS and relatively small CARDS clinical trials have suggested improved outcomes with methylprednisolone (MP) versus DEX. The objective of this retrospective cohort study was to compare the safety and effectiveness of MP and DEX in critically ill CARDS patients. Methods The study cohort included CARDS patients admitted to a tertiary referral intensive care unit (ICU) between April and September 2020 who received at least 5 days of CSs for CARDS. Results The cohort was notable for a high severity of illness (overall, 88.5% of patients required mechanical ventilation and 16% required vasopressors on admission). The DEX group (n = 62) was significantly older with a higher illness severity [Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) 6 (4.75-8) versus 4.5 (3-7), p = 0.008], while the MP group (n = 51) received significantly more loading doses [19 (37.3%) versus 4 (6.5%), p < 0.0001]. MP was associated with a shorter time to intubation and more rapid progression to mortality [days to death: 18 (15-23) versus 27 (15-34), p = 0.026]. After correction for baseline imbalances in age and SOFA score, DEX was associated with improved mortality at 90 days compared with MP [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.23-0.80, p = 0.008]. However, there were no differences between rates of secondary infections during hospitalization or insulin requirements at 7 and 14 days. Conclusion In this cohort of critically ill CARDS, choice of CS was associated with mortality but not adverse event profile, and thus warrants further investigation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dean Kellogg
- Division of Pulmonary Diseases and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, UT Health San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA
| | - G. Christina Gutierrez
- Department of Pharmacotherapy & Pharmacy Services, University Health, San Antonio, TX, USA
- Division of Pharmacotherapy, College of Pharmacy, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA
- Pharmacotherapy Education & Research Center, UT Health San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA
| | - Clay E. Small
- Department of Pharmacotherapy & Pharmacy Services, University Health, San Antonio, TX, USA
- Division of Pharmacotherapy, College of Pharmacy, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA
- Pharmacotherapy Education & Research Center, UT Health San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA
| | - Benjamin Stephens
- Division of Pulmonary Diseases and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, UT Health San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA
| | - Paloma Sanchez
- Division of Pulmonary Diseases and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, UT Health San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA
| | - Moezzullah Beg
- Division of Pulmonary Diseases and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, UT Health San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA
| | - Holly L. Keyt
- Division of Pulmonary Diseases and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, UT Health San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA
| | - Marcos I. Restrepo
- Division of Pulmonary Diseases and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, UT Health San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA
- South Texas Veterans Health Care System, Audie L. Murphy Memorial Veterans Hospital, San Antonio, TX, USA
| | - Rebecca L. Attridge
- Division of Pulmonary Diseases and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, UT Health San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA
- Feik School of Pharmacy, University of the Incarnate Word, San Antonio, TX, USA
- Agilum Healthcare Intelligence, Inc., Deerfield Beach, FL, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
An Overview of the Impact of Bacterial Infections and the Associated Mortality Predictors in Patients with COVID-19 Admitted to a Tertiary Center from Eastern Europe. Antibiotics (Basel) 2023; 12:antibiotics12010144. [PMID: 36671345 PMCID: PMC9854454 DOI: 10.3390/antibiotics12010144] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/03/2022] [Revised: 01/08/2023] [Accepted: 01/09/2023] [Indexed: 01/12/2023] Open
Abstract
1. BACKGROUND Literature data on bacterial infections and their impact on the mortality rates of COVID-19 patients from Romania are scarce, while worldwide reports are contrasting. 2. MATERIALS AND METHODS We conducted a unicentric retrospective observational study that included 280 patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, on whom we performed various microbiological determinations. Based on the administration or not of the antibiotic treatment, we divided the patients into two groups. First, we sought to investigate the rates and predictors of bacterial infections, the causative microbial strains, and the prescribed antibiotic treatment. Secondly, the study aimed to identify the risk factors associated with in-hospital death and evaluate the biomarkers' performance for predicting short-term mortality. 3. RESULTS Bacterial co-infections or secondary infections were confirmed in 23 (8.2%) patients. Acinetobacter baumannii was the pathogen responsible for most of the confirmed bacterial infections. Almost three quarters of the patients (72.8%) received empiric antibiotic therapy. Multivariate logistic regression has shown leukocytosis and intensive care unit admission as risk factors for bacterial infections and C-reactive protein, together with the length of hospital stay, as mortality predictors. The ROC curves revealed an acceptable performance for the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (AUC: 0.781), and C-reactive protein (AUC: 0.797), but a poor performance for fibrinogen (AUC: 0.664) in predicting fatal events. 4. CONCLUSIONS This study highlighted the somewhat paradoxical association of a low rate of confirmed infections with a high rate of empiric antibiotic therapy. A thorough assessment of the risk factors for bacterial infections, in addition to the acknowledgment of various mortality predictors, is crucial for identifying high-risk patients, thus allowing a timely therapeutic intervention, with a direct impact on improving patients' prognosis.
Collapse
|
6
|
Cruciani M, Pati I, Masiello F, Pupella S, De Angelis V. Corticosteroids use for COVID-19: an overview of systematic reviews. LE INFEZIONI IN MEDICINA 2022; 30:469-479. [PMID: 36482954 PMCID: PMC9714993 DOI: 10.53854/liim-3004-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/09/2022] [Accepted: 10/26/2022] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE A reappraisal of the validity of the conclusions of systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses related to corticosteroids use for the treatment of COVID-19. MATERIAL AND METHODS An overview of SRs (umbrella review). The methodological quality of the SRs was assessed using tha AMSTAR-2 checklist; quality of the evidence was appraised following the GRADE approach. RESULTS 35 SRs were included in this overview. Data were from 307 overlapping reports, based on 121 individual primary studies (25 randomized clinical trials (RCTs), 96 non-RCTs. In critically ill patients the use of steroids significantly reduced mortality compared to standard of care in 80% of the SRs, more often with moderate/high level of certainty; however, in patients not requiring oxygen supplementation the use of steroids increased the overall mortality in 2/3 of the comparisons. Clinical progression of diseases (need for mechanical ventilation, or for intensive care admission) was more commonly observed among controls compared to steroids recipients (in 9 out of 14 comparisons; certainty of evidence from very-low to moderate). The occurrence of adverse events was similar among steroids recipients and controls. Other outcomes (i.e., viral clearance, length of hospital stay) or issue related to optimal dose and type of steroids were addressed in a minority of SRs, with a high level of uncertainty, so that no definitive conclusions can be drawn. CONCLUSIONS There is moderate certainty of evidence that corticosteroids reduce mortality and progression of disease in critically ill COVID-19 patients compared to standard of care, without increasing the occurrence of adverse events.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mario Cruciani
- National Blood Centre, Italian National Institute of Health, Rome, Italy
| | - Ilaria Pati
- National Blood Centre, Italian National Institute of Health, Rome, Italy
| | - Francesca Masiello
- National Blood Centre, Italian National Institute of Health, Rome, Italy
| | - Simonetta Pupella
- National Blood Centre, Italian National Institute of Health, Rome, Italy
| | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
da Silva SJR, do Nascimento JCF, Germano Mendes RP, Guarines KM, Targino Alves da Silva C, da Silva PG, de Magalhães JJF, Vigar JRJ, Silva-Júnior A, Kohl A, Pardee K, Pena L. Two Years into the COVID-19 Pandemic: Lessons Learned. ACS Infect Dis 2022; 8:1758-1814. [PMID: 35940589 PMCID: PMC9380879 DOI: 10.1021/acsinfecdis.2c00204] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 16.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/29/2023]
Abstract
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a highly transmissible and virulent human-infecting coronavirus that emerged in late December 2019 in Wuhan, China, causing a respiratory disease called coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which has massively impacted global public health and caused widespread disruption to daily life. The crisis caused by COVID-19 has mobilized scientists and public health authorities across the world to rapidly improve our knowledge about this devastating disease, shedding light on its management and control, and spawned the development of new countermeasures. Here we provide an overview of the state of the art of knowledge gained in the last 2 years about the virus and COVID-19, including its origin and natural reservoir hosts, viral etiology, epidemiology, modes of transmission, clinical manifestations, pathophysiology, diagnosis, treatment, prevention, emerging variants, and vaccines, highlighting important differences from previously known highly pathogenic coronaviruses. We also discuss selected key discoveries from each topic and underline the gaps of knowledge for future investigations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Severino Jefferson Ribeiro da Silva
- Laboratory of Virology and Experimental Therapy (LAVITE), Department of Virology, Aggeu Magalhães Institute (IAM), Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (Fiocruz), 50670-420 Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil.,Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Leslie Dan Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 3M2, Canada
| | - Jessica Catarine Frutuoso do Nascimento
- Laboratory of Virology and Experimental Therapy (LAVITE), Department of Virology, Aggeu Magalhães Institute (IAM), Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (Fiocruz), 50670-420 Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil
| | - Renata Pessôa Germano Mendes
- Laboratory of Virology and Experimental Therapy (LAVITE), Department of Virology, Aggeu Magalhães Institute (IAM), Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (Fiocruz), 50670-420 Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil
| | - Klarissa Miranda Guarines
- Laboratory of Virology and Experimental Therapy (LAVITE), Department of Virology, Aggeu Magalhães Institute (IAM), Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (Fiocruz), 50670-420 Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil
| | - Caroline Targino Alves da Silva
- Laboratory of Virology and Experimental Therapy (LAVITE), Department of Virology, Aggeu Magalhães Institute (IAM), Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (Fiocruz), 50670-420 Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil
| | - Poliana Gomes da Silva
- Laboratory of Virology and Experimental Therapy (LAVITE), Department of Virology, Aggeu Magalhães Institute (IAM), Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (Fiocruz), 50670-420 Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil
| | - Jurandy Júnior Ferraz de Magalhães
- Laboratory of Virology and Experimental Therapy (LAVITE), Department of Virology, Aggeu Magalhães Institute (IAM), Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (Fiocruz), 50670-420 Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil.,Department of Virology, Pernambuco State Central Laboratory (LACEN/PE), 52171-011 Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil.,University of Pernambuco (UPE), Serra Talhada Campus, 56909-335 Serra Talhada, Pernambuco, Brazil.,Public Health Laboratory of the XI Regional Health, 56912-160 Serra Talhada, Pernambuco, Brazil
| | - Justin R J Vigar
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Leslie Dan Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 3M2, Canada
| | - Abelardo Silva-Júnior
- Institute of Biological and Health Sciences, Federal University of Alagoas (UFAL), 57072-900 Maceió, Alagoas, Brazil
| | - Alain Kohl
- MRC-University of Glasgow Centre for Virus Research, Glasgow G61 1QH, United Kingdom
| | - Keith Pardee
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Leslie Dan Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 3M2, Canada.,Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 3G8, Canada
| | - Lindomar Pena
- Laboratory of Virology and Experimental Therapy (LAVITE), Department of Virology, Aggeu Magalhães Institute (IAM), Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (Fiocruz), 50670-420 Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Kikuchi A, Arita R, Ono R, Tadano Y, Saito N, Akaishi T, Kanno T, Osawa M, Takayama S, Abe M, Onodera K, Ishii T. Response to Glucocorticoid Therapy in Patients with Mild to Moderate Coronavirus Disease 2019 at a Japanese Care Facility. TOHOKU J EXP MED 2022; 257:97-106. [PMID: 35387909 DOI: 10.1620/tjem.2022.j022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Akiko Kikuchi
- Department of Education and Support for Regional Medicine, Tohoku University Hospital.,Department of Kampo and Integrative Medicine, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine
| | - Ryutaro Arita
- Department of Education and Support for Regional Medicine, Tohoku University Hospital
| | - Rie Ono
- Department of Education and Support for Regional Medicine, Tohoku University Hospital
| | - Yasunori Tadano
- Department of Education and Support for Regional Medicine, Tohoku University Hospital
| | - Natsumi Saito
- Department of Education and Support for Regional Medicine, Tohoku University Hospital
| | - Tetsuya Akaishi
- Department of Education and Support for Regional Medicine, Tohoku University Hospital.,Department of Kampo and Integrative Medicine, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine
| | - Takeshi Kanno
- Department of Education and Support for Regional Medicine, Tohoku University Hospital
| | - Minoru Osawa
- Department of Education and Support for Regional Medicine, Tohoku University Hospital.,Department of Kampo and Integrative Medicine, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine
| | - Shin Takayama
- Department of Education and Support for Regional Medicine, Tohoku University Hospital.,Department of Kampo and Integrative Medicine, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine
| | - Michiaki Abe
- Department of Education and Support for Regional Medicine, Tohoku University Hospital
| | - Ko Onodera
- Department of Education and Support for Regional Medicine, Tohoku University Hospital.,Department of General Practitioner Development, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine
| | - Tadashi Ishii
- Department of Education and Support for Regional Medicine, Tohoku University Hospital.,Department of Kampo and Integrative Medicine, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine.,Department of General Practitioner Development, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Swart P, Nijbroek SGLH, Paulus F, Neto AS, Schultz MJ. Sex Differences in Use of Low Tidal Volume Ventilation in COVID-19-Insights From the PRoVENT-COVID Study. Front Med (Lausanne) 2022; 8:780005. [PMID: 35300177 PMCID: PMC8923734 DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2021.780005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/20/2021] [Accepted: 11/30/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to compare and understand differences in the use of low tidal volume ventilation (LTVV) between females and males with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This is a post-hoc analysis of an observational study in invasively ventilated patients with ARDS related to COVID-19 in 22 ICUs in the Netherlands. The primary endpoint was the use of LTVV, defined as having received a median tidal volume (VT) ≤6 ml/kg predicted body weight (PBW) during controlled ventilation. A mediation analysis was used to investigate the impact of anthropometric factors, next to the impact of sex per se. The analysis included 934 patients, 251 females and 683 males. All the patients had ARDS, and there were no differences in ARDS severity between the sexes. On the first day of ventilation, females received ventilation with a higher median VT compared with males [6.8 (interquartile range (IQR) 6.0–7.6 vs. 6.3 (IQR 5.8–6.9) ml/kg PBW; p < 0.001]. Consequently, females received LTVV less often than males (23 vs. 34%; p = 0.003). The difference in the use of LTVV became smaller but persisted over the next days (27 vs. 36%; p = 0.046 at day 2 and 28 vs. 38%; p = 0.030 at day 3). The difference in the use LTVV was significantly mediated by sex per se [average direct effect of the female sex, 7.5% (95% CI, 1.7–13.3%); p = 0.011] and by differences in the body height [average causal mediation effect, −17.5% (−21.5 to −13.5%); p < 0.001], but not by the differences in actual body weight [average causal mediation effect, 0.2% (−0.8 to 1.2%); p = 0.715]. In conclusion, in this cohort of patients with ARDS related to COVID-19, females received LTVV less often than males in the first days of invasive ventilation. The difference in the use of LTVV was mainly driven by an anthropometric factor, namely, body height. Use of LTVV may improve by paying attention to correct titration of VT, which should be based on PBW, which is a function of body height.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pien Swart
- Department of Intensive Care, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Location 'Academic Medical Center', Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Sunny G L H Nijbroek
- Department of Intensive Care, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Location 'Academic Medical Center', Amsterdam, Netherlands.,Department of Anaesthesiology, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Location 'Academic Medical Center', Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Frederique Paulus
- Department of Intensive Care, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Location 'Academic Medical Center', Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Ary Serpa Neto
- Department of Intensive Care, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Location 'Academic Medical Center', Amsterdam, Netherlands.,Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.,Department of Critical Care Medicine, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Marcus J Schultz
- Department of Intensive Care, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Location 'Academic Medical Center', Amsterdam, Netherlands.,Mahidol Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit (MORU), Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.,Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|