Search

Background In the COVID-STEROID 2 trial there was suggestion of heterogeneity of treatment effects (HTE) between patients enrolled from Europe vs. India on the primary outcome. Whether there was HTE for the remaining patient-centred outcomes is unclear. Methods In this post hoc analysis of the COVID-STEROID 2 trial, which compared 12 mg vs. 6 mg dexamethasone in adults with COVID-19 and severe hypoxemia, we evaluated HTE by geographical region (Europe vs. India) for secondary outcomes with analyses adjusted for stratification variables. Results are presented as risk differences (RDs) or mean differences (MDs) with 99% confidence intervals (CIs) and P-values from interaction tests. Findings There were differences in mortality at day 28 (RD for Europe −8.3% (99% CI: −17.7 to 1.0) vs. India 0.1% (99% CI: −10.0 to 10.0)), mortality at day 90 (RD for Europe −7.4% (99% CI: −17.1 to 2.0) vs. India −1.4% (99% CI: −12.8 to 9.8)), mortality at day 180 (RD for Europe −6.7% (99% CI: −16.4 to 2.9) vs. India −1.0% (99% CI: −12.3 to 10.3)), and number of days alive without life support at day 90 (MD for Europe 6.1 days (99% CI: −1.3 to 13.4) vs. India 1.7 days (99% CI: −8.4 to 11.8)). For serious adverse reactions, the direction was reversed (RD for Europe −1.0% (99% CI: −7.1 to 5.2) vs. India −5.3% (99% CI: −16.2 to 5.0). Interpretation Our analysis suggests higher dose dexamethasone may have less beneficial effects for patients in India as compared with those in Europe; however, the evidence is weak, and this could represent a chance finding., Background: In the COVID-STEROID 2 trial there was suggestion of heterogeneity of treatment effects (HTE) between patients enrolled from Europe vs. India on the primary outcome. Whether there was HTE for the remaining patient-centred outcomes is unclear. Methods: In this post hoc analysis of the COVID-STEROID 2 trial, which compared 12 mg vs. 6 mg dexamethasone in adults with COVID-19 and severe hypoxemia, we evaluated HTE by geographical region (Europe vs. India) for secondary outcomes with analyses adjusted for stratification variables. Results are presented as risk differences (RDs) or mean differences (MDs) with 99% confidence intervals (CIs) and P-values from interaction tests. Findings: There were differences in mortality at day 28 (RD for Europe −8.3% (99% CI: −17.7 to 1.0) vs. India 0.1% (99% CI: −10.0 to 10.0)), mortality at day 90 (RD for Europe −7.4% (99% CI: −17.1 to 2.0) vs. India −1.4% (99% CI: −12.8 to 9.8)), mortality at day 180 (RD for Europe −6.7% (99% CI: −16.4 to 2.9) vs. India −1.0% (99% CI: −12.3 to 10.3)), and number of days alive without life support at day 90 (MD for Europe 6.1 days (99% CI: −1.3 to 13.4) vs. India 1.7 days (99% CI: −8.4 to 11.8)). For serious adverse reactions, the direction was reversed (RD for Europe −1.0% (99% CI: −7.1 to 5.2) vs. India −5.3% (99% CI: −16.2 to 5.0). Interpretation: Our analysis suggests higher dose dexamethasone may have less beneficial effects for patients in India as compared with those in Europe; however, the evidence is weak, and this could represent a chance finding. Funding: None for this analysis. The COVID STEROID 2 trial was funded by The Novo Nordisk Foundation and supported by Rigshospitalet's Research Council.

Intensive care unit (ICU) patients with Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have an increased risk of thromboembolic complications. We describe the occurrence of thromboembolic and bleeding events in all ICU patients with COVID-19 in Denmark during the first and second waves of the pandemic

Background: ICU admission due to COVID-19 may result in cognitive and physical impairment. We investigated the long-term cognitive and physical status of Danish ICU patients with COVID-19. Methods: We included all patients with COVID-19 admitted to Danish ICUs between March 10 and May 19, 2020. Patients were the contacted prospectively at 6 and 12 months for follow-up. Our primary outcomes were cognitive function and frailty at 6 and 12 months after ICU admission, estimated by the Mini Montreal Cognitive Assessment, and the Clinical Frailty Scale. Secondary outcomes were 6- and 12-month mortality, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) assessed by EQ-5D-5L, functional status (Barthel activities of daily living and Lawton–Brody instrumental activities of daily living), and fatigue (Fatigue Assessment Scale). The study had no information on pre-ICU admission status for the participants. Results: A total of 326 patients were included. The 6- and 12-month mortality was 37% and 38%, respectively. Among the 204 six-month survivors, 105 (51%) participated in the 6-month follow-up; among the 202 twelve-month survivors, 95 (47%) participated in the 12-month follow-up. At 6 months, cognitive scores indicated impairment for 26% (95% confidence interval [CI], 11.4–12.4) and at 12 months for 17% (95% CI, 12.0–12.8) of participants. Frailty was indicated in 20% (95% CI, 3.4–3.9) at 6 months, and for 18% (95% CI, 3.3–3.8) at 12 months. Fatigue was reported by 52% at 6 months, and by 47% at 12 months. For HRQoL, moderate, severe, or extreme health problems were reported by 28% at 6 months, and by 25% at 12 months. Conclusion: Long-term cognitive, functional impairment was found in up to one in four of patients surviving intensive care for COVID-19. Fatigue was present in nearly half the survivors at both 6 and 12 months. However, pre-ICU admission status of the patients was unknown.

Background: Characteristics and care of intensive care unit (ICU) patients with COVID-19 may have changed during the pandemic, but longitudinal data assessing this are limited. We compared patients with COVID-19 admitted to Danish ICUs in the first wave with those admitted later. Methods: Among all Danish ICU patients with COVID-19, we compared demographics, chronic comorbidities, use of organ support, length of stay and vital status of those admitted 10 March to 19 May 2020 (first wave) versus 20 May 2020 to 30 June 2021. We analysed risk factors for death by adjusted logistic regression analysis. Results: Among all hospitalised patients with COVID-19, a lower proportion was admitted to ICU after the first wave (13% vs. 8%). Among all 1374 ICU patients with COVID-19, 326 were admitted during the first wave. There were no major differences in patient's characteristics or mortality between the two periods, but use of invasive mechanical ventilation (81% vs. 58% of patients), renal replacement therapy (26% vs. 13%) and ECMO (8% vs. 3%) and median length of stay in ICU (13 vs. 10 days) and in hospital (20 vs. 17 days) were all significantly lower after the first wave. Risk factors for death were higher age, larger burden of comorbidities (heart failure, pulmonary disease and kidney disease) and active cancer, but not admission during or after the first wave. Conclusions: After the first wave of COVID-19 in Denmark, a lower proportion of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 were admitted to ICU. Among ICU patients, use of organ support was lower and length of stay was reduced, but mortality rates remained at a relatively high level.

Importance A daily dose with 6 mg of dexamethasone is recommended for up to 10 days in patients with severe and critical COVID-19, but a higher dose may benefit those with more severe disease. Objective To assess the effects of 12 mg/d vs 6 mg/d of dexamethasone in patients with COVID-19 and severe hypoxemia. Design, Setting, and Participants A multicenter, randomized clinical trial was conducted between August 2020 and May 2021 at 26 hospitals in Europe and India and included 1000 adults with confirmed COVID-19 requiring at least 10 L/min of oxygen or mechanical ventilation. End of 90-day follow-up was on August 19, 2021. Interventions Patients were randomized 1:1 to 12 mg/d of intravenous dexamethasone (n = 503) or 6 mg/d of intravenous dexamethasone (n = 497) for up to 10 days. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was the number of days alive without life support (invasive mechanical ventilation, circulatory support, or kidney replacement therapy) at 28 days and was adjusted for stratification variables. Of the 8 prespecified secondary outcomes, 5 are included in this analysis (the number of days alive without life support at 90 days, the number of days alive out of the hospital at 90 days, mortality at 28 days and at 90 days, and ≥1 serious adverse reactions at 28 days). Results Of the 1000 randomized patients, 982 were included (median age, 65 [IQR, 55-73] years; 305 [31%] women) and primary outcome data were available for 971 (491 in the 12 mg of dexamethasone group and 480 in the 6 mg of dexamethasone group). The median number of days alive without life support was 22.0 days (IQR, 6.0-28.0 days) in the 12 mg of dexamethasone group and 20.5 days (IQR, 4.0-28.0 days) in the 6 mg of dexamethasone group (adjusted mean difference, 1.3 days [95% CI, 0-2.6 days]; P = .07). Mortality at 28 days was 27.1% in the 12 mg of dexamethasone group vs 32.3% in the 6 mg of dexamethasone group (adjusted relative risk, 0.86

Background Most data on intensive care unit (ICU) patients with COVID-19 originate in selected populations from stressed healthcare systems with shorter term follow-up. We present characteristics, interventions and longer term outcomes of the entire, unselected cohort of all ICU patients with COVID-19 in Denmark where the ICU capacity was not exceeded. Methods We identified all patients with SARS-CoV-2 admitted to any Danish ICU from 10 March to 19 May 2020 and registered demographics, chronic comorbidities, use of organ support, length of stay, and vital status from patient files. Risk factors for death were analyzed using adjusted Cox regression analysis. Results There were 323 ICU patients with confirmed COVID-19. Median age was 68 years, 74% were men, 50% had hypertension, 21% diabetes, and 20% chronic pulmonary disease; 29% had no chronic comorbidity. Invasive mechanical ventilation was used in 82%, vasopressors in 83%, renal replacement therapy in 26%, and extra corporeal membrane oxygenation in 8%. ICU stay was median 13 days (IQR 6-22) and hospital stay 19 days (11-30). Median follow-up was 79 days. At end of follow-up, 118 had died (37%), 15 (4%) were still in hospital hereof 4 in ICU as of 16 June 2020. Risk factors for mortality included male gender, age, chronic pulmonary disease, active cancer, and number of co-morbidities. Conclusions In this nationwide, population-based cohort of ICU patients with COVID-19, longer term survival was high despite high age and substantial use of organ support. Male gender, age, and chronic co-morbidities, in particular chronic pulmonary disease, were associated with increased risk of death.

BACKGROUND: Rhabdomyolysis-induced acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common and serious condition. We aimed to summarise the available evidence on this topic and provide recommendations according to current standards for trustworthy guidelines.METHODS: This guideline was developed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). The following preventive interventions were assessed: (a) fluids, (b) diuretics, (c) alkalinisation, (d) antioxidants, and (e) renal replacement therapy. Exclusively patient-important outcomes were assessed.RESULTS: We suggest using early rather than late fluid resuscitation (weak recommendation, very low quality of evidence). We suggest using crystalloids rather than colloids (weak recommendation, low quality of evidence). We suggest against routine use of loop diuretics as compared to none (weak recommendation, very low quality of evidence). We suggest against use of mannitol as compared to none (weak recommendation, very low quality of evidence). We suggest against routine use of any diuretic as compared to none (weak recommendation, very low quality of evidence). We suggest against routine use of alkalinisation with sodium bicarbonate as compared to none (weak recommendation, low quality of evidence). We suggest against the routine use of any alkalinisation as compared to none (weak recommendation, low quality of evidence). We suggest against routine use of renal replacement therapy as compared to none (weak recommendation, low quality of evidence). For the remaining PICO questions, no recommendations were issued.CONCLUSION: The quantity and quality of evidence supporting preventive interventions for rhabdomyolysis-induced AKI is low/very low. We were able to issue eight weak recommendations and no strong recommendations.