EClinicalMedicine

BACKGROUND: As mortality remains high for patients with Ebola virus disease (EVD) despite new treatment options, the ability to level up the provided supportive care and to predict the risk of death is of major importance. This analysis of the EVISTA cohort aims to describe advanced supportive care provided to EVD patients in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and to develop a simple risk score for predicting in-hospital death, called PREDS. METHODS: In this prospective cohort (NCT04815175), patients were recruited during the 10(th) EVD outbreak in the DRC across three Ebola Treatment Centers (ETCs). Demographic, clinical, biological, virological and treatment data were collected. We evaluated factors known to affect the risk of in-hospital death and applied univariate and multivariate Cox proportional-hazards analyses to derive the risk score in a training dataset. We validated the score in an internal-validation dataset, applying C-statistics as a measure of discrimination. FINDINGS: Between August 1(st) 2018 and December 31(th) 2019, 711 patients were enrolled in the study. Regarding supportive care, patients received vasopressive drug (n = 111), blood transfusion (n = 101), oxygen therapy (n = 250) and cardio-pulmonary ultrasound (n = 15). Overall, 323 (45%) patients died before day 28. Six independent prognostic factors were identified (ALT, creatinine, modified NEWS2 score, viral load, age and symptom duration). The final score range from 0 to 13 points, with a good concordance (C = 86.24%) and calibration with the Hosmer-Lemeshow test (p = 0.12). INTERPRETATION: The implementation of advanced supportive care is possible for EVD patients in emergency settings. PREDS is a simple, accurate tool that could help in orienting early advanced care for at-risk patients after external validation. FUNDING: This study was funded by ALIMA

COVID-19 symptoms at hospital admission vary with age and sex: results from the ISARIC prospective multinational observational study

Background: The ISARIC prospective multinational observational study is the largest cohort of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. We present relationships of age, sex, and nationality to presenting symptoms. Methods: International, prospective observational study of 60 109 hospitalized symptomatic patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 recruited from 43 countries between 30 January and 3 August 2020. Logistic regression was performed to evaluate relationships of age and sex to published COVID-19 case definitions and the most commonly reported symptoms. Results: ‘Typical’ symptoms of fever (69%), cough (68%) and shortness of breath (66%) were the most commonly reported. 92% of patients experienced at least one of these. Prevalence of typical symptoms was greatest in 30- to 60-year-olds (respectively 80, 79, 69%; at least one 95%). They were reported less frequently in children (≤ 18 years: 69, 48, 23; 85%), older adults (≥ 70 years: 61, 62, 65; 90%), and women (66, 66, 64; 90%; vs. men 71, 70, 67; 93%, each P < 0.001). The most common atypical presentations under 60 years of age were nausea and vomiting and abdominal pain, and over 60 years was confusion. Regression models showed significant differences in symptoms with sex, age and country. Interpretation: This international collaboration has allowed us to report reliable symptom data from the largest cohort of patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Adults over 60 and children admitted to hospital with COVID-19 are less likely to present with typical symptoms. Nausea and vomiting are common atypical presentations under 30 years. Confusion is a frequent atypical presentation of COVID-19 in adults over 60 years. Women are less likely to experience typical symptoms than men

Active prospective surveillance study with post-discharge surveillance of surgical site infections in Cambodia

Summary: Barriers to the implementation of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines for surgical site infection (SSI) surveillance have been described in resource-limited settings. This study aimed to estimate the SSI incidence rate in a Cambodian hospital and to compare different modalities of SSI surveillance. We performed an active prospective study with post-discharge surveillance. During the hospital stay, trained surveyors collected the CDC criteria to identify SSI by direct examination of the surgical site. After discharge, a card was given to each included patient to be presented to all practitioners examining the surgical site. Among 167 patients, direct examination of the surgical site identified a cumulative incidence rate of 14 infections per 100 patients. An independent review of medical charts presented a sensitivity of 16%. The sensitivity of the purulent drainage criterion to detect SSIs was 83%. After hospital discharge, 87% of the patients provided follow-up data, and nine purulent drainages were reported by a practitioner (cumulative incidence rate: 20%). Overall, the incidence rate was dependent on the surveillance modalities. The review of medical charts to identify SSIs during hospitalization was not effective; the use of a follow-up card with phone calls for post-discharge surveillance was effective. Keywords: Surgical wound infection, Cambodia, Infection control, Developing countries, Follow-up studies, Feasibility studie

Impact of corticosteroids use on midterm sequelae in survivors of COVID-19 admitted to hospital: A prospective cohort study

International audienceAn understanding of the midterm sequelae in COVID-19 and their association with corticosteroids use are needed. Between March and July 2020, we evaluated 1227 survivors of COVID-19, 3 months posthospitalization, of whom 213 had received corticosteroids within 7 days of admission. Main outcome was any midterm sequelae (oxygen therapy, shortness of breath, one major clinical sign, two minor clinical signs or three minor symptoms). Association between corticosteroids use and midterm sequelae was assessed using inverse propensity-score weighting models. Our sample included 753 (61%) male patients, and 512 (42%) were older than 65 years. We found a higher rate of sequelae among users than nonusers of corticosteroids (42% vs. 35%, odds ratio [OR] 1.40 [1.16-1.69]). Midterm sequelae were more frequent in users of low-dose corticosteroids than nonusers (64% vs. 51%, OR 1.60 [1.10-2.32]), whereas no association between higher doses (≥20 mg/day equivalent of dexamethasone) and sequelae was evidenced (OR 0.95 [0.56-1.61]). Higher risk of sequelae with corticosteroids use was observed among subjects with propensity score below the 90th percentile. Our study suggest that corticosteroids use during hospitalization for COVID-19 is associated with higher risk of midterm sequelae

Severity of self-reported symptoms and psychological burden 6-months after hospital admission for COVID-19: a prospective cohort study

International audienceOBJECTIVES: Few studies have reported clinical COVID-19 sequelae six months (M6) after hospital discharge, but none has studied symptom severity. METHODS: Prevalence and severity of 7 symptoms were estimated until M6 using the self-administered influenza severity scale in COVID-19 hospitalized patients enrolled in the French COVID cohort. Factors associated with severity were assessed by logistic regression. Anxiety, depression and health-related quality of life (HRQL) were also assessed. RESULTS: At M6, among the 324 patients (median age 61 years, 63% men, 19% admitted to intensive care during the acute phase), 187/324 (58%) reported at least one symptom mostly fatigue (47%) and myalgia (23%). Symptom severity was scored, at most, mild in 125 (67%), moderate in 44 (23%) and severe in 18 (10%). Female gender was the sole factor associated with moderate/severe symptom reporting (OR = 1.98, 95%CI=1.13-3.47). Among the 225 patients with psychological assessment, 24 (11%) had anxiety, 18 (8%) depressive symptoms, and their physical HRQL was significantly poorer than the general population (p=0.0005). CONCLUSION: Even if 58% of patients reported ≥1 symptom at M6, less than 7% rated any symptom as severe. Assessing symptoms severity could be helpful to identify patients requiring appropriate medical care. Women may require special attention

Impact on disease mortality of clinical, biological, and virological characteristics at hospital admission and overtime in COVID‐19 patients

International audienc

Long-term neurological symptoms after acute COVID-19 illness requiring hospitalization in adult patients: insights from the ISARIC-COVID-19 follow-up study

in this study we aimed to characterize the type and prevalence of neurological symptoms related to neurological long-COVID-19 from a large international multicenter cohort of adults after discharge from hospital for acute COVID-19

Paediatric COVID-19 mortality: a database analysis of the impact of health resource disparity

Background The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on paediatric populations varied between high-income countries (HICs) versus low-income to middle-income countries (LMICs). We sought to investigate differences in paediatric clinical outcomes and identify factors contributing to disparity between countries.Methods The International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infections Consortium (ISARIC) COVID-19 database was queried to include children under 19 years of age admitted to hospital from January 2020 to April 2021 with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis. Univariate and multivariable analysis of contributing factors for mortality were assessed by country group (HICs vs LMICs) as defined by the World Bank criteria.Results A total of 12 860 children (3819 from 21 HICs and 9041 from 15 LMICs) participated in this study. Of these, 8961 were laboratory-confirmed and 3899 suspected COVID-19 cases. About 52% of LMICs children were black, and more than 40% were infants and adolescent. Overall in-hospital mortality rate (95% CI) was 3.3% [=(3.0% to 3.6%), higher in LMICs than HICs (4.0% (3.6% to 4.4%) and 1.7% (1.3% to 2.1%), respectively). There were significant differences between country income groups in intervention profile, with higher use of antibiotics, antivirals, corticosteroids, prone positioning, high flow nasal cannula, non-invasive and invasive mechanical ventilation in HICs. Out of the 439 mechanically ventilated children, mortality occurred in 106 (24.1%) subjects, which was higher in LMICs than HICs (89 (43.6%) vs 17 (7.2%) respectively). Pre-existing infectious comorbidities (tuberculosis and HIV) and some complications (bacterial pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome and myocarditis) were significantly higher in LMICs compared with HICs. On multivariable analysis, LMIC as country income group was associated with increased risk of mortality (adjusted HR 4.73 (3.16 to 7.10)).Conclusion Mortality and morbidities were higher in LMICs than HICs, and it may be attributable to differences in patient demographics, complications and access to supportive and treatment modalities

Respiratory support in patients with severe COVID-19 in the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection (ISARIC) COVID-19 study: a prospective, multinational, observational study

Background: Up to 30% of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 require advanced respiratory support, including high-flow nasal cannulas (HFNC), non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIV), or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). We aimed to describe the clinical characteristics, outcomes and risk factors for failing non-invasive respiratory support in patients treated with severe COVID-19 during the first two years of the pandemic in high-income countries (HICs) and low middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: This is a multinational, multicentre, prospective cohort study embedded in the ISARIC-WHO COVID-19 Clinical Characterisation Protocol. Patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection who required hospital admission were recruited prospectively. Patients treated with HFNC, NIV, or IMV within the first 24 h of hospital admission were included in this study. Descriptive statistics, random forest, and logistic regression analyses were used to describe clinical characteristics and compare clinical outcomes among patients treated with the different types of advanced respiratory support. Results: A total of 66,565 patients were included in this study. Overall, 82.6% of patients were treated in HIC, and 40.6% were admitted to the hospital during the first pandemic wave. During the first 24 h after hospital admission, patients in HICs were more frequently treated with HFNC (48.0%), followed by NIV (38.6%) and IMV (13.4%). In contrast, patients admitted in lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs) were less frequently treated with HFNC (16.1%) and the majority received IMV (59.1%). The failure rate of non-invasive respiratory support (i.e. HFNC or NIV) was 15.5%, of which 71.2% were from HIC and 28.8% from LMIC. The variables most strongly associated with non-invasive ventilation failure, defined as progression to IMV, were high leukocyte counts at hospital admission (OR [95%CI]; 5.86 [4.83–7.10]), treatment in an LMIC (OR [95%CI]; 2.04 [1.97–2.11]), and tachypnoea at hospital admission (OR [95%CI]; 1.16 [1.14–1.18]). Patients who failed HFNC/NIV had a higher 28-day fatality ratio (OR [95%CI]; 1.27 [1.25–1.30]). Conclusions: In the present international cohort, the most frequently used advanced respiratory support was the HFNC. However, IMV was used more often in LMIC. Higher leucocyte count, tachypnoea, and treatment in LMIC were risk factors for HFNC/NIV failure. HFNC/NIV failure was related to worse clinical outcomes, such as 28-day mortality. Trial registration This is a prospective observational study; therefore, no health care interventions were applied to participants, and trial registration is not applicable