Download This Paper Open PDF in Browser Add Paper to My Library Share: Permalink Using these links will ensure access to this page indefinitely Copy URL Copy DOI
To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of anticoagulation regimens in COVID-19 critically ill patients with new-onset Atrial fibrillation (Afib) during their intensive care unit (ICU) stays.
Vaccine hesitancy is a major obstacle to the large efforts made by governments and health organizations toward achieving successful COVID-19 vaccination programs. Healthcare worker's (HCWs) acceptance or refusal of the vaccine is an influencing factor to the attitudes of their patients and general population. This study aimed to report the acceptance rates for COVID-19 vaccines among HCWs in Arab countries and identify key factors driving the attitudes of HCWs in the Arab world toward vaccines.
ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Clostridium difficile infection is one of the most common causes of diarrhea in healthcare facilities. More studies are needed to identify patients at high risk of C difficile infection in our community. OBJECTIVES: Estimate the prevalence of C difficile infection among adult patients and evaluate the risk factors associated with infection. DESIGN: Retrospective record review. SETTING: Tertiary academic medical center in Jeddah. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients were adults (≥18 years old) with confirmed C difficile diagnosis between January 2013 and May 2018. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prevalence rate and types of risk factors. SAMPLE SIZE: Of 1886 records, 129 patients had positive lab results and met the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: The prevalence of C difficile infection in our center over five years was 6.8%. The mean (SD) age was 56 (18) years, and infection was more prevalent in men (53.5%) than in women (46.5%). The most common risk factors were use of proton-pump inhibitors (PPI) and broad-spectrum antibiotics. The overlapping exposure of both PPIs and broad-spectrum antibiotics was 56.6%. There was no statistically significant difference between the type of PPI ( P =.254) or antibiotic ( P =.789) and the onset of C difficile infection. CONCLUSION: The overall C difficile infection prevalence in our population was low compared to Western countries. The majority of the patients who developed C difficile infection were using PPIs and/or antibiotics. No differences were observed in the type of antibiotic or PPI and the onset of C difficile infection development. Appropriate prescribing protocols for PPIs and antibiotics in acute settings are needed. LIMITATIONS: Single center and retrospective design. CONFLICT OF INTEREST: None.
Background: Tocilizumab (TCZ) has been proposed as potential rescue therapy for severe COVID-19. No previous study has primarily assessed the role of TCZ in preventing severe COVID-19-related multiorgan dysfunction. Hence, this multicenter cohort study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of TCZ early use versus standard of care in preventing severe COVID-19-related multiorgan dysfunction in COVID-19 critically ill patients during intensive care unit (ICU) stay. Methods: A multicenter, retrospective cohort study includes critically ill adult patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICUs. Patients were categorized into two groups, the treatment group includes patients who received early TCZ therapy within 24 hours of ICU admission and the control group includes patients who received standard of care. The primary outcome was the multiorgan dysfunction on day three of the ICU admission. The secondary outcomes were 30-day, and in-hospital mortality, ventilator-free days, hospital length of stay (LOS), ICU LOS, and ICU-related complications. Results: After propensity score matching, 300 patients were included in the analysis based on predefined criteria with a ratio of 1:2. Patients who received TCZ had lower multiorgan dysfunction score on day three of ICU admission compared to the control group (beta coefficient: -0.13, 95% CI: -0.26, -0.01, P-value = 0.04). Moreover, respiratory failure requiring MV was statistically significantly lower in patients who received early TCZ compared to the control group (OR 0.52; 95% CI 0.31, 0.91, P-value = 0.02). The 30-day and in-hospital mortality were significantly lower in patients who received TCZ than those who did not (HR 0.56; 95% CI 0.37, 0.85, P-value = 0 .006 and HR 0.54; 95% CI 0.36, 0.82, P-value = 0.003, respectively). Conclusion: In addition to the mortality benefits associated with early TCZ use within 24 hours of ICU admission, the use of TCZ was associated with a significantly lower multiorgan dysfunction score on day three of ICU admission in critically ill patients with COVID-19.
Oseltamivir has been used as adjunctive therapy in the management of patients with COVID-19. However, the evidence about using oseltamivir in critically ill patients with severe COVID-19 remains scarce. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of oseltamivir in critically ill patients with COVID-19.This multicenter, retrospective cohort study includes critically ill adult patients with COVID-19 admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). Patients were categorized into two groups based on oseltamivir use within 48 hours of ICU admission (Oseltamivir vs. Control). The primary endpoint was viral load clearance.A total of 226 patients were matched into two groups based on their propensity score. The time to COVID-19 viral load clearance was shorter in patients who received oseltamivir (11 vs. 16 days, p = 0.042; beta coefficient: -0.84, 95%CI: (-1.33, 0.34), p = 0.0009). Mechanical ventilation (MV) duration was also shorter in patients who received oseltamivir (6.5 vs. 8.5 days, p = 0.02; beta coefficient: -0.27, 95% CI: [-0.55,0.02], P = 0.06). In addition, patients who received oseltamivir had lower odds of hospital/ventilator-acquired pneumonia (OR:0.49, 95% CI:(0.283,0.861), p = 0.01). On the other hand, there were no significant differences between the groups in the 30-day and in-hospital mortality.Oseltamivir was associated with faster viral clearance and shorter MV duration without safety concerns in critically ill COVID-19 patients.
Thrombotic events are common in critically ill patients with COVID-19 and have been linked with COVID-19- induced hyperinflammatory state. In addition to anticoagulant effects, heparin and its derivatives have various anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory properties that may affect patient outcomes. This study compared the effectiveness and safety of prophylactic standard-doses of enoxaparin and unfractionated heparin (UFH) in critically ill patients with COVID-19. METHODS: A multicenter, retrospective cohort study included critically ill adult patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU between March 2020 and July 2021. Patients were categorized into two groups based on the type of pharmacological VTE thromboprophylaxis given in fixed doses (Enoxaparin 40 mg SQ every 24 hours versus UFH 5000 Units SQ every 8 hours) throughout their ICU stay. The primary endpoint was all cases of thrombosis. Other endpoints were considered secondary. Propensity score (PS) matching was used to match patients (1:1 ratio) between the two groups based on the predefined criteria. Multivariable logistic, Cox proportional hazards, and negative binomial regression analysis were used as appropriate. RESULTS: A total of 306 patients were eligible based on the eligibility criteria; 130 patients were included after PS matching (1:1 ratio). Patients who received UFH compared to enoxaparin had higher all thrombosis events at crude analysis (18.3% vs. 4.6%; p-value = 0.02 as well in logistic regression analysis (OR: 4.10 (1.05, 15.93); p-value = 0.04). Although there were no significant differences in all bleeding cases and major bleeding between the two groups (OR: 0.40 (0.07, 2.29); p-value = 0.31 and OR: 1.10 (0.14, 8.56); p-value = 0.93, respectively); however, blood transfusion requirement was higher in the UFH group but did not reach statistical significance (OR: 2.98 (0.85, 10.39); p-value = 0.09). The 30-day and in-hospital mortality were similar between the two groups at Cox hazards regression analysis. In contrast, hospital LOS was longer in the UFH group; however, it did not reach the statistically significant difference (beta coefficient: 0.22; 95% CI: -0.03, 0.48; p-value = 0.09).Prophylactic enoxaparin use in critically ill patients with COVID-19 may significantly reduce all thrombosis cases with similar bleeding risk compared to UFH.
Abstract Background Previous studies have shown that non-critically ill COVID-19 patients co-infected with other respiratory viruses have poor clinical outcomes. However, limited studies focused on this co-infections in critically ill patients. This study aims to evaluate the clinical outcomes of critically ill patients infected with COVID-19 and co-infected by other respiratory viruses. Methods A multicenter retrospective cohort study was conducted for all adult patients with COVID-19 who were hospitalized in the ICUs between March, 2020 and July, 2021. Eligible patients were sub-categorized into two groups based on simultaneous co-infection with other respiratory viruses throughout their ICU stay. Influenza A or B, Human Adenovirus (AdV), Human Coronavirus (i.e., 229E, HKU1, NL63, or OC43), Human Metapneumovirus, Human Rhinovirus/Enterovirus, Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV), Parainfluenza virus, and Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) were among the respiratory viral infections screened. Patients were followed until discharge from the hospital or in-hospital death. Results A total of 836 patients were included in the final analysis. Eleven patients (1.3%) were infected concomitantly with other respiratory viruses. Rhinovirus/Enterovirus (38.5%) was the most commonly reported co-infection. No difference was observed between the two groups regarding the 30-day mortality (HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.13, 1.20; p = 0.10). The in-hospital mortality was significantly lower among co-infected patients with other respiratory viruses compared with patients who were infected with COVID-19 alone (HR 0.32 95% CI 0.10, 0.97; p = 0.04). Patients concomitantly infected with other respiratory viruses had longer median mechanical ventilation (MV) duration and hospital length of stay (LOS). Conclusion Critically ill patients with COVID-19 who were concomitantly infected with other respiratory viruses had comparable 30-day mortality to those not concomitantly infected. Further proactive testing and care may be required in the case of co-infection with respiratory viruses and COVID-19. The results of our study need to be confirmed by larger studies.
Cancer therapy duration is variable and may take years, adding a new challenge of maintaining the best life quality for cancer survivors. In cancer patients, late-onset toxicities have been reported with monoclonal antibodies and may involve several body organs or systems. They are defined as an autoimmune illnesses that can happen months to years after treatment discontinuation. Late-onset toxicities have become a focus of clinical care and related research. After cancer therapy is completed, the patient should receive longitudinal follow-up to detect these late effects as early as possible. The current review summarizes the recently reported late-onset toxicities of four classes of monoclonal antibodies (anti-CD52, anti-CTLA-4, anti-PD-1 and anti-CD20) with guidance for the diagnostic tools, appropriate management and treatment.Late-onset toxicities have been reported in cancer patients with monoclonal antibodies therapy and may involve several body organs or systems. They are defined as autoimmune illnesses that can happen months to years after treatment discontinuation. The reported late-onset toxicities include; bruises due to decreased platelet count associated with alemtuzumab, ipilimumab-induced pneumonitis, hepatitis, gastrointestinal disorders, cardiovascular complications and neurosarcoidosis. Moreover, endocrinal side effects of nivolumab, pembrolizumab-induced colitis, dermatological toxicities and acute encephalopathy, and rituximab-induced late-onset decrease in neutrophils count. Several treatment options are available for managing late-onset toxicities, including corticosteroids. After monoclonal antibodies therapy is completed in cancer patients, they should receive a longitudinal follow-up to detect these late effects as early as possible.
