Acute kidney injury in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 from the ISARIC WHO CCP-UK Study: a prospective, multicentre cohort study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Acute kidney injury (AKI) is common in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This study investigated adults hospitalized with COVID-19 and hypothesized that risk factors for AKI would include comorbidities and non-White race.Methods
A prospective multicentre cohort study was performed using patients admitted to 254 UK hospitals with COVID-19 between 17 January 2020 and 5 December 2020.Results
Of 85 687 patients, 2198 (2.6%) received acute kidney replacement therapy (KRT). Of 41 294 patients with biochemistry data, 13 000 (31.5%) had biochemical AKI: 8562 stage 1 (65.9%), 2609 stage 2 (20.1%) and 1829 stage 3 (14.1%). The main risk factors for KRT were chronic kidney disease (CKD) [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 3.41: 95% confidence interval 3.06-3.81], male sex (aOR 2.43: 2.18-2.71) and Black race (aOR 2.17: 1.79-2.63). The main risk factors for biochemical AKI were admission respiratory rate >30 breaths per minute (aOR 1.68: 1.56-1.81), CKD (aOR 1.66: 1.57-1.76) and Black race (aOR 1.44: 1.28-1.61). There was a gradated rise in the risk of 28-day mortality by increasing severity of AKI: stage 1 aOR 1.58 (1.49-1.67), stage 2 aOR 2.41 (2.20-2.64), stage 3 aOR 3.50 (3.14-3.91) and KRT aOR 3.06 (2.75-3.39). AKI rates peaked in April 2020 and the subsequent fall in rates could not be explained by the use of dexamethasone or remdesivir.Conclusions
AKI is common in adults hospitalized with COVID-19 and it is associated with a heightened risk of mortality. Although the rates of AKI have fallen from the early months of the pandemic, high-risk patients should have their kidney function and fluid status monitored closely.
SUBMITTER: Sullivan MK
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8788218 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundImmunocompromised patients may be at higher risk of mortality if hospitalised with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) compared with immunocompetent patients. However, previous studies have been contradictory. We aimed to determine whether immunocompromised patients were at greater risk of in-hospital death and how this risk changed over the pandemic.Methods and findingsWe included patients > = 19 years with symptomatic community-acquired COVID-19 recruited to the ISARIC WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol UK prospective cohort study. We defined immunocompromise as immunosuppressant medication preadmission, cancer treatment, organ transplant, HIV, or congenital immunodeficiency. We used logistic regression to compare the risk of death in both groups, adjusting for age, sex, deprivation, ethnicity, vaccination, and comorbidities. We used Bayesian logistic regression to explore mortality over time. Between 17 January 2020 and 28 February 2022, we recruited 156,552 eligible patients, of whom 21,954 (14%) were immunocompromised. In total, 29% (n = 6,499) of immunocompromised and 21% (n = 28,608) of immunocompetent patients died in hospital. The odds of in-hospital mortality were elevated for immunocompromised patients (adjusted OR 1.44, 95% CI [1.39, 1.50], p < 0.001). Not all immunocompromising conditions had the same risk, for example, patients on active cancer treatment were less likely to have their care escalated to intensive care (adjusted OR 0.77, 95% CI [0.7, 0.85], p < 0.001) or ventilation (adjusted OR 0.65, 95% CI [0.56, 0.76], p < 0.001). However, cancer patients were more likely to die (adjusted OR 2.0, 95% CI [1.87, 2.15], p < 0.001). Analyses were adjusted for age, sex, socioeconomic deprivation, comorbidities, and vaccination status. As the pandemic progressed, in-hospital mortality reduced more slowly for immunocompromised patients than for immunocompetent patients. This was particularly evident with increasing age: the probability of the reduction in hospital mortality being less for immunocompromised patients aged 50 to 69 years was 88% for men and 83% for women, and for those >80 years was 99% for men and 98% for women. The study is limited by a lack of detailed drug data prior to admission, including steroid doses, meaning that we may have incorrectly categorised some immunocompromised patients as immunocompetent.ConclusionsImmunocompromised patients remain at elevated risk of death from COVID-19. Targeted measures such as additional vaccine doses, monoclonal antibodies, and nonpharmaceutical preventive interventions should be continually encouraged for this patient group.Trial registrationISRCTN 66726260.
| S-EPMC9928075 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMicrobiological characterisation of co-infections and secondary infections in patients with COVID-19 is lacking, and antimicrobial use is high. We aimed to describe microbiologically confirmed co-infections and secondary infections, and antimicrobial use, in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.MethodsThe International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infections Consortium (ISARIC) WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol UK (CCP-UK) study is an ongoing, prospective cohort study recruiting inpatients from 260 hospitals in England, Scotland, and Wales, conducted by the ISARIC Coronavirus Clinical Characterisation Consortium. Patients with a confirmed or clinician-defined high likelihood of SARS-CoV-2 infection were eligible for inclusion in the ISARIC WHO CCP-UK study. For this specific study, we excluded patients with a recorded negative SARS-CoV-2 test result and those without a recorded outcome at 28 days after admission. Demographic, clinical, laboratory, therapeutic, and outcome data were collected using a prespecified case report form. Organisms considered clinically insignificant were excluded.FindingsWe analysed data from 48 902 patients admitted to hospital between Feb 6 and June 8, 2020. The median patient age was 74 years (IQR 59-84) and 20 786 (42·6%) of 48 765 patients were female. Microbiological investigations were recorded for 8649 (17·7%) of 48 902 patients, with clinically significant COVID-19-related respiratory or bloodstream culture results recorded for 1107 patients. 762 (70·6%) of 1080 infections were secondary, occurring more than 2 days after hospital admission. Staphylococcus aureus and Haemophilus influenzae were the most common pathogens causing respiratory co-infections (diagnosed ≤2 days after admission), with Enterobacteriaceae and S aureus most common in secondary respiratory infections. Bloodstream infections were most frequently caused by Escherichia coli and S aureus. Among patients with available data, 13 390 (37·0%) of 36 145 had received antimicrobials in the community for this illness episode before hospital admission and 39 258 (85·2%) of 46 061 patients with inpatient antimicrobial data received one or more antimicrobials at some point during their admission (highest for patients in critical care). We identified frequent use of broad-spectrum agents and use of carbapenems rather than carbapenem-sparing alternatives.InterpretationIn patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, microbiologically confirmed bacterial infections are rare, and more likely to be secondary infections. Gram-negative organisms and S aureus are the predominant pathogens. The frequency and nature of antimicrobial use are concerning, but tractable targets for stewardship interventions exist.FundingNational Institute for Health Research (NIHR), UK Medical Research Council, Wellcome Trust, UK Department for International Development, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, EU Platform for European Preparedness Against (Re-)emerging Epidemics, NIHR Health Protection Research Unit (HPRU) in Emerging and Zoonotic Infections at University of Liverpool, and NIHR HPRU in Respiratory Infections at Imperial College London.
| S-EPMC8172149 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 is a multisystem disease and patients who survive might have in-hospital complications. These complications are likely to have important short-term and long-term consequences for patients, health-care utilisation, health-care system preparedness, and society amidst the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Our aim was to characterise the extent and effect of COVID-19 complications, particularly in those who survive, using the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infections Consortium WHO Clinical Characterisation Protocol UK.MethodsWe did a prospective, multicentre cohort study in 302 UK health-care facilities. Adult patients aged 19 years or older, with confirmed or highly suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection leading to COVID-19 were included in the study. The primary outcome of this study was the incidence of in-hospital complications, defined as organ-specific diagnoses occurring alone or in addition to any hallmarks of COVID-19 illness. We used multilevel logistic regression and survival models to explore associations between these outcomes and in-hospital complications, age, and pre-existing comorbidities.FindingsBetween Jan 17 and Aug 4, 2020, 80 388 patients were included in the study. Of the patients admitted to hospital for management of COVID-19, 49·7% (36 367 of 73 197) had at least one complication. The mean age of our cohort was 71·1 years (SD 18·7), with 56·0% (41 025 of 73 197) being male and 81·0% (59 289 of 73 197) having at least one comorbidity. Males and those aged older than 60 years were most likely to have a complication (aged ≥60 years: 54·5% [16 579 of 30 416] in males and 48·2% [11 707 of 24 288] in females; aged <60 years: 48·8% [5179 of 10 609] in males and 36·6% [2814 of 7689] in females). Renal (24·3%, 17 752 of 73 197), complex respiratory (18·4%, 13 486 of 73 197), and systemic (16·3%, 11 895 of 73 197) complications were the most frequent. Cardiovascular (12·3%, 8973 of 73 197), neurological (4·3%, 3115 of 73 197), and gastrointestinal or liver (0·8%, 7901 of 73 197) complications were also reported.InterpretationComplications and worse functional outcomes in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 are high, even in young, previously healthy individuals. Acute complications are associated with reduced ability to self-care at discharge, with neurological complications being associated with the worst functional outcomes. COVID-19 complications are likely to cause a substantial strain on health and social care in the coming years. These data will help in the design and provision of services aimed at the post-hospitalisation care of patients with COVID-19.FundingNational Institute for Health Research and the UK Medical Research Council.
| S-EPMC8285118 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThis study sought to establish the long-term effects of Covid-19 following hospitalisation.Methods327 hospitalised participants, with SARS-CoV-2 infection were recruited into a prospective multicentre cohort study at least 3 months post-discharge. The primary outcome was self-reported recovery at least ninety days after initial Covid-19 symptom onset. Secondary outcomes included new symptoms, disability (Washington group short scale), breathlessness (MRC Dyspnoea scale) and quality of life (EQ5D-5L).Findings55% of participants reported not feeling fully recovered. 93% reported persistent symptoms, with fatigue the most common (83%), followed by breathlessness (54%). 47% reported an increase in MRC dyspnoea scale of at least one grade. New or worse disability was reported by 24% of participants. The EQ5D-5L summary index was significantly worse following acute illness (median difference 0.1 points on a scale of 0 to 1, IQR: -0.2 to 0.0). Females under the age of 50 years were five times less likely to report feeling recovered (adjusted OR 5.09, 95% CI 1.64 to 15.74), were more likely to have greater disability (adjusted OR 4.22, 95% CI 1.12 to 15.94), twice as likely to report worse fatigue (adjusted OR 2.06, 95% CI 0.81 to 3.31) and seven times more likely to become more breathless (adjusted OR 7.15, 95% CI 2.24 to 22.83) than men of the same age.InterpretationSurvivors of Covid-19 experienced long-term symptoms, new disability, increased breathlessness, and reduced quality of life. These findings were present in young, previously healthy working age adults, and were most common in younger females.FundingNational Institute for Health Research, UK Medical Research Council, Wellcome Trust, Department for International Development and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
| S-EPMC8343377 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectivesThe risk-benefit ratio of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker therapy after AKI may be altered due to concerns regarding recurrent AKI. We evaluated, in a prospective cohort, the association between use (versus nonuse) of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers and the subsequent risk of AKI and other adverse outcomes after hospitalizations with and without AKI.Design, setting, participants, & measurementsWe studied 1538 patients recently discharged from the hospital who enrolled in the multicenter, prospective ASSESS-AKI study, with approximately half of patients experiencing AKI during the index hospitalization. All participants were seen at a baseline visit 3 months after their index hospitalization and were categorized at that time on whether they were using angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers or not. We used multivariable Cox regression, adjusting for demographics, comorbidities, eGFR, urine protein-creatinine ratio, and use of other medications, to examine the association between angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker use and subsequent risks of AKI, death, kidney disease progression, and adjudicated heart-failure events.ResultsThe use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers was 50% (386/769) among those with AKI during the index hospitalization and 47% (362/769) among those without. Among those with AKI during the index hospitalization, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker use was not associated with a higher risk of recurrent hospitalized AKI (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% confidence interval, 0.69 to 1.13). Associations between angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker use and death, kidney disease progression, and adjudicated heart-failure events appeared similar in study participants who did and did not experience AKI during the index hospitalization (all interaction P values >0.05).ConclusionsThe risk-benefit ratio of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker therapy after hospital discharge appears to be similar regardless of whether AKI occurred during the hospitalization.
| S-EPMC7792656 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDexamethasone was the first intervention proven to reduce mortality in patients with COVID-19 being treated in hospital. We aimed to evaluate the adoption of corticosteroids in the treatment of COVID-19 in the UK after the RECOVERY trial publication on June 16, 2020, and to identify discrepancies in care.MethodsWe did an audit of clinical implementation of corticosteroids in a prospective, observational, cohort study in 237 UK acute care hospitals between March 16, 2020, and April 14, 2021, restricted to patients aged 18 years or older with proven or high likelihood of COVID-19, who received supplementary oxygen. The primary outcome was administration of dexamethasone, prednisolone, hydrocortisone, or methylprednisolone. This study is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN66726260.FindingsBetween June 17, 2020, and April 14, 2021, 47 795 (75·2%) of 63 525 of patients on supplementary oxygen received corticosteroids, higher among patients requiring critical care than in those who received ward care (11 185 [86·6%] of 12 909 vs 36 415 [72·4%] of 50 278). Patients 50 years or older were significantly less likely to receive corticosteroids than those younger than 50 years (adjusted odds ratio 0·79 [95% CI 0·70-0·89], p=0·0001, for 70-79 years; 0·52 [0·46-0·58], p<0·0001, for >80 years), independent of patient demographics and illness severity. 84 (54·2%) of 155 pregnant women received corticosteroids. Rates of corticosteroid administration increased from 27·5% in the week before June 16, 2020, to 75-80% in January, 2021.InterpretationImplementation of corticosteroids into clinical practice in the UK for patients with COVID-19 has been successful, but not universal. Patients older than 70 years, independent of illness severity, chronic neurological disease, and dementia, were less likely to receive corticosteroids than those who were younger, as were pregnant women. This could reflect appropriate clinical decision making, but the possibility of inequitable access to life-saving care should be considered.FundingUK National Institute for Health Research and UK Medical Research Council.
| S-EPMC8940185 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Cauda equina syndrome (CES) is a potentially devastating condition caused by compression of the cauda equina nerve roots. This can result in bowel, bladder and sexual dysfunction plus lower limb weakness, numbness and pain. CES occurs infrequently, but has serious potential morbidity and medicolegal consequences. This study aims to identify and describe the presentation and management of patients with CES in the UK. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:Understanding Cauda Equina Syndrome (UCES) is a prospective and collaborative multicentre cohort study of adult patients with confirmed CES managed at specialist spinal centres in the UK. Participants will be identified using neurosurgical and orthopaedic trainee networks to screen referrals to spinal centres. Details of presentation, investigations, management and service usage will be recorded. Both patient-reported and clinician-reported outcome measures will be assessed for 1?year after surgery. This will establish the incidence of CES, current investigation and management practices, and adherence to national standards of care. Outcomes will be stratified by clinical presentation and patient management. Accurate and up to date information about the presentation, management and outcome of patients with CES will inform standards of service design and delivery for this important but infrequent condition. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:UCES received a favourable ethical opinion from the South East Scotland Research Ethics Committee 02 (Reference: 18/SS/0047; IRAS ID: 233515). All spinal centres managing patients with CES in the UK will be encouraged to participate in UCES. Study results will be published in medical journals and shared with local participating sites. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:ISRCTN16828522; Pre-results.
| S-EPMC6303568 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8241313 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundEarly in the pandemic it was suggested that pre-existing use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) could lead to increased disease severity in patients with COVID-19. NSAIDs are an important analgesic, particularly in those with rheumatological disease, and are widely available to the general public without prescription. Evidence from community studies, administrative data, and small studies of hospitalised patients suggest NSAIDs are not associated with poorer COVID-19 outcomes. We aimed to characterise the safety of NSAIDs and identify whether pre-existing NSAID use was associated with increased severity of COVID-19 disease.MethodsThis prospective, multicentre cohort study included patients of any age admitted to hospital with a confirmed or highly suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection leading to COVID-19 between Jan 17 and Aug 10, 2020. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality, and secondary outcomes were disease severity at presentation, admission to critical care, receipt of invasive ventilation, receipt of non-invasive ventilation, use of supplementary oxygen, and acute kidney injury. NSAID use was required to be within the 2 weeks before hospital admission. We used logistic regression to estimate the effects of NSAIDs and adjust for confounding variables. We used propensity score matching to further estimate effects of NSAIDS while accounting for covariate differences in populations.ResultsBetween Jan 17 and Aug 10, 2020, we enrolled 78 674 patients across 255 health-care facilities in England, Scotland, and Wales. 72 179 patients had death outcomes available for matching; 40 406 (56·2%) of 71 915 were men, 31 509 (43·8%) were women. In this cohort, 4211 (5·8%) patients were recorded as taking systemic NSAIDs before admission to hospital. Following propensity score matching, balanced groups of NSAIDs users and NSAIDs non-users were obtained (4205 patients in each group). At hospital admission, we observed no significant differences in severity between exposure groups. After adjusting for explanatory variables, NSAID use was not associated with worse in-hospital mortality (matched OR 0·95, 95% CI 0·84-1·07; p=0·35), critical care admission (1·01, 0·87-1·17; p=0·89), requirement for invasive ventilation (0·96, 0·80-1·17; p=0·69), requirement for non-invasive ventilation (1·12, 0·96-1·32; p=0·14), requirement for oxygen (1·00, 0·89-1·12; p=0·97), or occurrence of acute kidney injury (1·08, 0·92-1·26; p=0·33).InterpretationNSAID use is not associated with higher mortality or increased severity of COVID-19. Policy makers should consider reviewing issued advice around NSAID prescribing and COVID-19 severity.FundingNational Institute for Health Research and Medical Research Council.
| S-EPMC8104907 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to investigate the association of obesity with in-hospital coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes in different ethnic groups.MethodsPatients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 in the United Kingdom through the Clinical Characterisation Protocol UK (CCP-UK) developed by the International Severe Acute Respiratory and emerging Infections Consortium (ISARIC) were included from February 6 to October 12, 2020. Ethnicity was classified as White, South Asian, Black, and other minority ethnic groups. Outcomes were admission to critical care, mechanical ventilation, and in-hospital mortality, adjusted for age, sex, and chronic diseases.ResultsOf the participants included, 54,254 (age = 76 years; 45.0% women) were White, 3,728 (57 years; 41.1% women) were South Asian, 2,523 (58 years; 44.9% women) were Black, and 5,427 (61 years; 40.8% women) were other ethnicities. Obesity was associated with all outcomes in all ethnic groups, with associations strongest for black ethnicities. When stratified by ethnicity and obesity status, the odds ratios for admission to critical care, mechanical ventilation, and mortality in black ethnicities with obesity were 3.91 (3.13-4.88), 5.03 (3.94-6.63), and 1.93 (1.49-2.51), respectively, compared with White ethnicities without obesity.ConclusionsObesity was associated with an elevated risk of in-hospital COVID-19 outcomes in all ethnic groups, with associations strongest in Black ethnicities.
| S-EPMC8251439 | biostudies-literature