Background Asthmatics and COPD patients have more severe outcomes with viral infections than people without obstructive disease. Objective To evaluate if obstructive diseases are risk factors for ICU stay and death due to COVID19. Methods We collected data from the electronic medical record from 596 adult patients hospitalized in University hospital of Liege between 18 th of March and 17th of April 2020 for SARS-CoV2 infection. We classified patients in three groups according to the underlying respiratory disease, present prior to COVID19 pandemics. Results Among patients requiring hospitalization for COVID19, asthma and COPD accounted for 9.6% and 7.7% respectively. The proportions of asthmatics, COPD and patients without obstructive airway disease hospitalized in ICU were 17.5%, 19.6% and 14% respectively. One third of COPD patients died during hospitalization while only 7.0% of asthmatics and 13.6% of patients without airway obstruction died due to SARS-CoV2. The multivariate analysis showed that asthma, COPD, ICS treatment and OCS treatment were not independent risk factors for ICU admission or death. Male gender (OR:1.9; 95%CI: 1.1 to 3.2) and obesity (OR:8.5; 95%CI: 5.1 to 14.1) were predictors of ICU admission while male gender (OR1.9; 95%CI: 1.1-3.2), older age (OR:1.9; 95%CI: 1.6-2.3), cardiopathy (OR: 1.8; 95%CI: 1.1-3.1) and immunosuppressive diseases (OR: 3.6; 95%CI: 1.5-8.4) were independent predictors of death. Conclusion Asthma and COPD are not risk factors for ICU admission and death related to SARS-CoV2 infection.

Retrospective studies showed a relationship between vitamin D status and COVID-19 severity and mortality, with an inverse relation between SARS-CoV-2 positivity and circulating calcifediol levels. The objective of this pilot study was to investigate the effect of vitamin D supplementation on the length of hospital stay and clinical improvement in patients with vitamin D deficiency hospitalized with COVID-19. The study was randomized, double blind and placebo controlled. A total of 50 subjects were enrolled and received, in addition to the best available COVID therapy, either vitamin D (25,000 IU per day over 4 consecutive days, followed by 25,000 IU per week up to 6 weeks) or placebo. The length of hospital stay decreased significantly in the vitamin D group compared to the placebo group (4 days vs. 8 days; p = 0.003). At Day 7, a significantly lower percentage of patients were still hospitalized in the vitamin D group compared to the placebo group (19% vs. 54%; p = 0.0161), and none of the patients treated with vitamin D were hospitalized after 21 days compared to 14% of the patients treated with placebo. Vitamin D significantly reduced the duration of supplemental oxygen among the patients who needed it (4 days vs. 7 days in the placebo group; p = 0.012) and significantly improved the clinical recovery of the patients, as assessed by the WHO scale (p = 0.0048). In conclusion, this study demonstrated that the clinical outcome of COVID-19 patients requiring hospitalization was improved by administration of vitamin D.

Long-term clinical follow up of patients suffering from moderate to severe COVID-19 infection: A monocentric prospective observational cohort study,

Face masks and personal respirators are used to curb the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in respiratory droplets; filters embedded in some personal protective equipment could be used as a non-invasive sample source for applications, including at-home testing, but information is needed about whether filters are suited to capture viral particles for SARS-CoV-2 detection. In this study, we generated inactivated virus-laden aerosols of 0.3–2 microns in diameter (0.9 µm mean diameter by mass) and dispersed the aerosolized viral particles onto electrostatic face mask filters. The limit of detection for inactivated coronaviruses SARS-CoV-2 and HCoV-NL63 extracted from filters was between 10 to 100 copies/filter for both viruses. Testing for SARS-CoV-2, using face mask filters and nasopharyngeal swabs collected from hospitalized COVID-19-patients, showed that filter samples offered reduced sensitivity (8.5% compared to nasopharyngeal swabs). The low concordance of SARS-CoV-2 detection between filters and nasopharyngeal swabs indicated that number of viral particles collected on the face mask filter was below the limit of detection for all patients but those with the highest viral loads. This indicated face masks are unsuitable to replace diagnostic nasopharyngeal swabs in COVID-19 diagnosis. The ability to detect nucleic acids on face mask filters may, however, find other uses worth future investigation.