Search

OBJECTIVE: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has affected the whole world and caused the death of more than 6 million people. The disease has been observed to have a more severe course in patients with chronic lung diseases. There are limited data regarding COVID-19 in patients with bronchiectasis. The aim of this article is to investigate the course of COVID-19 and factors affecting the clinical outcome in patients with bronchiectasis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study was conducted using the Turkish Adult Bronchiectasis Database (TEBVEB) to which 25 centers in Türkiye contributed between March 2019 and January 2022. The database consisted of 1035 patients, and COVID-19-related data were recorded for 606 patients. RESULTS: One hundred nineteen (19.6%) of the bronchiectasis patients (64 female, mean age 57.3 ± 13.9) had COVID-19. Patients with bronchiectasis who developed COVID-19 more frequently had other comorbidities (P = .034). They also more frequently had cystic bronchiectasis (P = .009) and their Bronchiectasis Severity Index was significantly higher (P = .019). Eighty-two (68.9%) of the patients who had COVID-19 were followed up in the outpatient clinic, 27 (22.7%) in the inpatient ward and 10 (8.4%) patients in the intensive care unit. There tended to be a higher percentage of males among patients admitted to the hospital (P = .073); similarly, the mean age of the patients admitted to the hospital was also higher (60.8 vs 55.8 years for the outpatients), but these differences did not reach statistical significance (P = .071). CONCLUSION: In conclusion, this study showed that severe bronchiectasis, presence of cystic bronchiectasis and worse Bronchiectasis Severity Index are associated with the development of COVID-19, but not with the severity of infection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: There is a need to increase patient and clinician awareness on the effectiveness of pneumococcal vaccination in at-risk groups. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of reminders for physicians and patients using the vaccination tracking system created in the hospital information management system (HIMS) on the vaccination rate, and the effect of pneumococcal vaccination on pneumonia-related hospitalization and mortality over a 12-month period. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This prospective observational cohort study was undertaken during a 2-year period in 3 tertiary care centers. Patients were followed up for 12 months following vaccination, and hospital admissions and mortality were recorded via HIMS. During the campaign, HIMS transmitted pneumococcal immunization reminder messages in accordance with guideline recommendations to physicians' computers and patients' mobile phones. Educational posters on pneumococcal vaccination were posted in outpatient clinics. Regular seminars on the evidence for pneumococcal vaccination were organized. All patients who were hospitalized during the follow-up period for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), asthma, lung cancer, or pneumonia were analyzed in relation to their vaccination history regarding clinical outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 29 530 patients were included in the study. During the study period, the annual vaccination rate increased by 74.4% and reached 4.8% in 3 hospitals (P = .001). The rates were 3.9% in patients older than 65 years without comorbidities and 5.2% in those with COPD and asthma (P = .002). In pneumococcal vaccine recipients, pneumonia-related hospital mortality was lower (relative risk (RR) = 0.19, CI 0.09-0.35, P < .001). CONCLUSION: It is possible to raise the rate of pneumococcal vaccination through awareness campaigns. Individuals with COPD and asthma are more willing to receive pneumococcal vaccination. Among patients hospitalized for pneumonia, prior pneumococcal vaccination is associated with lower mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: The optimal anticoagulant treatment regimen in hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients is uncertain. This study aimed to compare the rates of disease progression and mortality in patients treated with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) according to baseline d-dimer levels and in those who received a fixed-dose regimen irrespective of the d-dimer level. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of all patients admitted to a university hospital for COVID-19 pneumonia during a 1-year period. The protocol for d-dimer-driven therapy (on-protocol) was as follows: prophylactic dose when the baseline level is <1000 ng/mL, intermediate dose when the level is between 1000 and 3000 ng/mL, and therapeutic dose when the level is >3000 ng/mL. We compared the progression and mortality rates between the on-protocol and off-protocol treatment groups. The offprotocol group consisted of patients that received a fixed-dose LMWH regimen, which was not in accordance with the defined protocol. RESULTS: Of 384 patients (mean age 61.5 ± 15.9 years, 216 male), 294 patients with complete data composed the study group, and 174 patients were treated on-protocol and 120 patients were treated off-protocol. The on-protocol group had lower C-reactive protein (CRP), ferritin, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and d-dimer levels and higher SpO2/FiO2 levels at admission. Disease progression developed in 45/174 on-protocol patients (25.9%) vs. 53/120 off-protocol patients (44.2%) during the follow-up (P = .001), and mortality was 29 (16.7%) vs. 32 (26.7%), respectively (P = .041). Logistic regression analysis was performed and included age, presence of comorbidities, LMWH regimen, baseline SpO2/FiO2, CRP, and LDH levels as independent variables. The presence of cardiac comorbidity, age, CRP, and LDH levels, but not the LMWH treatment regimen, were associated with both disease progression and mortality. CONCLUSION: A d-dimer-driven LMWH treatment protocol is not associated with better clinical outcomes in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: It is known that inpatient hospital costs are much higher than outpatient services. It was aimed to investigate the effect of pneumococcal vaccination on hospitalizations. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The direct hospitalization costs, length of stay, and factors of the vaccinated and unvaccinated patients in the same hospital during the 12-month follow-up of the patients who received pneumococcal vaccine between November 15, 2018, and November 15, 2020, in 3 chest diseases and thoracic surgery training and research hospitals were analyzed by obtaining Hospital Information Management System records. Data were collected with Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 23 program (IBM Corp.; Armonk, NY, USA), and statistical evaluation was made. RESULTS: The mean age of 800 hospitalized patients, of whom 400 were unvaccinated and 400 were vaccinated, was 68.48 ± 11.97. There was no significant difference in the mean age of vaccinated and unvaccinated patients (P > .05). Five hundred sixty-six patients (70.8%) were aged 65 and over. Two hundred eighty (51.2%) of men were vaccinated and 120 (47.2%) of women were vaccinated, and there was no significant difference (P > .05). The mean hospital stay of these patients was 11.01 days, and those in the vaccinated group had an average mean hospital stay of 9.11 days and those in the unvaccinated group had a mean hospital stay less than 12.91 days (P < .001). Total 1-year hospitalization costs were $501.653.53 and the cost per person was calculated as $627.07. The cost per capita for the vaccinated group was $550.52, which was lower than the average cost of the unvaccinated group ($703.62) (P < .05). When comparing the status of being vaccinated, comorbidity, mortality, mean length of stay, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and heart disease were found to be statistically significant (P < .05). CONCLUSION: In our study, it was revealed that vaccination of patients hospitalized in chest disease hospitals with the pneumococcal vaccine reduced the average length of hospital stay by 41.7% and the cost of hospitalization by 27.8%. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: A substantial number of patients with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) demonstrate severe infection. Cytokine storm is an underlying condition that worsens clinical outcomes. As an interleukin-6 receptor antagonist, tocilizumab is a promising treatment option for COVID-19. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical predictors of mortality for critically ill COVID-19 patients receiving tocilizumab therapy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The retrospective cohort study was conducted in 4 centers' both wards and intensive care units between March 20 and May 20, 2020. Demographic, clinical, and laboratory data were consecutively drawn from medical records. The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: In this study, 39 patients (28.2% female) were included, and the mortality rate was 25.6% (n = 10). There was statistically significant difference between survivor and non-survivor groups regarding age (53.0 (46.5-65.0) vs. 75.0 (68.25-81.25), respectively, P = .001), CALL score (8.0 (7.0-10.0) vs. 12.0 (9.75-13.0), P = .001), GRAM score (119.5 (99.5-142.0) vs. 155.0 (129.8-226.0), P = .004), and white blood cell count (k/mL) (5.6 (3.8-8.6) vs. 8.0 (7.6-9.3), P = .003). The patients who were on invasive mechanical ventilation at the time of tocilizumab administration had a higher mortality rate (100% vs. 25.9%, P < .001). Besides, arterial partial pressure of oxygen/fraction of inspiratory oxygen (PaO2/FiO2) ratio on day 7, but not on days 0, 1, and 3 of tocilizumab therapy, was associated with mortality. C-reactive protein (mg/dL) tended to be lower in the survivor group; however, it was not statistically significant (68.4 (32.7-157.5) vs. 113.5 (77.7-219.0), P = .058). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that advanced age, increased leukocyte count, higher CALL and GRAM scores, and the need for invasive mechanical ventilation revealed a worse prognosis after tocilizumab treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the rate of pneumococcal pneumonia (PP) among patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in Turkey and to investigate and compare features of PP and non-PP CAP patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This multicenter, non-interventional, prospective, observational study included adult CAP patients (age > 18 years). Diagnosis of PP was based on the presence of at least 1 positive laboratory test result for Streptococcus pneumoniae (blood culture or sputum culture or urinary antigen test [UAT]) in patients with radiographic findings of pneumonia. RESULTS: Four hundred sixty-five patients were diagnosed with CAP of whom 59 (12.7%) had PP The most common comorbidity was chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (30.1%). The mean age, smoking history, presence of chronic neurological disease, and CURB-65 score were significantly higher in PP patients, when compared to non-PP patients. In PP patients, 84.8% were diagnosed based ony on the UAT. The overall rate of PP patients among CAP was calculated as 22.8% considering the UAT sensitivity ratio of 63% (95% confidence interval: 45-81). The rate of intensive care treatment was higher in PP patients (P = .007). While no PP patients were vaccinated for pneumococcus, 3.8% of the non-PP patients were vaccinated (P = .235). Antibiotic use in the preceding 48 hours was higher in the non-PP group than in the PP group (31.8% vs. 11.1%, P = .002). The CURB-65 score and the rate of patients requiring inpatient treatment according to this score were higher in the PP group. CONCLUSION: The facts that PP patients were older and required intensive care treatment more frequently as compared to non-PP patients underline the burden of PP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical features and outcomes of patients who were admitted with a diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) but who were not confirmed with polymerase chain reaction (PCR) positivity. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of all patients admitted to two tertiary care centers between March 15 and May 15, 2020, with a diagnosis of COVID-19. From a common database prepared for COVID-19, we retrieved the relevant data and compared the clinical findings and outcomes of PCR-positive patients with those of PCR-negative cases who had been diagnosed on the basis of typical clinical and radiographic findings. RESULTS: A total of 349 patients were included in the analysis, of which 126 (36.1%) were PCR-negative. PCR-negative patients were younger (54.6 ± 20.8 vs. 60.8 ± 18.9 years, P = .009) but were similar to PCR-positive patients in terms of demographics, comorbidities, and presenting symptoms. They had higher lymphocyte counts (1519 ± 868 vs. 1331 ± 737/mm³, P = .02) and less frequently presented with bilateral radiographic findings (68.3% vs. 79.4%, P = .046) than PCR-positive patients. Besides, they had less severe disease and better clinical outcomes regarding admission to the intensive care unit (9.6% vs. 20.6%, P = .023), oxygen therapy (21.4% vs. 43.5%, P < .001), ventilatory support (3.2% vs. 11.2%, P = .03) and length of hospital stay (5.0 ± 5.0 vs. 9.7 ± 5.9 days, P < .001). CONCLUSION: This study confirms that about one-third of the COVID-19 patients are PCR-negative and diagnosed based on clinical and radiographic findings. These patients have a more favorable clinical course, shorter hospital stays, and are less frequently admitted to the intensive care unit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]