ObjectivesWe investigated the natural history of patients after a first episode of acute heart failure (FEAHF) requiring emergency department (ED) consultation, focusing on: the frequency of ED visits and hospitalisations, departments admitting patients during the first and subsequent hospitalisations, and factors associated with difficult disease control.We included consecutive patients diagnosed with FEAHF (either with or without previous heart failure diagnosis) in four EDs during 5 months in three different time periods (2009, 2011, 2014). Diagnosis was adjudicated by local principal investigators. The clinical characteristics of the index event were prospectively recorded, and all post-discharge ED visits and hospitalisations [related/unrelated to acute heart failure (AHF)], as well as departments involved in subsequent hospitalisations were retrospectively ascertained. 'Uncontrolled disease' during the first year after FEAHF was considered if patients were attended at ED (≥ 3 times) or hospitalised (≥ 2 times) for AHF or died. Overall, 505 patients with FEAHF were included and followed for a mean of 2.4 years. In-hospital mortality was 7.5%. Among 467 patients discharged alive, 288 died [median survival 3.9 years, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.5-4.4], 421 (90%) revisited the ED (2342 ED visits; 42.4% requiring hospitalisation, 34.0% AHF-related) and 357 Ò. Miró et al.(77%) were hospitalised (1054 hospitalisations; 94.1% through ED, 51.4% AHF-related). AHF-related hospitalisations were mainly in internal medicine (28.0%), short-stay unit (26.3%), cardiology (20.8%), and geriatrics (14.1%). Only 47.4% of AHF-related hospitalisations were in the same department as the FEAHF, and internal medicine involvement significantly increased with subsequent hospitalisations (P = 0.01). Uncontrolled disease was observed in 31% of patients, which was independently related to age > 80 years [odds ratio (OR) 1.80, 95% CI 1.17-2.77], systolic blood pressure < 110 mmHg at ED arrival (OR 2.61, 95% CI 1. 26-5.38) and anaemia (OR 2.39, 95% CI
Data on convalescent plasma (CP) treatment in COVID-19 outpatients are scarce. We aimed to assess whether CP administered during the first week of symptoms reduced the disease progression or risk of hospitalization of outpatients. Two multicenter, double-blind randomized trials (NCT04621123, NCT04589949) were merged with data pooling starting when <20% of recruitment target was achieved. A Bayesian-adaptive individual patient data meta-analysis was implemented. Outpatients aged ≥50 years and symptomatic for ≤7days were included. The intervention consisted of 200–300mL of CP with a predefined minimum level of antibodies. Primary endpoints were a 5-point disease severity scale and a composite of hospitalization or death by 28 days. Amongst the 797 patients included, 390 received CP and 392 placebo; they had a median age of 58 years, 1 comorbidity, 5 days symptoms and 93% had negative IgG antibody-test. Seventy-four patients were hospitalized, 6 required mechanical ventilation and 3 died. The odds ratio (OR) of CP for improved disease severity scale was 0.936 (credible interval (CI) 0.667–1.311); OR for hospitalization or death was 0.919 (CI 0.592–1.416). CP effect on hospital admission or death was largest in patients with ≤5 days of symptoms (OR 0.658, 95%CI 0.394–1.085). CP did not decrease the time to full symptom resolution.Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04621123 and NCT04589949. Registration: NCT04621123 and NCT04589949 on https://www.clinicaltrials.gov
In Spain, systematic reporting of pulmonary infections with nontuberculous mycobacteria is not mandatory. Therefore, to determine trends, we retrospectively identified cases for January 1994–December 2014 in Catalonia. Over the 21 years, prevalence increased and was associated with being male. Mycobacterium avium complex and M. abscessus prevalence increased; M. kansasii prevalence decreased.
BackgroundConvalescent plasma (CP) for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 has not demonstrated clear benefits. However, data on outpatients with early symptoms are scarce. We aimed to assess whether treatment with CP administered during the first 7 days of symptoms reduced the disease progression or risk of hospitalization of outpatients.MethodsTwo double-blind randomized trials (NCT04621123, NCT04589949) were merged with data pooling starting when <20% of their predefined sample size had been recruited. A Bayesian adaptive individual patient data meta-analysis was implemented. Analyses were done with Bayesian proportional odds and logistic models, where odds ratios (OR)<1.0 indicate a favorable outcome for CP. Fourteen study sites across the Netherlands and Catalonia in Spain participated in the trial. The two studies included outpatients aged ≥50 years and diagnosed with COVID-19 and symptomatic for ≤7days. The intervention consisted of one unit (200-300mL) of CP with a predefined minimum level of antibodies. The two primary endpoints were (a) a 5-point disease severity scale (fully recovered by day 7 or not, hospital or ICU admission and death) and (b) a composite of hospitalization or death.ResultsOf 797 patients included, 390 received CP and 392 placebo. At baseline, they had a median age of 58 years, 1 comorbidity, symptoms for 5 days and 93% tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 S-protein IgG antibodies. Seventy-four patients were hospitalized, 6 required mechanical ventilation and 3 died. The OR of CP for an improved disease severity scale was 0.936 (credible interval (CI) 0.667-1.311). The OR for hospitalization or death was 0.919 (CI 0.592-1.416). The effect of CP on hospital admission or death was largest in patients with ≤5 days of symptoms (OR 0.658, 95% CI 0.394-1.085). CP did not decrease the time to full symptom resolution (p=0.62).ConclusionTreatment with CP of outpatients in the first 7 days of symptoms did not improve the outcome of COVID-19. The possible beneficial effect in patients with ≤5 days of symptoms requires further study.RegistrationNCT04621123 and NCT04589949 on https://www.clinicaltrials.govFunding sourceZONMW, the Netherlands, grant number 10430062010001.SUPPORT-E, grant number 101015756YoMeCorono, www.tomecorono.comThe Fight AIDS and Infectious Diseases Foundation with funding from the pharmaceutical company Grifols S.A
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.