Background Patients with COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) have been shown to have high sedation requirements. Objective The purpose of this study was to compare sedative use between patients with COVID-19 ARDS and non-COVID-19 ARDS. Methods This was a retrospective study of patients with COVID-19 ARDS compared with historical controls of non-COVID-19 ARDS who were admitted to 2 hospitals from March 1, 2020, to April 30, 2020, and April 1, 2018, to December 31, 2019, respectively. The primary outcome was median cumulative dose of propofol (µg/kg) at 24 hours after intubation. Results There were 92 patients with COVID-19 ARDS and 37 patients with non-COVID-19 ARDS included. Within the first 24 hours of intubation, patients with COVID-19 ARDS required higher total median doses of propofol: 51 045 µg/kg (interquartile range, 26 150-62 365 µg/kg) versus 33 350 µg/kg (9632-51 455 µg/kg; P = 0.004). COVID-19 patients were more likely receive intravenous lorazepam (37% vs 14%; P = 0.02) and higher cumulative median doses of midazolam by days 5 (14 vs 4 mg; P = 0.04) and 7 of intubation (89 vs 4 mg; P = 0.03) to achieve the same median Richmond Analgesia-Sedation Scale scores. COVID-19 ARDS patients required more ventilator days (10 vs 6 days; P = 0.02). There was no difference in 30-day mortality. Conclusion and Relevance Patients with COVID-19 ARDS required higher doses of propofol and benzodiazepines than patients with non-COVID-19 ARDS to achieve the same median levels of sedation.
Spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) is a rare cause of acute coronary syndrome (ACS), seen mostly in young females. The rarity and limited knowledge of the disease make its management challenging. Prompt diagnosis of the condition is extremely important to decrease both long-and short-term complications. Treatment options depend on hemodynamic stability and the location of the dissection-with more distal lesions treated more conservatively as opposed to proximal lesions which are treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass graft (CABG). The following are the two cases with different presentation, management and outcomes.Our first patient was a 35-year-old woman with no medical history who presented with acute, anginal pain, diaphoresis and palpitations. She was hemodynamically stable on presentation, with work-up significant for electrocardiogram (ECG) with sinus bradycardia, ST elevation in leads V1-V6, and elevated troponin level of 4 ng/ml. There was no evidence of a pulmonary embolism on computed tomography (CT) of the chest. A coronary angiogram showed 100% dissection of the proximal to mid-left anterior descending (LAD) artery. Attempts to place a stent in the proximal to mid LAD were unsuccessful as the true lumen of the LAD was not accessible. The patient became hemodynamically unstable, and an emergent CABG was done, restoring blood flow. The patient recovered during her hospital stay and was discharged with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), beta-blockers, and atorvastatin.The second patient was a 28-year-old woman, with a history of hypertension who presented with anginal chest pain. Workup showed ECG with minimal ST elevations in anteroseptal leads, with elevated troponin level to 0.71 ng/ml. Coronary angiogram showed 40-50% stenosis of the mid LAD with an aneurysmal segment. An echocardiogram showed no evidence of wall motion abnormalities, and she had a normal left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). She was discharged home the next day, on medical management. After two days, she returned to the hospital with similar complaints, with work-up significant for ECG with nonspecific ST-T abnormality, and troponin level which peaked at 2.22 ng/ml. She was started on a heparin drip, and a repeat left heart catheterization revealed type 2 dissection of the mid to distal LAD, with intravascular ultrasound showing a fractional flow reserve of 0.76. She was discharged home on DAPT, beta-blocker, calcium channel blocker (CCB), and atorvastatin, with close cardiology follow up. These two cases highlight the importance of keeping in mind the possibility of SCAD, especially when relatively healthy young women present with anginal symptoms. Early diagnosis of the condition and prompt management are extremely important to ensure favourable outcomes. The two cases also describe the coronary angiogram findings in SCAD, and the different strategies employed in the management of this condition.
Background and Aims Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected the care of patients on chronic hemodialysis (HD). It has been reported that older adults and those with comorbidities, such as diabetes mellitus, hypertension, cardiovascular disease and chronic kidney disease are prone to develop severe disease and poorer outcomes. By virtue of their average old age, multiple comorbidities, immunosuppression and frequent contact with other patients in dialysis facilities, chronic HD patients are at particular risk for severe COVID-19 infection. The aim of this study was to compare clinical presentation, laboratory and radiologic data and outcomes between HD and non-HD COVID-19 patients and find possible risk factors for mortality on HD patients. Method A single center retrospective cohort study including patients on HD hospitalized with a laboratory confirmed COVID-19 infection, from March 1st to December 31st of 2020 and matched them to non-dialysis patients (non-HD) (1:1). Data regarding patient baseline characteristics, symptoms, laboratory and radiologic results at presentation were collected, as well as their outcomes. Categorical variables are presented as frequencies and percentages, and continuous variables as means or medians for variables with skewed distributions. A paired Student’s t-test was performed on parametric continuous values or Mann-Whitney for non-parametric continuous variables. Chi-squared test was performed for comparing categorical variables. Logistic regression was used to identify risk factors for mortality on HD patients. A p-value of less than 0,05 indicated statistical significance. Results A total of 34 patients HD patients were included, 70,6% male, mean age of 76,5 years, median time of dialysis of 3,0 years. Among them 85,3% were hypertensive, 47,1% diabetic, 47,1% had cardiovascular disease, 30,6% pulmonary chronic disease and 23,5% cancer. The most frequent symptoms were fever (67,6%), shortness of breath (61,8%) and cough (52,9%). At admission, 55,9% of patients needed oxygen supply, one required mechanic ventilation and was admitted to intensive care unit. Regarding laboratory data, the most common features were lymphopenia in 58,9% (median- 795/uL), elevated LDH in 64,7% (median- 255 U/L), raised C-reactive protein in 97,1% (median-6,3 mg/dlL, raised D-dimer in 95,8% (median 1,7 ng/mL), and all patients presented high ferritin (median 1658 ng/mL) and elevated Troponin T (median 130ng/mL). The majority presented with radiologic changes, particularly bilateral infiltrates in 29,4%. Concerning clinical outcomes, the median hospitalization time was 11 days and 13 patients (38,2%) developed bacterial superinfection. Mortality rate was 32,4%. When matched to 34 non-HD patients there was no statistical significant differences in sex, age and comorbidities. The HD group had a tendency to more ventilator support need (p=0,051), higher ferritin and troponin levels (p=<0,001 for both), whereas the non-HD group presented with greater levels of transaminases (p= 0,017). There was o significant difference in hospitalization time (median of 11 vs 7 days, p=0,222) neither in mortality (median of 32,4 vs 35,3%, p=0,798). When the logistic regression was performed, only bacterial superinfection was a predictor for mortality on hemodialysis patients (p=0,004). Conclusion Our study compared outcomes for COVID-19 patients on chronic HD to non-dialysis patients and showed no difference in hospitalization time nor in death rate. In spite of these results, the mortality in patients on chronic HD is still not negligible, with up to 32% of in-hospital mortality. Bacterial superinfection is a predictive risk factor for mortality. Hence the importance of interventions to mitigate the burden of COVID-19 in these patients, by preventing its spread, particularly in hemodialysis centers.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.