Key PointsQuestionWhat is the effect of convalescent plasma therapy added to standard treatment, compared with standard treatment alone, on clinical outcomes in patients with severe or life-threatening coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)?FindingIn this randomized clinical trial that included 103 patients and was terminated early, the hazard ratio for time to clinical improvement within 28 days in the convalescent plasma group vs the standard treatment group was 1.40 and was not statistically significant.MeaningAmong patients with severe or life-threatening COVID-19, convalescent plasma therapy added to standard treatment did not significantly improve the time to clinical improvement within 28 days, although the trial was terminated early and may have been underpowered to detect a clinically important difference.

Summary Background COVID-19 is an ongoing global pandemic. Changes in haematological characteristics in patients with COVID-19 are emerging as important features of the disease. We aimed to explore the haematological characteristics and related risk factors in patients with COVID-19. Methods This retrospective cohort study included patients with COVID-19 admitted to three designated sites of Wuhan Union Hospital (Wuhan, China). Demographic, clinical, laboratory, treatment, and outcome data were extracted from electronic medical records and compared between patients with moderate, severe, and critical disease (defined according to the diagnosis and treatment protocol for novel coronavirus pneumonia, trial version 7, published by the National Health Commission of China). We assessed the risk factors associated with critical illness and poor prognosis. Dynamic haematological and coagulation parameters were investigated with a linear mixed model, and coagulopathy screening with sepsis-induced coagulopathy and International Society of Thrombosis and Hemostasis overt disseminated intravascular coagulation scoring systems was applied. Findings Of 466 patients admitted to hospital from Jan 23 to Feb 23, 2020, 380 patients with COVID-19 were included in our study. The incidence of thrombocytopenia (platelet count <100 × 10 9 cells per L) in patients with critical disease (42 [49%] of 86) was significantly higher than in those with severe (20 [14%] of 145) or moderate (nine [6%] of 149) disease (p<0·0001). The numbers of lymphocytes and eosinophils were significantly lower in patients with critical disease than those with severe or moderate disease (p<0·0001), and prothrombin time, D-dimer, and fibrin degradation products significantly increased with increasing disease severity (p<0·0001). In multivariate analyses, death was associated with increased neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (≥9·13; odds ratio [OR] 5·39 [95% CI 1·70–17·13], p=0·0042), thrombocytopenia (platelet count <100 × 10 9 per L; OR 8·33 [2·56–27·15], p=0·00045), prolonged prothrombin time (>16 s; OR 4·94 [1·50–16·25], p=0·0094), and increased D-dimer (>2 mg/L; OR 4·41 [1·06–18·30], p=0·041). Thrombotic and haemorrhagic events were common complications in patients who died (19 [35%] of 55). Sepsis-induced coagulopathy and International Society of Thrombosis and Hemostasis overt disseminated intravascular coagulation scores (assessed in 12 patients who survived and eight patients who died) increased over time in patients who died. The onset of sepsis-induced coagulopathy was typically before overt disseminated intravascular coagulation. Interpretation Rapid blood tests, including platelet count, prothrombin time, D-dimer, and neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio can help clinicians to assess severity and prognosis of patients with COVID-19. The sepsis-induced coagulopathy scoring system can be used fo...

Background: To investigate deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), we performed a single institutional study to evaluate its prevalence, risk factors, prognosis, and potential thromboprophylaxis strategies in a large referral and treatment center. Methods: We studied a total of 143 patients with COVID-19 from January 29, 2020 to February 29, 2020. Demographic and clinical data, laboratory data, including ultrasound scans of the lower extremities, and outcome variables were obtained, and comparisons were made between groups with and without DVT. Results: Of the 143 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 (age 63±14 years, 74 [51.7%] men), 66 patients developed lower extremity DVT (46.1%: 23 [34.8%] with proximal DVT and 43 [65.2%] with distal DVT). Compared with patients who did not have DVT, patients with DVT were older and had a lower oxygenation index, a higher rate of cardiac injury, and worse prognosis, including an increased proportion of deaths (23 [34.8%] versus 9 [11.7%]; P =0.001) and a decreased proportion of patients discharged (32 [48.5%] versus 60 [77.9%]; P <0.001). Multivariant analysis showed an association only between CURB-65 (confusion status, urea, respiratory rate, and blood pressure) score 3 to 5 (odds ratio, 6.122; P =0.031), Padua prediction score ≥4 (odds ratio, 4.016; P =0.04), D-dimer >1.0 μg/mL (odds ratio, 5.818; P <0.014), and DVT in this cohort, respectively. The combination of a CURB-65 score 3 to 5, a Padua prediction score ≥4, and D-dimer >1.0 μg/mL has a sensitivity of 88.52% and a specificity of 61.43% for screening for DVT. In the subgroup of patients with a Padua prediction score ≥4 and whose ultrasound scans were performed >72 hours after admission, DVT was present in 18 (34.0%) patients in the subgroup receiving venous thromboembolism prophylaxis versus 35 (66.0%) patients in the nonprophylaxis group ( P =0.010). Conclusions: The prevalence of DVT is high and is associated with adverse outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism may be protective in patients with a Padua protection score ≥4 after admission. Our data seem to suggest that COVID-19 is probably an additional risk factor for DVT in hospitalized patients.