Outcomes of Patients with COPD Hospitalized for Coronavirus Disease 2019.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Rationale
There is controversy concerning the association of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) as an independent risk factor for mortality in patients hospitalized with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). We hypothesize that patients with COPD hospitalized for COVID-19 have increased mortality risk.Objective
To assess whether COPD increased the risk of mortality among patients hospitalized for COVID-19.Methods
We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of patients with COVID-19 between February 10, 2020, and November 10, 2020, and hospitalized within 14 days of diagnosis. Electronic health records from U.S. facilities (Optum COVID-19 data) were used.Results
In our cohort of 31,526 patients, 3030 (9.6%) died during hospitalization. Mortality in patients with COPD was higher than that of patients without COPD, 14.02% and 8.8%, respectively. Univariate (odds ratio [OR] 1.68; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.54 to 1.84) and multivariate (OR 1.33; 95% CI 1.18 to 1.50) analysis showed that patients with COPD had greater odds of death due to COVID-19 than patients without COPD. We found significant interactions between COPD and sex and COPD and age. Specifically, the increased mortality risk associated with COPD was observed among female (OR 1.62; 95% CI 1.36 to 1.95) but not male patients (OR 1.14; 95% CI 0.97 to 1.34); and in patients aged 40 to 64 (OR 1.42; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.90) and 65 to 79 (OR 1.48; 95% CI 1.23 to 1.78) years.Conclusions
COPD is an independent risk factor for death in adults aged 40 to 79 years hospitalized with COVID-19 infection.
SUBMITTER: Puebla Neira DA
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8686850 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundOutcomes of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 have been described in health systems overwhelmed with a surge of cases. However, studies examining outcomes of patients admitted to hospitals not in crisis are lacking.ObjectiveTo describe clinical characteristic and outcomes of all patients with COVID-19 who are admitted to hospitals not in crisis, and factors associated with mortality in this population.DesignA retrospective analysis PARTICIPANTS: In total, 470 consecutive patients with COVID-19 requiring hospitalization in one health system in Boston from January 1, 2020 to April 15, 2020.Main measuresWe collected clinical outcomes during hospitalization including intensive care unit (ICU) admission, receipt of mechanical ventilation, and vasopressors. We utilized multivariable logistic regression models to examine factors associated with mortality.Key resultsA total of 470 patients (median age 66 [range 23-98], 54.0% male) were included. The most common comorbidities were diabetes (38.5%, 181/470) and obesity (41.3%, 194/470). On admission, 41.9% (197/470) of patients were febrile and 60.6% (285/470) required supplemental oxygen. During hospitalization, 37.9% (178/470) were admitted to the ICU, 33.6% (158/470) received mechanical ventilation, 29.4% (138/470) received vasopressors, 16.4% (77/470) reported limitations on their desire for life-sustaining therapies such as intubation and cardiopulmonary resuscitation, and 25.1% (118/470) died. Among those admitted to the ICU (N=178), the median number of days on the ventilator was 10 days (IQR 1-29), and 58.4% (104/178) were discharged alive. Older age (OR=1.04, P<0.001), male sex (OR=2.14, P=0.007), higher comorbidities (OR=1.20, P=0.001), higher lactate dehydrogenase on admission (2nd tertile: OR=4.07, P<0.001; 3rd tertile: OR=8.04, P<0.001), and the need for supplemental oxygen on admission (OR=2.17, P=0.014) were all associated with higher mortality.ConclusionsThe majority of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and those who received mechanical ventilation survived. These data highlight the need to examine public health and system factors that contribute to improved outcomes for this population.
| S-EPMC7904295 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThere is increasing evidence of cardiovascular morbidity associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (coronavirus disease 2019). Pro-B-type natriuretic peptide is a biomarker of myocardial stress, associated with various respiratory and cardiac outcomes. We hypothesized that pro-B-type natriuretic peptide level would be associated with mortality and clinical outcomes in hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 patients.DesignWe performed a retrospective analysis using adjusted logistic and linear regression to assess the association of admission pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (analyzed by both cutoff > 125 pg/mL and log transformed pro-B-type natriuretic peptide) with clinical outcomes. We additionally treated body mass index, a confounder of both pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels and coronavirus disease 2019 outcomes, as an ordinal variable.SettingWe reviewed hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 who had a pro-B-type natriuretic peptide level measured within 48 hours of admission between March 1, and August 31, 2020, from a multihospital U.S. health system.PatientsAdult patients (≥ 18 yr old; n = 1232) with confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 admitted to the health system.InterventionsNone.Measurements and main resultsAfter adjustment for demographics, comorbidities, and troponin I level, higher pro-B-type natriuretic peptide level was significantly associated with death and secondary outcomes of new heart failure, length of stay, ICU duration, and need for ventilation among hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 patients. This significance persisted after adjustment for body mass index as an ordinal variable. The adjusted hazard ratio of death for log transformed pro-B-type natriuretic peptide was 1.56 (95% CI, 1.23-1.97; p < 0.0001).ConclusionsFurther investigation is warranted on the utility of pro-B-type natriuretic peptide for clinical prognostication in coronavirus disease 2019 as well as implications of abnormal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide in the underlying pathophysiology of coronavirus disease 2019-related myocardial injury.
| S-EPMC8288900 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSevere acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has caused a devastating worldwide pandemic. Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) has in vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2, but clinical data supporting HCQ for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are limited.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 who received ≥1 dose of HCQ at two New York City hospitals. We measured incident Grade 3 or 4 blood count and liver test abnormalities, ventricular arrhythmias, and vomiting and diarrhea within 10 days after HCQ initiation, and the proportion of patients who completed HCQ therapy. We also describe changes in Sequential Organ Failure Assessment hypoxia scores between baseline and day 10 after HCQ initiation and in-hospital mortality.ResultsNone of the 153 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 who received HCQ developed a sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmia. Incident blood count and liver test abnormalities occurred in <15% of patients and incident vomiting or diarrhea was rare. Eighty-nine percent of patients completed their HCQ course and three patients discontinued therapy because of QT prolongation. Fifty-two percent of patients had improved hypoxia scores 10 days after starting HCQ. Thirty-one percent of patients who were receiving mechanical ventilation at the time of HCQ initiation died during their hospitalization, compared to 18% of patients who were receiving supplemental oxygen but not requiring mechanical ventilation, and 8% of patients who were not requiring supplemental oxygen. Co-administration of azithromycin was not associated with improved outcomes.ConclusionsHCQ appears to be reasonably safe and tolerable in most hospitalized patients with COVID-19. However, nearly one-half of patients did not improve with this treatment, highlighting the need to evaluate HCQ and alternate therapies in randomized trials.
| S-EPMC7377460 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We aimed to investigate the prevalence of decreased folate levels in patients hospitalized with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) and evaluate their outcome and the prognostic signifi-cance associated with its different levels. In this retrospective cohort study, data were obtained from the electronic medical records at the Sheba Medical Center. Folic acid levels were available in 333 out of 1020 consecutive patients diagnosed with COVID-19 infection hospitalized from January 2020 to November 2020. Thirty-eight (11.4%) of the 333 patients comprising the present study population had low folate levels. No significant difference was found in the incidence of acute kidney injury, hypoxemia, invasive ventilation, length of hospital stay, and mortality be-tween patients with decreased and normal-range folate levels. When sub-dividing the study population according to quartiles of folate levels, similar findings were observed. In conclusion, decreased serum folate levels are common among hospitalized patients with COVID-19, but there was no association between serum folate levels and clinical outcomes. Due to the important role of folate in cell metabolism and the potential pathologic impact when deficient, a follow-up of folate levels or possible supplementation should be encouraged in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Fur-ther studies are required to assess the prevalence and consequences of folate deficiency in COVID-19 patients.
| S-EPMC8001221 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused devastating morbidity and mortality worldwide. In particular, thromboembolic complications have emerged as a key threat for patients with COVID-19. We assessed our experience with deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in patients with COVID-19.MethodsWe performed a retrospective analysis of all patients with COVID-19 who had undergone upper or lower extremity venous duplex ultrasonography at an academic health system in New York City from March 3, 2020 to April 12, 2020 with follow-up through May 12, 2020. A cohort of hospitalized patients without COVID-19 (non-COVID-19) who had undergone venous duplex ultrasonography from December 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019 was used for comparison. The primary outcome was DVT. The secondary outcomes included pulmonary embolism, in-hospital mortality, admission to the intensive care unit, and antithrombotic therapy. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify the risk factors for DVT and mortality.ResultsOf 443 patients (COVID-19, n = 188; and non-COVID-19, n = 255) who had undergone venous duplex ultrasonography, the COVID-19 cohort had had a greater incidence of DVT (31% vs 19%; P = .005) than had the non-COVID-19 cohort. The incidence of pulmonary embolism was not significantly different statistically between the COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 cohorts (8% vs 4%; P = .105). The DVT location in the COVID-19 group was more often distal (63% vs 29%; P < .001) and bilateral (15% vs 4%; P < .001). The duplex ultrasound findings had a significant impact on the antithrombotic plan; 42 patients (72%) with COVID-19 in the DVT group had their therapy escalated and 49 (38%) and 3 (2%) had their therapy escalated and deescalated in the non-DVT group, respectively (P < .001). Within the COVID-19 cohort, the D-dimer level was significantly greater in the DVT group at admission (2746 ng/mL vs 1481 ng/mL; P = .004) and at the duplex examination (6068 ng/mL vs 3049 ng/mL; P < .01). On multivariable analysis, male sex (odds ratio [OR], 2.27; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06-4.87; P = .035), intensive care unit admission (OR, 3.42; 95% CI, 1.02-11.44; P = .046), and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (OR, 5.5; 95% CI, 1.01-30.13; P = .049) were independently associated with DVT.ConclusionsGiven the high incidence of venous thromboembolic events in this population, we support the decision to empirically initiate therapeutic anticoagulation for patients with a low bleeding risk and severe COVID-19 infection. Duplex ultrasonography should be reserved for patients with a high clinical suspicion of venous thromboembolism for whom anticoagulation therapy could result in life-threatening consequences. Further study of patients with COVID-19 is warranted to elucidate the etiology of vascular thromboembolic events and guide the prophylactic and therapeutic interventions for these patients.
| S-EPMC7543928 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) can infect any human host, but kidney transplant recipients (KTR) are considered more susceptible on the basis of previous experience with other viral infections. We evaluated rates of hospital complications between SARS-CoV-2-positive KTR and comparator groups.MethodsWe extracted data from the electronic health record on patients who were hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2, testing at six hospitals from March 4 through September 9, 2020. We compared outcomes between SARS-CoV-2-positive KTR and controls: SARS-CoV-2-positive non-KTR, SARS-CoV-2-negative KTR, and SARS-CoV-2-negative non-KTR.ResultsOf 31,540 inpatients, 3213 tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. There were 32 SARS-CoV-2-positive and 224 SARS-CoV-2-negative KTR. SARS-CoV-2-positive KTR had higher ferritin levels (1412; interquartile range, 748-1749 versus 553; interquartile range, 256-1035; P<0.01) compared with SARS-CoV-2-positive non-KTR. SARS-CoV-2-positive KTR had higher rates of ventilation (34% versus 14%, P<0.01; versus 9%, P<0.01; versus 5%, P<0.01), vasopressor use (41% versus 16%, P<0.01; versus 17%, P<0.01; versus 12%, P<0.01), and AKI (47% versus 15%, P<0.01; versus 23%, P<0.01; versus 10%, P<0.01) compared with SARS-CoV-2-positive non-KTR, SARS-CoV-2-negative KTR, and SARS-CoV-2-negative non-KTR, respectively. SARS-CoV-2-positive KTR continued to have increased odds of ventilation, vasopressor use, and AKI compared with SARS-CoV-2-positive non-KTR independent of Elixhauser score, Black race, and baseline eGFR. Mortality was not significantly different between SARS-CoV-2-positive KTR and non-KTR, but there was a notable trend toward higher mortality in SARS-CoV-2-positive KTR (25% versus 16%, P=0.15, respectively).ConclusionsHospitalized SARS-CoV-2-positive KTR had a high rate of mortality and hospital complications, such as requiring ventilation, vasopressor use, and AKI. Additionally, they had higher odds of hospital complications compared with SARS-CoV-2-positive non-KTR after adjusting for Elixhauser score, Black race, and baseline eGFR. Future studies with larger sample size of KTR are needed to validate our findings.PodcastThis article contains a podcast at https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp3/www.asn-online.org/media/podcast/K360/2021_03_25_KID0005652020.mp3.
| S-EPMC8786009 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTocilizumab, an IL-6 receptor antagonist, can be used to treat cytokine release syndrome (CRS), with observed improvements in a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) case series.Research questionThe goal of this study was to determine if tocilizumab benefits patients hospitalized with COVID-19.Study design and methodsThis observational study of consecutive COVID-19 patients hospitalized between March 10, 2020, and March 31, 2020, and followed up through April 21, 2020, was conducted by chart review. Patients were treated with tocilizumab using an algorithm that targeted CRS. Survival and mechanical ventilation (MV) outcomes were reported for 14 days and stratified according to disease severity designated at admission (severe, ≥ 3 L supplemental oxygen to maintain oxygen saturation > 93%). For tocilizumab-treated patients, pre/post analyses of clinical response, biomarkers, and safety outcomes were assessed. Post hoc survival analyses were conducted for race/ethnicity.ResultsAmong the 239 patients, median age was 64 years; 36% and 19% were black and Hispanic, respectively. Hospital census increased exponentially, yet MV census did not. Severe disease was associated with lower survival (78% vs 93%; P < .001), greater proportion requiring MV (44% vs 5%; P < .001), and longer median MV days (5.5 vs 1.0; P = .003). Tocilizumab-treated patients (n = 153 [64%]) comprised 90% of those with severe disease; 44% of patients with nonsevere disease received tocilizumab for evolving CRS. Tocilizumab-treated patients with severe disease had higher admission levels of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (120 vs 71 mg/L; P < .001) and received tocilizumab sooner (2 vs 3 days; P < .001), but their survival was similar to that of patients with nonsevere disease (83% vs 91%; P = .11). For tocilizumab-treated patients requiring MV, survival was 75% (95% CI, 64-89). Following tocilizumab treatment, few adverse events occurred, and oxygenation and inflammatory biomarkers (eg, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, IL-6) improved; however, D-dimer and soluble IL-2 receptor (also termed CD25) levels increased significantly. Survival in black and Hispanic patients, after controlling for age, was significantly higher than in white patients (log-rank test, P = .002).InterpretationA treatment algorithm that included tocilizumab to target CRS may influence MV and survival outcomes. In tocilizumab-treated patients, oxygenation and inflammatory biomarkers improved, with higher than expected survival. Randomized trials must confirm these findings.
| S-EPMC7831876 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundProgressive hypoxemia is the predominant mode of deterioration in COVID-19. Among hypoxemia measures, the ratio of the partial pressure of arterial oxygen to the fraction of inspired oxygen (P/F ratio) has optimal construct validity but poor availability because it requires arterial blood sampling. Pulse oximetry reports oxygenation continuously, but occult hypoxemia can occur in Black patients because the technique is affected by skin color. Oxygen dissociation curves allow non-invasive estimation of P/F ratios (ePFR) but this approach remains unproven.Research questionCan ePFRs measure overt and occult hypoxemia?Study design and methodsWe retrospectively studied COVID-19 hospital encounters (n=5319) at two academic centers (University of Virginia [UVA] and Emory University). We measured primary outcomes (death or ICU transfer within 24 hours), ePFR, conventional hypoxemia measures, baseline predictors (age, sex, race, comorbidity), and acute predictors (National Early Warning Score (NEWS) and Sepsis-3). We updated predictors every 15 minutes. We assessed predictive validity using adjusted odds ratios (AOR) and area under receiver operating characteristics curves (AUROC). We quantified disparities (Black vs non-Black) in empirical cumulative distributions using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov (K-S) two-sample test.ResultsOvert hypoxemia (low ePFR) predicted bad outcomes (AOR for a 100-point ePFR drop: 2.7 [UVA]; 1.7 [Emory]; p<0.01) with better discrimination (AUROC: 0.76 [UVA]; 0.71 [Emory]) than NEWS (AUROC: 0.70 [UVA]; 0.70 [Emory]) or Sepsis-3 (AUROC: 0.68 [UVA]; 0.65 [Emory]). We found racial differences consistent with occult hypoxemia. Black patients had better apparent oxygenation (K-S distance: 0.17 [both sites]; p<0.01) but, for comparable ePFRs, worse outcomes than other patients (AOR: 2.2 [UVA]; 1.2 [Emory], p<0.01).InterpretationThe ePFR was a valid measure of overt hypoxemia. In COVID-19, it may outperform multi-organ dysfunction models like NEWS and Sepsis-3. By accounting for biased oximetry as well as clinicians’ real-time responses to it (supplemental oxygen adjustment), ePFRs may enable statistical modelling of racial disparities in outcomes attributable to occult hypoxemia.
| S-EPMC9216725 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe clinical significance of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as an associate of myocardial injury is controversial.HypothesisType 2 MI/Myocardial Injury are associated with worse outcomes if complicated by COVID-19.MethodsThis longitudinal cohort study involved consecutive patients admitted to a large urban hospital. Myocardial injury was determined using laboratory records as ≥1 hs-TnI result >99th percentile (male: >34 ng/L; female: >16 ng/L). Endotypes were defined according to the Fourth Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction (MI) and COVID-19 determined using PCR. Outcomes of patients with myocardial injury with and without COVID-19 were assessed.ResultsOf 346 hospitalized patients with elevated hs-TnI, 35 (10.1%) had laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 (median age [IQR]; 65 [59-74]; 64.8% male vs. COVID-19 negative: 74 [63-83] years; 43.7% male). Cardiac endotypes by COVID-19 status (yes vs. no) were: Type 1 MI (0 [0%] vs. 115 [100%]; p < .0005), Type 2 MI (13 [16.5%] vs. 66 [83.5%]; p = .045), and non-ischemic myocardial injury (cardiac: 4 [5.8%] vs. 65 [94.2%]; p = .191, non-cardiac:19 [22.9%] vs. 64 [77.%]; p < .0005). COVID-19 patients had less comorbidity (median [IQR] Charlson Comorbidity Index: 3.0 [3.0] vs. 5.0 [4.0]; p = .001), similar hs-TnI concentrations (median [IQR] initial: 46 [113] vs. 62 [138]; p = .199, peak: 122 [474] vs. 79 [220] ng/L; p = .564), longer admission (days) (median [IQR]: 14[19] vs. 6[12]; p = .001) and higher in-hospital mortality (63.9% vs. 11.3%; OR = 13.2; 95%CI: 5.90, 29.7).ConclusionsCardiac sequelae of COVID-19 typically manifest as Non-cardiac myocardial injury/Type 2MI in younger patients with less co-morbidity. Paradoxically, the admission duration and in-hospital mortality are increased.
| S-EPMC7943910 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceThe outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Wuhan, China, is serious and has the potential to become an epidemic worldwide. Several studies have described typical clinical manifestations including fever, cough, diarrhea, and fatigue. However, to our knowledge, it has not been reported that patients with COVID-19 had any neurologic manifestations.ObjectiveTo study the neurologic manifestations of patients with COVID-19.Design, setting, and participantsThis is a retrospective, observational case series. Data were collected from January 16, 2020, to February 19, 2020, at 3 designated special care centers for COVID-19 (Main District, West Branch, and Tumor Center) of the Union Hospital of Huazhong University of Science and Technology in Wuhan, China. The study included 214 consecutive hospitalized patients with laboratory-confirmed diagnosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection.Main outcomes and measuresClinical data were extracted from electronic medical records, and data of all neurologic symptoms were checked by 2 trained neurologists. Neurologic manifestations fell into 3 categories: central nervous system manifestations (dizziness, headache, impaired consciousness, acute cerebrovascular disease, ataxia, and seizure), peripheral nervous system manifestations (taste impairment, smell impairment, vision impairment, and nerve pain), and skeletal muscular injury manifestations.ResultsOf 214 patients (mean [SD] age, 52.7 [15.5] years; 87 men [40.7%]) with COVID-19, 126 patients (58.9%) had nonsevere infection and 88 patients (41.1%) had severe infection according to their respiratory status. Overall, 78 patients (36.4%) had neurologic manifestations. Compared with patients with nonsevere infection, patients with severe infection were older, had more underlying disorders, especially hypertension, and showed fewer typical symptoms of COVID-19, such as fever and cough. Patients with more severe infection had neurologic manifestations, such as acute cerebrovascular diseases (5 [5.7%] vs 1 [0.8%]), impaired consciousness (13 [14.8%] vs 3 [2.4%]), and skeletal muscle injury (17 [19.3%] vs 6 [4.8%]).Conclusions and relevancePatients with COVID-19 commonly have neurologic manifestations. During the epidemic period of COVID-19, when seeing patients with neurologic manifestations, clinicians should suspect severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection as a differential diagnosis to avoid delayed diagnosis or misdiagnosis and lose the chance to treat and prevent further transmission.
| S-EPMC7149362 | biostudies-literature