2 research outputs found

    Effectiveness and safety of colistin among older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis

    No full text
    Abstract Objectives Limited data are available to guide colistin use in older adults (&amp;gt;65 years old). We aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of colistin in this population. Methods Systematic review and meta-analysis of original data from randomized control trials, cohort studies and case–control studies assessing colistin regimens with various comparisons for any infection. Original data were obtained from corresponding authors of original studies. The primary outcome was all-cause 1 month mortality; secondary outcomes included clinical and microbiological outcomes and adverse events, including acute kidney injury. Two independent reviewers screened citations, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. ORs with 95% CIs were pooled. Results We included 38 publications (41 comparisons) reporting 2857 elderly individuals: 29 studies compared a colistin-based regimen versus another regimen (comparison 1) and 10 compared colistin monotherapy versus colistin combination (comparison 2). No significant difference in 1 month mortality was demonstrated between colistin and comparator (comparison 1, OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.80–1.60; comparison 2, OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.78–1.27). Clinical failure was significantly more likely with colistin-based therapy versus comparator (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.13–2.06). Acute kidney injury was also significantly more common with colistin-based combinations versus other drugs (OR 3.81, 95% CI 2.14–6.77). Conclusions For older adults, colistin-based therapy resulted in no mortality difference, compared with other regimens, for any infection. Clinical failure and acute kidney injury were significantly more common with colistin-based regimens. Close renal function monitoring is needed while using colistin in older adults.</p

    Patterns of Long COVID Symptoms: A Multi-Center Cross Sectional Study

    No full text
    Background: Long COVID has become a burden on healthcare systems worldwide. Research into the etiology and risk factors has been impeded by observing all diverse manifestations as part of a single entity. We aimed to determine patterns of symptoms in convalescing COVID-19 patients. Methods: Symptomatic patients were recruited from four countries. Data were collected regarding demographics, comorbidities, acute disease and persistent symptoms. Factor analysis was performed to elucidate symptom patterns. Associations of the patterns with patients’ characteristics, features of acute disease and effect on daily life were sought. Results: We included 1027 symptomatic post-COVID individuals in the analysis. The majority of participants were graded as having a non-severe acute COVID-19 (N = 763, 74.3%). We identified six patterns of symptoms: cognitive, pain-syndrome, pulmonary, cardiac, anosmia-dysgeusia and headache. The cognitive pattern was the major symptoms pattern, explaining 26.2% of the variance; the other patterns each explained 6.5–9.5% of the variance. The cognitive pattern was higher in patients who were outpatients during the acute disease. The pain-syndrome pattern was associated with acute disease severity, higher in women and increased with age. The pulmonary pattern was associated with prior lung disease and severe acute disease. Only two of the patterns (cognitive and cardiac) were associated with failure to return to pre-COVID occupational and physical activity status. Conclusion: Long COVID diverse symptoms can be grouped into six unique patterns. Using these patterns in future research may improve our understanding of pathophysiology and risk factors of persistent COVID, provide homogenous terminology for clinical research, and direct therapeutic interventions
    corecore