Search

Background: Thrombotic complications are considered among the main extrapulmonary manifestations of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The optimal type and duration of prophylactic antithrombotic therapy in these patients remain unknown., Methods: This article reports the final (90-day) results of the Intermediate versus Standard-dose Prophylactic anticoagulation In cRitically-ill pATIents with COVID-19: An opeN label randomized controlled trial (INSPIRATION) study. Patients with COVID-19 admitted to intensive care were randomized to intermediate-dose versus standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation for 30 days, irrespective of hospital discharge status. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of adjudicated venous or arterial thrombosis, treatment with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), or all-cause death. The main safety outcome was major bleeding., Results: Of 600 randomized patients, 562 entered the modified intention-to-treat analysis (median age [Q1, Q3]: 62 [50, 71] years; 237 [42.2%] women), of whom 336 (59.8%) survived to hospital discharge. The primary outcome occurred in 132 (47.8%) of patients assigned to intermediate dose and 130 (45.4%) patients assigned to standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.21, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.95-1.55, p  = 0.11). Findings were similar for other efficacy outcomes, and in the landmark analysis from days 31 to 90 (HR: 1.59, 95% CI: 0.45-5.06). There were 7 (2.5%) major bleeding events in the intermediate-dose group (including 3 fatal events) and 4 (1.4%) major bleeding events in the standard-dose group (none fatal) (HR: 1.82, 95% CI: 0.53-6.24)., Conclusion: Intermediate-dose compared with standard-dose prophylactic anticoagulation did not reduce a composite of death, treatment with ECMO, or venous or arterial thrombosis at 90-day follow-up., Competing Interests: Dr. Parikh reports being on the Advisory Board for Abbott, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, CSI, Philips, Janssen; research grants: Abbott, Boston Scientific, Surmodics, TriReme Medical, Shockwave Medical; and receiving consulting fees from Terumo and Abiomed. Dr. Gupta received payment from the Arnold & Porter Law Firm for work related to the Sanofi clopidogrel litigation and from the Ben C. Martin Law Firm for work related to the Cook inferior vena cava filter litigation. Dr. Gupta holds equity in a health care telecardiology startup, Heartbeat Health, Inc. and received consulting fees from Edwards LifeSciences. Dr. Madhavan has received support from an institutional grant by the National Institutes of Health/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute to Columbia University Irving Medical Center (T32 HL007854). Dr. Sethi reports honoraria from Janssen and Chiesi and research grant support from the American Heart Association. Dr. Piazza has received research grant support to Brigham and Women's Hospital from EKOS, a BTG International Group company, Bayer, the Bristol Myers Squibb/Pfizer Alliance, Portola, and Janssen. He has received consulting fees from Amgen, Pfizer, Boston Scientific Corporation, and Thrombolex. Dr. Kirtane reports institutional funding to Columbia University and/or Cardiovascular Research Foundation from Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Abbott Vascular, Abiomed, CSI, CathWorks, Siemens, Philips, and ReCor Medical. In addition to research grants, institutional funding includes fees paid to Columbia University and/or Cardiovascular Research Foundation for speaking engagements and/or consulting. Personal: travel expenses/meals from Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Abbott Vascular, Abiomed, CSI, CathWorks, Siemens, Philips, ReCor Medical, Chiesi, OpSens, Zoll, and Regeneron. Dr. Van Tassell received research support from Novartis, Swedish Orphan Biovitrum, Olatec Therapeutics, and Serpin Pharma. He is a consultant of R-Pharm, Serpin Pharma. Dr. Stone has received speaker or other honoraria from Cook, Terumo, and Orchestra Biomed; served as a consultant to Valfix, TherOx, Vascular Dynamics, Robocath, HeartFlow, Gore, Ablative Solutions, Miracor, Neovasc, V-Wave, Abiomed, Ancora, MAIA Pharmaceuticals, Vectorious, Reva, Matrizyme, Cardiomech; and has received equity or options from Ancora, Cagent, Applied Therapeutics, Biostar family of funds, SpectraWave, Orchestra Biomed, Aria, Cardiac Success, MedFocus family of funds, and Valfix. Dr. Lip reports consultant and speaker for BMS/Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Daiichi-Sankyo. No fees are received personally. Dr. Krumholz reports personal fees from UnitedHealth, personal fees from IBM Watson Health, personal fees from Element Science, personal fees from Aetna, personal fees from Facebook, personal fees from Siegfried & Jensen Law Firm, personal fees from Arnold & Porter Law Firm, personal fees from Ben C. Martin Law Firm, personal fees from National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Beijing, ownership of HugoHealth, ownership of Refactor Health, contracts from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, grants from Medtronic and the Food and Drug Administration, grants from Medtronic and Johnson and Johnson, grants from Shenzhen Center for Health Information, and is a Venture Partner at FPrime, outside the submitted work. Dr. Bikdeli reports that he is a consulting expert, on behalf of the plaintiff, for litigation related to two specific brand models of IVC filters. All other authors report no relevant Enoxaparin was provided through Alborz Darou, Pooyesh Darou, and Caspian Pharmaceuticals companies, and atorvastatin and matching placebo were provided by Sobhan Darou. None of these companies were study sponsors and they had no other role and will not have a role in the design, conduct, analysis, or interpretation of the ongoing results or the decision to submit the resultant manuscript(s)., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Background: Severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may lead to the cytokine storm syndrome which may cause acute respiratory failure syndrome and death. Our aim was to investigate the therapeutic effects of infliximab, intravenous gammaglobulin (IVIg) or combination therapy in patients with severe COVID-19 disease admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU)., Methods: In this observational research, we studied 104 intubated adult patients with severe COVID-19 infection (based on clinical symptoms, and radiographic or CT scan parameters) who were admitted to the ICU of a multispecialty hospital during March 2020 in Tehran, Iran. All cases received standard treatment regimens as local protocol (Oseltamivir + hydroxychloroquine + lopinavir/ritonavir or sofosbuvir or atazanavir ± ribavirin). The cases were grouped as controls (n = 43), infliximab (n = 27), IVIg (n = 23) and combination (n = 11)., Results: There was no significant difference between controls and treatment groups in terms of underlying diseases or the number of underlying diseases. The mean age (SD) of cases was 72.42 (16.06) in the control group, 64.52 (12.965) in IVIg, 63.40 (17.57) in infliximab and 64.00 (11.679) in combination therapy; ( P = 0.047, 0.031 and 0.11, respectively). Also, 37% in the infliximab group, 26.1% in IVIg, 45.5% in combination therapy, and 62.8% in the control group expired (all P < 0.05). Hazard ratios were 0.31 in IVIg (95% CI: 0.12-0.76, P = 0.01), 0.30 in infliximab (95% CI: 0.13-0.67, P = 0.004), 0.39 in combination therapy (95% CI: 0.12-1.09, P = 0.071)., Conclusion: According to the findings of this study, it seems that infliximab and IVIg, alone or together, in patients with severe COVID-19 disease can be considered an effective treatment., (© 2021 The Author(s). This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.)

Considering the high prevalence of vitamin D deficiency worldwide and its relationship with immune response to viral infections, this study attempted to identify the predictive power of serum vitamin D for poor outcomes among the COVID‐19 patients. This retrospective cohort study included all patients with confirmed COVID‐19 hospitalized between February 20, 2020, and April 20, 2020, at a designated COVID‐19 hospital, located in Tehran province, Iran. General characteristics, medical history and clinical symptoms were recorded by trained physicians. Blood parameters including complete blood count, creatinine, lactate dehydrogenase, creatine phosphokinase, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C‐reactive protein and vitamin D were tested. This study included 290 hospitalized patients with COVID‐19 (the mean age [SD]: 61.6 [16.9], 56.6% males), of whom 142 had vitamin D concentrations less than 20 ng/ml, defined as vitamin D deficiency. COVID‐19 patients with vitamin D deficiency were more likely to die (Crude OR [95% CI]: 2.30 [1.25–4.26]), require ICU (2.06 [1.22–3.46]) and invasive mechanical ventilation (2.03 [1.04–3.93]) based on univariate logistic regression results. Although, after adjusting for potentials confounders such as gender and age, the association between vitamin D and need to invasive mechanical ventilation lost its significance, adjusted values for the risk of death and ICU requirement were still statistically significant. Vitamin D deficiency can be considered as a predictor of poor outcomes and mortality in COVID‐19 patients. Therefore, checking serum 25 (OH) D on admission and taking vitamin D supplements according to the prophylactic or treatment protocols is recommended for all COVID‐19 patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]