15
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Pulmonary embolism in hospitalized COVID-19 patients: Short- and long-term clinical outcomes

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a frequent complication in COVID-19. However, the influence of PE on the prognosis of COVID-19 remains unclear as previous studies were affected by misclassification bias. Therefore, we evaluated a cohort of COVID-19 patients whom all underwent systematic screening for PE (thereby avoiding misclassification) and compared clinical outcomes between patients with and without PE.

          Materials and methods

          We included all COVID-19 patients who were admitted through the ED between April 2020 and February 2021. All patients underwent systematic work-up for PE in the ED using the YEARS-algorithm. The primary outcome was a composite of in-hospital mortality and ICU admission. We also evaluated long-term outcomes including PE occurrence within 90 days after discharge and one-year all-cause mortality.

          Results

          637 ED patients were included in the analysis. PE was diagnosed in 46 of them (7.2%). The occurrence of the primary outcome did not differ between patients with PE and those without (28.3% vs. 26.9%, p = 0.68). The overall rate of PE diagnosed in-hospital (after an initial negative PE screening in the ED) and in the first 90 days after discharge was 3.9% and 1.2% respectively. One-year all-cause mortality was similar between patients with and without PE (26.1% vs. 24.4%, p = 0.83).

          Conclusions

          In a cohort of COVID-19 patients who underwent systematic PE screening in the ED, we found no differences in mortality rate and ICU admissions between patients with and without PE. This may indicate that proactive PE screening, and thus timely diagnosis and treatment of PE, may limit further clinical deterioration and associated mortality in COVID-19 patients.

          Related collections

          Most cited references16

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: Development and validation

          The objective of this study was to develop a prospectively applicable method for classifying comorbid conditions which might alter the risk of mortality for use in longitudinal studies. A weighted index that takes into account the number and the seriousness of comorbid disease was developed in a cohort of 559 medical patients. The 1-yr mortality rates for the different scores were: "0", 12% (181); "1-2", 26% (225); "3-4", 52% (71); and "greater than or equal to 5", 85% (82). The index was tested for its ability to predict risk of death from comorbid disease in the second cohort of 685 patients during a 10-yr follow-up. The percent of patients who died of comorbid disease for the different scores were: "0", 8% (588); "1", 25% (54); "2", 48% (25); "greater than or equal to 3", 59% (18). With each increased level of the comorbidity index, there were stepwise increases in the cumulative mortality attributable to comorbid disease (log rank chi 2 = 165; p less than 0.0001). In this longer follow-up, age was also a predictor of mortality (p less than 0.001). The new index performed similarly to a previous system devised by Kaplan and Feinstein. The method of classifying comorbidity provides a simple, readily applicable and valid method of estimating risk of death from comorbid disease for use in longitudinal studies. Further work in larger populations is still required to refine the approach because the number of patients with any given condition in this study was relatively small.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            CO-RADS – A categorical CT assessment scheme for patients with suspected COVID-19: definition and evaluation

            Purpose To introduce the COVID-19 Reporting and Data System (CO-RADS) for standardized assessment of pulmonary involvement of COVID-19 on non-enhanced chest CT and report its initial interobserver agreement and performance. Methods The Dutch Radiological Society (NVvR) developed CO-RADS based on other efforts for standardization, such as Lung-RADS or BI-RADS. CO-RADS assesses the suspicion for pulmonary involvement of COVID-19 on a scale from 1 (very low) to 5 (very high). The system is meant to be used in patients presenting with moderate to severe symptoms of COVID-19. The system was evaluated using 105 chest CTs of patients admitted to the hospital with clinical suspicion of COVID-19 in whom RT-PCR was performed (62 +/- 16 years, 61 men, 53 with positive RT-PCR). Eight observers assessed the scans using CO-RADS. Fleiss’ kappa was calculated, and scores of individual observers were compared to the median of the remaining seven observers. The resulting area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) was compared to results from RT-PCR and clinical diagnosis of COVID-19. Results There was absolute agreement among observers in 573 (68.2%) of 840 observations. Fleiss’ kappa was 0.47 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45-0.47), with the highest kappa for CO-RADS categories 1 (0.58, 95% CI 0.54-0.62) and 5 (0.68, 95% CI 0.65-0.72). The average AUC was 0.91 (95% CI 0.85-0.97) for predicting RT-PCR outcome and 0.95 (95% CI 0.91-0.99) for clinical diagnosis. The false negative rate for CO-RADS 1 was 9/161 (5.6%, 95% CI 1.0-10%), and the false positive rate for CO-RADS 5 was 1/286 (0.3%, 95% CI 0-1.0%). Conclusions CO-RADS is a categorical assessment scheme for pulmonary involvement of COVID-19 on non-enhanced chest CT providing very good performance for predicting COVID-19 in patients with moderate to severe symptoms and has a substantial interobserver agreement, especially for categories 1 and 5.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Thromboembolism risk of COVID-19 is high and associated with a higher risk of mortality: A systematic review and meta-analysis

              Background Studies have suggested that there is increased risk of thromboembolism (TE) associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, overall arterial and venous TE rates of COVID-19 and effect of TE on COVID-19 mortality is unknown. Methods We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies evaluating TE in COVID-19. We searched PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase for studies published up to June 12, 2020. Random effects models were used to produce summary TE rates and odds ratios (OR) of mortality in COVID-19 patients with TE compared to those without TE. Heterogeneity was quantified with I 2 . Findings Of 425 studies identified, 42 studies enrolling 8271 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Overall venous TE rate was 21% (95% CI:17–26%): ICU, 31% (95% CI: 23–39%). Overall deep vein thrombosis rate was 20% (95% CI: 13–28%): ICU, 28% (95% CI: 16–41%); postmortem, 35% (95% CI:15–57%). Overall pulmonary embolism rate was 13% (95% CI: 11–16%): ICU, 19% (95% CI:14–25%); postmortem, 22% (95% CI:16–28%). Overall arterial TE rate was 2% (95% CI: 1–4%): ICU, 5% (95%CI: 3–7%). Pooled mortality rate among patients with TE was 23% (95%CI:14–32%) and 13% (95% CI:6–22%) among patients without TE. The pooled odds of mortality were 74% higher among patients who developed TE compared to those who did not (OR, 1.74; 95%CI, 1.01–2.98; P = 0.04). Interpretation TE rates of COVID-19 are high and associated with higher risk of death. Robust evidence from ongoing clinical trials is needed to determine the impact of thromboprophylaxis on TE and mortality risk of COVID-19. Funding None.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Thrombosis Update
                Published by Elsevier Ltd.
                2666-5727
                22 June 2023
                22 June 2023
                : 100142
                Affiliations
                [a ]Department of Internal Medicine, Zuyderland Medical Centre, PO-box 5500, 6130, MB, Sittard, the Netherlands
                [b ]Department of Radiology, Zuyderland Medical Centre, PO-box 5500, 6130, MB, Sittard, the Netherlands
                [c ]Department of Pulmonology, Zuyderland Medical Centre, PO-box 5500, 6130, MB, Sittard, the Netherlands
                [d ]Department of Internal Medicine and Biochemistry, Cardiovascular Research Institute Maastricht (CARIM), Maastricht University Medical Centre, PO-box 616, 6200, MD, Maastricht, the Netherlands
                [e ]Department of Intensive Care, Zuyderland Medical Centre, PO-box 5500, 6130, MB, Sittard, the Netherlands
                [f ]Department of Clinical Chemistry and Haematology, Zuyderland Medical Centre, PO-box 5500, 6130, MB, Sittard, the Netherlands
                Author notes
                []Corresponding author.
                Article
                S2666-5727(23)00013-5 100142
                10.1016/j.tru.2023.100142
                10286522
                38562231
                53f0a3a4-4bc0-4a61-9e7e-fa47aae677e1
                © 2023 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                : 20 April 2023
                : 15 June 2023
                : 17 June 2023
                Categories
                Article

                covid-19,pulmonary embolism,clinical outcomes
                covid-19, pulmonary embolism, clinical outcomes

                Comments

                Comment on this article