Recent studies suggest that thrombotic complications are a common phenomenon in the novel SARS-CoV-2 infection. The main objective of our study is to assess cumulative incidence of pulmonary embolism (PE) in non critically ill COVID-19 patients and to identify its predicting factors associated to the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism. We retrospectevely reviewed 452 electronic medical records of patients admitted to Internal Medicine Department of a secondary hospital in Madrid during Covid 19 pandemic outbreak. We included 91 patients who underwent a multidetector Computed Tomography pulmonary angiography(CTPA) during conventional hospitalization. The cumulative incidence of PE was assessed ant the clinical, analytical and radiological characteristics were compared between patients with and without PE. PE incidence was 6.4% (29/452 patients). Most patients with a confirmed diagnosed with PE recieved low molecular weight heparin (LMWH): 79.3% (23/29). D-dimer peak was significatly elevated in PE vs non PE patients (14,480 vs 7230 mcg/dL, p = 0.03). In multivariate analysis of patients who underwent a CTPA we found that plasma D-dimer peak was an independen predictor of PE with a best cut off point of > 5000 µg/dl (OR 3.77; IC95% (1.18-12.16), p = 0.03). We found ninefold increased risk of PE patients not suffering from dyslipidemia (OR 9.06; IC95% (1.88-43.60). Predictive value of AUC for ROC is 75.5%. We found a high incidence of PE in non critically ill hospitalized COVID 19 patients despite standard thromboprophylaxis. An increase in D-dimer levels is an independent predictor for PE, with a best cutoff point of > 5000 µg/ dl.

Background The clinical presentation of COVID-19 in patients admitted to hospital is heterogeneous. We aimed to determine whether clinical phenotypes of patients with COVID-19 can be derived from clinical data, to assess the reproducibility of these phenotypes and correlation with prognosis, and to derive and validate a simplified probabilistic model for phenotype assignment. Phenotype identification was not primarily intended as a predictive tool for mortality. MethodsIn this study, we used data from two cohorts: the COVID-19@Spain cohort, a retrospective cohort including 4035 consecutive adult patients admitted to 127 hospitals in Spain with COVID-19 between Feb 2 and March 17, 2020, and the COVID-19@HULP cohort, including 2226 consecutive adult patients admitted to a teaching hospital in Madrid between Feb 25 and April 19, 2020. The COVID-19@Spain cohort was divided into a derivation cohort, comprising 2667 randomly selected patients, and an internal validation cohort, comprising the remaining 1368 patients. The COVID-19@HULP cohort was used as an external validation cohort. A probabilistic model for phenotype assignment was derived in the derivation cohort using multinomial logistic regression and validated in the internal validation cohort. The model was also applied to the external validation cohort. 30-day mortality and other prognostic variables were assessed in the derived phenotypes and in the phenotypes assigned by the probabilistic model. Findings Three distinct phenotypes were derived in the derivation cohort (n=2667)-phenotype A (516 [19%] patients), phenotype B (1955 [73%]) and phenotype C (196 [7%])-and reproduced in the internal validation cohort (n=1368)phenotype A (233 [17%] patients), phenotype B (1019 [74%]), and phenotype C (116 [8%]). Patients with phenotype A were younger, were less frequently male, had mild viral symptoms, and had normal inflammatory parameters. Patients with phenotype B included more patients with obesity, lymphocytopenia, and moderately elevated inflammatory parameters. Patients with phenotype C included older patients with more comorbidities and even higher inflammatory parameters than phenotype B. We developed a simplified probabilistic model (validated in the internal validation cohort) for phenotype assignment, including 16 variables. In the derivation cohort, 30-day mortality rates were 2•5% (95% CI 1•4-4•3) for patients with phenotype A, 30•5% (28•5-32•6) for patients with phenotype B, and 60•7% (53•7-67•2) for patients with phenotype C (log-rank test p<0•0001). The predicted phenotypes in the internal validation cohort and external validation cohort showed similar mortality rates to the assigned phenotypes (internal validation cohort: 5•3% [95% CI 3•4-8•1] for phenotype A, 31•3% [28•5-34•2] for phenotype B, and 59•5% [48•8-69•3] for phenotype C; external validation cohort: 3•7% [2•0-6•4] for phenotype A, 23•7% [21•8-25•7] for phenotype B, and 51•4% [41•9-60•7] for phenotype C).Interpretation Patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 can be classified into three...

Background: Incidence of thrombotic events associated to Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is difficult to assess and reported rates differ significantly. Optimal thromboprophylaxis is unclear.Objectives: We aimed to analyze the characteristics of patients with a confirmed thrombotic complication including inflammatory and hemostatic parameters, compare patients affected by arterial vs venous events and examine differences between survivors and non-survivors. We reviewed compliance with thromboprophylaxis and explored how the implementation of a severity-adjusted protocol could have influenced outcome. Methods: Single-cohort retrospective study of COVID-19 patients admitted, from March 3 to May 3 2020, to the Infanta Leonor University Hospital in Madrid, epicenter of the Spanish outbreak. Results: Among 1127 patients, 80 thrombotic events were diagnosed in 69 patients (6.1% of the entire cohort). Forty-three patients (62%) suffered venous thromboembolism, 18 (26%) arterial episodes and 6 (9%) concurrent venous and arterial thrombosis. Most patients (90%) with a confirmed thrombotic complication where under low-molecular-weight heparin treatment. Overt disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) was rare. Initial ISTH DIC score and pre-event CRP were significantly higher among non-survivors. In multivariate analysis, arterial localization was an independent predictor of mortality (OR = 18, 95% CI: 2.4-142, p < .05). Conclusions: Despite quasi-universal thromboprophylaxis, COVID-19 lead to a myriad of arterial and venous thrombotic events. Considering the subgroup of patients with thrombotic episodes, arterial events appeared earlier in the course of disease and conferred very poor prognosis, and an ISTH DIC score ≥ 3 at presentation was identified as a potential predictor of mortality. Severity-adjusted thromboprophylaxis seemed to decrease the number of events and could have influenced mortality. Randomized controlled trials are eagerly awaited.

Background The most susceptible population group to critical and fatal coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is older adults. In SARS-CoV-2 infection, the host immune response is thought to play a key role in the pathophysiological effects of lung damage. Therefore, corticosteroid therapy could modulate inflammation-mediated pulmonary injury and thereby reduce progression to severe respiratory failure and death. The aim of this study was to analyse the safety and clinical efficacy of corticosteroid therapy in older adults with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. Method We reviewed the clinical records of confirmed COVID-19 patients aged 75 years or older admitted to our hospital over a three months period (March 1, to May 31, 2020). A total of 143 patients were included in the study cohort. From 2 April, 2020, in accordance with World Health Organization (WHO) guidance on COVID-19, our hospital protocol added corticosteroid for COVID-19 treatment. We compared in-hospital mortality among patients with critical COVID-19 who received corticosteroids therapy and those who did not. Results 88 patients (61.5%) were treated with corticosteroids, and 55 patients (38.4%) were not. Both groups were similar in baseline characteristics. The median age was 85 years (IQR, 82–89), and 61.5% (88/143) were male. In-hospital mortality was lower in the corticosteroid group (68.2%) compared with patients in the non-corticosteroid group (81.8%). Treatment with corticosteroids was an independent survival factor (HR=0.61; 95% CI, 0.41–0.93; P=0.006). Conclusions In critically ill older adults with COVID-19 pneumonia, the use of corticosteroid treatment resulted in lower mortality without severe adverse events.

Objectives Several reports had observed a high risk of pulmonary embolism (PE) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19), most of them in the intensive care unit. Reported findings indicate that a direct viral‐mediated hyperinflammatory response leads to local thromboinflammation. According to those findings, the incidence of deep venous thrombosis (DVT) in patients with COVID‐19 and PE should be low. The objective of this study was to evaluate the incidence of DVT in patients with COVID‐19 who developed PE. Methods In this prospective observational study, consecutive patients hospitalized in the internal medicine ward with a diagnosis of COVID‐19 who developed PE were screened for DVT in the lower extremities with complete compression ultrasound. Results The study comprised 26 patients. Fifteen patients (57.7%) were male. The median age was 60 years (interquartile range, 54–73 years). Compression ultrasound findings were positive for DVT in 2 patients (7.7%; 95% confidence interval, 3.6%–11.7%). Patients with DVT had central and bilateral PE. In both, venous thromboembolism was diagnosed in the emergency department, so they did not receive previous prophylactic therapy with low‐molecular‐weight heparin. Patients without DVT had higher median d ‐dimer levels: 25,688 μg/dL (interquartile range, 80,000–1210 μg/dL) versus 5310 μg/dL ( P < .05). Conclusions Our study showed a low incidence of DVT in a cohort of patients with COVID‐19 and PE. This observation suggests that PE in these patients could be produced mainly by a local thromboinflammatory syndrome induced by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection and not by a thromboembolic event.

No abstract

Background: Meta-analyses of observational studies report a 1.1-1.7% pooled risk of stroke among patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection requiring hospitalization, but consultations for stroke and reperfusion procedures have decreased during the outbreak that occurred during the first half of the year 2020. It is still unclear whether a true increase in the risk of stroke exists among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 . In-hospital ischemic stroke (IHIS) complicated the 0.04-0.06% of all admissions in the pre-COVID-19 era, but its incidence has not been assessed among inpatients with COVID-19. We aimed to compare IHIS incidence among patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection with that of inpatients with non-COVID-19 illnesses from the same outbreak period and from previous periods. Methods: This historical cohort study belongs to the COVID-19@Vallecas cohort. The incidence of IHIS was estimated for patients with SARS-CoV-2 hospitalized during March-April 2020 [COVID-19 cohort (CC)], for patients with non-COVID-19 medical illness hospitalized during the same outbreak period [2020 non-COVID-19 cohort (20NCC)], and for inpatients with non-COVID-19 illness admitted during March-April of the years 2016-2019 [historical non-COVID-19 cohort (HNCC)]. Unadjusted risk of IHIS was compared between the three cohorts, and adjusted incidence rate ratio (IRR) of IHIS between cohorts was obtained by means of Poisson regression.Results: Overall, 8126 inpatients were included in this study. Patients in the CC were younger and more commonly men than those from the HNCC and 20NCC. Absolute risk of IHIS was 0.05% for HNCC, 0.23% for 20NCC, and 0.36% for CC, (p = 0.004 for HNCC vs. CC). Cumulative incidence for IHIS by day nine after admission, with death as a competing risk, was 0.09% for HNCC, 0.23% for 20NCC, and 0.50% for CC. In an adjusted Poisson regression model with sex, age, needing of intensive care unit admission, and cohort (HNCC as reference) as covariates, COVID-19 was an independent predictor for IHIS (IRR 6.76, 95% confidence interval 1.66-27.54, p = 0.01). A nonsignificant increase in the risk of IHIS was observed for the 20NCC (IRR 5.62, 95% confidence interval 0.93-33.9, p = 0.06).Conclusions: SARS-CoV-2 outbreak was associated with an increase in the incidence of IHIS when compared with inpatients from a historical cohort. Viral infection itself may be related to the increased risk of IHIS among patients with COVID-19, but in view of our results from the 20NCC, it is likely that other factors, such as hospital saturation and overwhelming of health systems, may have played a role in the increased frequency of IHIS.

No abstract