Compass in COVID-19 Illness: Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation/Sepsis-induced Coagulopathy Scoring in Predicting Severity

Clinico-Epidemiological Characteristics of Healthcare Workers with SARS-CoV-2 Infection during the First and Second Waves in a Teaching Hospital from Eastern India: A Comparative Analysis

In this retrospective observational study, we have performed a comparative analysis of the demographic, clinical and epidemiological characteristics of the HCWs affected with SARS-CoV-2 infection during first two waves in India. The overall prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection among HCWs was found to be 15.24% (14.20-16.33) and 23.38% (22.14-25.65) during first and second waves respectively. The second wave showed an adjusted odds ratio of 0.04(0.02-0.07) and 2.09(1.49-2.93) for hospitalization and being symptomatic, respectively. We detected significantly higher level of C-reactive protein (CRP) among admitted HCWs during the second wave (5.10 -14.60 mg/dl) as compared to the first wave (2.00 - 2.80 mg/dl). Our study found the relative risk of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection among HCWs during the second wave to be 0.68 [0.57-0.82, p < 0.001)]. Although, the prevalence of SARS CoV-2 infection and risk of being symptomatic was higher during second wave, the risk of hospitalization was less when compared with the first wave.

Comparison of the prognostic value of four different critical illness scores in patients with sepsis-induced coagulopathy

In patients with sepsis-induced coagulopathy (SIC), the Chinese DIC scoring system (CDSS) of the Chinese Society of Thrombosis and Hemostasis score, the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine (JAAM) score, the International Society of Thrombosis and Hemostasis (ISTH), and the Can Rapid risk stratification of Unstable angina patients Suppress Adverse outcomes with Early implementation of the ACC/AHA Guidelines (CRUSADE) score were compared for their predictive significance (SIC). From August 2021 through August 2022, 92 SIC patients hospitalized in our hospital's Department of Critical Care Medicine served as study participants. Groups of patients were created with a bad prognosis (n = 35) and a favorable prognosis (n = 57) 14 days following admission. Electronic medical records were used to compile patient information such as demographics (gender, age, and body mass index), medical history (hypertension, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and chronic kidney disease), treatment (mechanical ventilation, APACHE II score at admission), and outcomes (results). All patients' JAAM, CDSS, ISTH, and CRUSADE scores were recorded. The APACHE II scores of the group with a poor prognosis were noticeably (p < 0.05) higher upon admission than those of the group with a favorable prognosis. The poor prognosis group had higher JAAM, ISTH, CDSS, and CRUSADE scores than the good prognosis group (all p < 0.05). Partial coagulation indicators in fibrinogen, D-dimer, activated partial thromboplastin time, and prothrombin time were positively linked with JAAM, ISTH, CDSS, and CRUSADE (all p < 0.05). At admission, the JAAM, ISTH, CDSS, CRUSADE, and APACHE II scores were independently linked with SIC patients' prognosis (all p < 0.05) in a multivariate logistic regression analysis. According to receiver operating characteristic analysis, the area under the curve for predicting the prognosis of SIC patients using the JAAM, ISTH, CDSS, and CRUSADE4 scores was 0.896, 0.870, 0.852, and 0.737, respectively, with 95% CI being 0.840-0.952, 0.805-0.936, 0.783-0.922 and 0.629-0.845, respectively (all p < 0.05). The prognosis of SIC patients may be predicted in part by their JAAM, ISTH, CDSS, and CRUSADE4 scores, with the CDSS score being the most accurate. This research provides important recommendations for improving the care of patients with SIC.

Study to Determine a Prognostic Cutoff Values of the Coagulation Analyte D-dimer for ICU Admission among COVID-19 Patients

Introduction

The measured D-dimer levels in coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) patients have no specific cutoff to find the progression of coagulopathy and severity.

Aim

This study aimed to determine prognostic cutoff values of D-dimer for intensive care unit (ICU) admission among COVID-19 patients.

Materials and methods

This cross-sectional study was conducted in Sree Balaji Medical College and Hospital, Chennai, during a period of 6 months. This study included 460 COVID-19-positive individuals.

Results

The mean age was 52.2 ± 12.53 years. Patients with mild illness have D-dimer value 461.8 ± 221, whereas moderate and severe COVID illness patients have D-dimer values of 1915.2 ± 699.9 and 7937.6 ± 2045.2, respectively. D-dimer cutoff value of 1036.9 is shown to be a prognostic cutoff value for COVID-19 patients admitted in the ICU with 99% sensitivity and 17% specificity. The area under curve (AUC) was considered excellent (AUC = 0.827, 95% Cl: 0.78-0.86, p-value < 0.0001) indicative of high sensitivity.

Conclusion

The D-dimer value of 1036.9 ng/mL was found to be the optimum cutoff for the patients to predict the severity of the COVID-19-positive patients admitted in the ICU.

How to cite this article

Anton MC, Shanthi B, Vasudevan E. Study to Determine a Prognostic Cutoff Values of the Coagulation Analyte D-dimer for ICU Admission among COVID-19 Patients. Indian J Crit Care Med 2023;27(2):135-138.

Prescription Pattern of Intravenous Fosfomycin in a Provincial Hospital in Thailand

BACKGROUND

In Thailand, active antibiotics against Gram-negative bacteria are limited. The re-emergence of intravenous (IV) fosfomycin is an alternative. IV fosfomycin has broad-spectrum activity, relative safety, and availability. The limitations of the clinical use of IV fosfomycin include the lack of susceptibility reports and unclear dosing. Therefore, this study was designed to examine the prescription pattern of IV fosfomycin in Chonburi Hospital, a provincial hospital in Thailand.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective descriptive study involving in-patients aged ≥18 years who received IV fosfomycin between February 2019 and January 2020. Data were collected from the electronic patient records.

RESULTS

Of 265 patients, 254 (95.8%) and 11 (4.2%) received IV fosfomycin for treatment and prophylaxis, respectively. IV fosfomycin was prescribed for empirical and definitive treatment. All 166 organisms were Gram-negative bacteria (GNB), including Enterobacterales (47.0%), Acinetobacter baumannii (44.0%), and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (9.0%). Moreover, 141 (87.6%) isolates were carbapenem-resistant GNB (CR-GNB). The most commonly used IV fosfomycin regimen contained colistin or aminoglycosides. Furthermore, 35.3% of the combination regimens contained one active antibiotic. The appropriate dosage of IV fosfomycin for treating urinary tract infection was 71.8%. The 14-day all-cause mortality rate in CR-GNB was 45.0%.

CONCLUSION

IV fosfomycin is reserved for secondary use in treating nosocomial infection with resistant GNB. It is used synergistically with other antibiotics. At least one active antibiotic and the optimal fosfomycin dosage should be considered. An antimicrobial stewardship program should be implemented for the optimal use of fosfomycin.