Background As the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has remained in Latin America, Mexico has become the third country with the highest death rate worldwide. Data regarding in-hospital mortality and its risk factors, as well as the impact of hospital overcrowding in Latin America has not been thoroughly explored. Methods and findings In this prospective cohort study, we enrolled consecutive adult patients hospitalized with severe confirmed COVID-19 pneumonia at a SARS-CoV-2 referral center in Mexico City from February 26th, 2020, to June 5th, 2020. A total of 800 patients were admitted with confirmed diagnosis, mean age was 51.9 ± 13.9 years, 61% were males, 85% were either obese or overweight, 30% had hypertension and 26% type 2 diabetes. From those 800, 559 recovered (69.9%) and 241 died (30.1%). Among survivors, 101 (18%) received invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and 458 (82%) were managed outside the intensive care unit (ICU); mortality in the ICU was 49%. From the non-survivors, 45.6% (n = 110) did not receive full support due to lack of ICU bed availability. Within this subgroup the main cause of death was acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in 95% of the cases, whereas among the non-survivors who received full (n = 105) support the main cause of death was septic shock (45%) followed by ARDS (29%). The main risk factors associated with in-hospital death were male sex (RR 2.05, 95% CI 1.34–3.12), obesity (RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.14–2.32)—in particular morbid obesity (RR 3.38, 95%CI 1.63–7.00)—and oxygen saturation < 80% on admission (RR 4.8, 95%CI 3.26–7.31). Conclusions In this study we found similar in-hospital and ICU mortality, as well as risk factors for mortality, compared to previous reports. However, 45% of the patients who did not survive justified admission to ICU but did not receive IMV / ICU care due to the unavailability of ICU beds. Furthermore, mortality rate over time was mainly due to the availability of ICU beds, indirectly suggesting that overcrowding was one of the main factors that contributed to hospital mortality.

Background: Regional information regarding the characteristics of patients with coronavirus disease (COVID)-19 is needed for a better understanding of the pandemic. Objective: The objective of the study to describe the clinical features of COVID-19 patients diagnosed in a tertiary-care center in Mexico City and to assess differences according to the treatment setting (ambulatory vs. hospital) and to the need of intensive care (IC). Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort, including consecutive

Objective: To describe empirical antimicrobial prescription on admission in patients with severe COVID-19, the prevalence of Hospital-Acquired Infections, and the susceptibility patterns of the causing organisms. Methods: In this prospective cohort study in a tertiary care center in Mexico City, we included consecutive patients admitted with severe COVID-19 between March 20th and June 10th and evaluated empirical antimicrobial prescription and the occurrence of HAI. Results: 794 patients with severe COVID-19 were admitted during the study period. Empiric antibiotic treatment was started in 92% of patients (731/794); the most frequent regimes were amoxicillin-clavulanate plus atypical coverage in 341 (46.6%) and ceftriaxone plus atypical coverage in 213 (29.1%). We identified 110 HAI episodes in 74/656 patients (11.3%). Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) was the most frequent HAI, in 56/110 (50.9%), followed by bloodstream infections (BSI), in 32/110 (29.1%). The most frequent cause of VAP were Enterobacteriaceae in 48/69 (69.6%), followed by non-fermenter gram-negative bacilli in 18/69 (26.1%). The most frequent cause of BSI was coagulase negative staphylococci, in 14/35 (40.0%), followed by Enterobacter complex in 7/35 (20%). Death occurred in 30/74 (40.5%) patients with one or more HAI episodes and in 193/584 (33.0%) patients without any HAI episode (p < 0.05). Conclusion: A high frequency of empiric antibiotic treatment in patients admitted with COVID-19 was seen. VAP and BSI were the most frequent hospital-acquired infections, due to Enterobacteriaceae and coagulase negative staphylococci, respectively.

Background Early treatment of COVID-19 with remdesivir in high-risk patients, including those with immunosuppression of different causes has not been evaluated. Objective To assess the clinical effectiveness of early remdesivir treatment among patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 at high risk of progression. Methods This prospective cohort comparative study was conducted in a tertiary referral center in Mexico City. Patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 at high risk for progression were treated with an ambulatory 3-day course of remdesivir. The primary efficacy composite outcome was hospitalization or death at 28 days after symptom onset. Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to identify associations with the primary outcome. Results From December 1st, 2021, to April 30th, 2022, a total of 196 high-risk patients were diagnosed with COVID-19, of which 126 were included in this study (43%, 54/126 received remdesivir, 57%, 72/126 did not receive remdesivir). Baseline clinical characteristics were similar between groups; autoimmune diseases (39/126), solid organ transplant (31/126) and malignant neoplasms (24/126) were the most common immunocompromising conditions. Diabetes mellitus was strongly associated with the primary outcome in both groups. Prior SARS-CoV-2 infection or vaccination were not independently associated with COVID-19 progression. Treatment with remdesivir significantly reduced the odds of hospitalization or death (adjusted HR 0.16 95% CI 0.06 to 0.44, p &lt; 0.01). Conclusion Early outpatient treatment with remdesivir significantly reduces hospitalization or death by 84% in high-risk, majority immunosuppressed patients with COVID-19 Omicron variant.

IMPORTANCE: Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, thousands of temporary ICUs have been established worldwide. The outcomes and management of mechanically ventilated patients in these areas remain unknown. OBJECTIVES: To investigate mortality and management of mechanically ventilated patients in temporary ICUs. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Observational cohort study in a single-institution academic center. We included all adult patients with severe COVID-19 hospitalized in temporary and conventional ICUs for invasive mechanical ventilation due to acute respiratory distress syndrome from March 23, 2020, to April 5, 2021. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: To determine if management in temporary ICUs increased 30-day in-hospital mortality compared with conventional ICUs. Ventilator-free days, ICU-free days (both at 28 d), hospital length of stay, and ICU readmission were also assessed. RESULTS: We included 776 patients (326 conventional and 450 temporary ICUs). Thirty-day in-hospital unadjusted mortality (28.8% conventional vs 36.0% temporary, log-rank test p = 0.023) was higher in temporary ICUs. After controlling for potential confounders, hospitalization in temporary ICUs was an independent risk factor associated with mortality (hazard ratio, 1.4; CI, 1.06–1.83; p = 0.016).There were no differences in ICU-free days at 28 days (6; IQR, 0–16 vs 2; IQR, 0–15; p = 0.5) or ventilator-free days at 28 days (8; IQR, 0–16 vs 5; IQR, 0–15; p = 0.6). We observed higher reintubation (18% vs 12%; p = 0.029) and readmission (5% vs 1.6%; p = 0.004) rates in conventional ICUs despite higher use of postextubation noninvasive mechanical ventilation (13% vs 8%; p = 0.025). Use of lung-protective ventilation (87% vs 85%; p = 0.5), prone positioning (76% vs 79%; p = 0.4), neuromuscular blockade (96% vs 98%; p = 0.4), and COVID-19 pharmacologic treatment was similar. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: We observed a higher 30-day in-hospital mortality in temporary ICUs. Although both areas had high adherence to evidence-based management, hospitalization in temporary ICUs was an independent risk factor associated with mortality.