Search

Summary: Background: Previous Randomised controlled trials (RCT) evaluating chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in non-hospitalised COVID-19 patients have found no significant difference in hospitalisation rates. However, low statistical power precluded definitive answers. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, double-blind, RCT in 56 Brazilian sites. Adults with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 presenting with mild or moderate symptoms with ≤ 07 days prior to enrollment and at least one risk factor for clinical deterioration were randomised (1:1) to receive hydroxychloroquine 400 mg twice a day (BID) in the first day, 400 mg once daily (OD) thereafter for a total of seven days, or matching placebo. The primary outcome was hospitalisation due to COVID-19 at 30 days, which was assessed by an adjudication committee masked to treatment allocation and following the intention-to-treat (ITT) principle. An additional analysis was performed only in participants with SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed by molecular or serology testing (modified ITT [mITT] analysis). This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04466540. Findings: From May 12, 2020 to July 07, 2021, 1372 patients were randomly allocated to hydroxychloroquine or placebo. There was no significant difference in the risk of hospitalisation between hydroxychloroquine and placebo groups (44/689 [6·4%] and 57/683 [8·3%], RR 0·77 [95% CI 0·52–1·12], respectively, p=0·16), and similar results were found in the mITT analysis with 43/478 [9·0%] and 55/471 [11·7%] events, RR 0·77 [95% CI 0·53–1·12)], respectively, p=0·17. To further complement our data, we conducted a meta-analysis which suggested no significant benefit of hydroxychloroquine in reducing hospitalisation among patients with positive testing (69/1222 [5·6%], and 88/1186 [7·4%]; RR 0·77 [95% CI 0·57–1·04]). Interpretation: In outpatients with mild or moderate forms of COVID-19, the use of hydroxychloroquine did not reduce the risk of hospitalisation compared to the placebo control. Our findings do not support the routine use of hydroxychloroquine for treatment of COVID-19 in the outpatient setting. Funding: COALITION COVID-19 Brazil and EMS.

Abstract Background Sepsis remains a worldwide major cause of hospitalization, mortality, and morbidity. To enhance the identification of patients with suspected sepsis at high risk of mortality and adverse outcomes in the emergency department (ED), the use of mortality predictors is relevant. This study aims to establish whether quick sofa (qSOFA) and the severity criteria applied in patients with suspicion of sepsis in a monitored ED are in fact predictors of mortality. Methods We performed a retrospective cohort study among adult patients with suspicion of sepsis at the ED of a tertiary care hospital in Brazil between January 1st, 2019 and December 31, 2020. All adult patients (ages 18 and over) with suspected sepsis that scored two or more points on qSOFA score or at least one point on the severity criteria score were included in the study. Results The total of patients included in the study was 665 and the average age of the sample was 73 ± 19 years. The ratio of men to women was similar. Most patients exhibited qSOFA ≥ 2 (58.80%) and 356 patients (53.61%) scored one point in the severity criteria at admission. The overall mortality rate was 19.7% (131 patients) with 98 patients (14.74%) having positive blood cultures, mainly showing Escherichia coli as the most isolated bacteria. Neither scores of qSOFA nor the severity criteria were associated with mortality rates, but scoring any point on qSOFA was considered as an independent factor for intensive care unit (ICU) admission (qSOFA = 1 point, p = 0.02; qSOFA = 2 points, p = 0.03, and qSOFA = 3 points, p = 0.04). Positive blood cultures (RR, 1.63;95% CI, 1.10 to 2.41) and general administration of vasopressors at the ED (RR, 2.14;95% CI, 1.44 to 3.17) were associated with 30-day mortality. The administration of vasopressors at the ED (RR, 2.25; CI 95%, 1.58 to 3.21) was found to be a predictor of overall mortality. Conclusions Even though an association was found between qSOFA and ICU admission, there was no association of qSOFA or the severity criteria with mortality. Therefore, patients with a tendency toward greater severity could be identified and treated more quickly and effectively in the emergency department. Further studies are necessary to assess novel scores or biomarkers to predict mortality in sepsis patients admitted to the ED’s initial care.

BACKGROUND: Coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) are currently the most common isolates recovered from the blood of patients with cancer and febrile neutropenia (FN).

PURPOSE:This study sought to evaluate factors associated with hospital length of stay in cancer patients with febrile neutropenia. METHODS:A prospective cohort study was performed at a single tertiary referral hospital in southern Brazil from October 2009 to August 2011. All adult cancer patients with febrile neutropenia admitted to the hematology ward were evaluated. Stepwise random-effects negative binomial regression was performed to identify risk factors for prolonged length of hospital stay. RESULTS:In total, 307 cases of febrile neutropenia were evaluated. The overall median length of hospital stay was 16 days (interquartile range 18 days). According to multiple negative binomial regression analysis, hematologic neoplasms (P = 0.003), high-dose chemotherapy regimens (P

The current report describes two renal transplant recipients who presented with sporotrichosis. In addition, the authors review the general aspects of sporotrichosis in renal transplant recipients reported in the literature. Sporotrichosis is a rare fungal infection in transplant patients and has been reported primarily in renal transplant recipients not treated with antifungal prophylaxis. Extracutaneous forms of sporotrichosis without skin manifestations and no previous history of traumatic injuries have been described in such patients and are difficult to diagnose. Renal transplant recipients with sporotrichosis described in the present report were successfully treated with antifungal therapy including amphotericin B deoxycholate, lipid amphotericin B formulations, fluconazole and itraconazole.

Summary: Background: COVID-19 progression is associated with an increased risk of arterial and venous thrombosis. Randomised trials have demonstrated that anticoagulants reduce the risk of thromboembolism in hospitalised patients with COVID-19, but a benefit of routine anticoagulation has not been demonstrated in the outpatient setting. Methods: We conducted a randomised, open-label, controlled, multicentre study, evaluating the use of rivaroxaban in mild or moderate COVID-19 patients. Adults ≥18 years old, with probable or confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, presenting within ≤7 days from symptom onset with no clear indication for hospitalization, plus at least 2 risk factors for complication, were randomised 1:1 either to rivaroxaban 10 mg OD for 14 days or to routine care. The primary efficacy endpoint was the composite of venous thromboembolic events, need of mechanical ventilation, acute myocardial infarction, stroke, acute limb ischemia, or death due to COVID-19 during the first 30 days. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04757857. Findings: Enrollment was prematurely stopped due to sustained reduction in new COVID-19 cases. From September 29th, 2020, through May 23rd, 2022, 660 patients were randomised (median age 61 [Q1-Q3 47–69], 55.7% women). There was no significant difference between rivaroxaban and control in the primary efficacy endpoint (4.3% [14/327] vs 5.8% [19/330], RR 0.74; 95% CI: 0.38–1.46). There was no major bleeding in the control group and 1 in the rivaroxaban group. Interpretation: On light of these findings no decision can be made about the utility of rivaroxaban to improve outcomes in outpatients with COVID-19. Metanalyses data provide no evidence of a benefit of anticoagulant prophylaxis in outpatients with COVID-19. These findings were the result of an underpowered study, therefore should be interpreted with caution. Funding: COALITION COVID-19 Brazil and Bayer S.A.

Resumo Fundamento Estudos anteriores revelaram alto risco de eventos tromboembólicos arteriais e venosos como consequência de danos virais diretos do SARS-CoV-2 em células endoteliais e um meio procoagulante devido ao aumento de biomarcadores como o D-dímero, fibrinogênio, fator VIII. Foram realizados ensaios controlados randomizados de terapias antitrombóticas em pacientes internados, no entanto, poucos estudos avaliaram o papel da tromboprofilaxia no ambiente ambulatorial. Objetivo Avaliar se a profilaxia antitrombótica com rivaroxabana reduz o risco de eventos trombóticos venosos ou arteriais, suporte ventilatório invasivo e morte em pacientes ambulatoriais com COVID-19. Métodos O estudo CARE é um ensaio randomizado, aberto, multicêntrico e controlado por rivaroxabana 10 mg uma vez por dia durante 14 dias ou tratamento local padrão isolado, para a prevenção de resultados adversos, registrado no Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04757857). Os critérios de inclusão são adultos com infecção confirmada ou suspeita do SARS-CoV-2, com sintomas leves ou moderados, sem indicação de hospitalização, no prazo de 7 dias após o início dos sintomas e um fator de risco de complicação da COVID-19 (>65 anos, hipertensão, diabetes, asma, doença pulmonar obstrutiva crônica ou outras doenças pulmonares crônicas, tabagismo, imunossupressão ou obesidade). O desfecho primário composto inclui tromboembolismo venoso, necessidade de ventilação mecânica invasiva, eventos cardiovasculares agudos maiores e mortalidade no prazo de 30 dias após a randomização, sendo avaliado segundo o princípio da intenção de tratar. Todos os pacientes assinaram termo de consentimento. Foi estabelecido um nível de significância de 5% para todos os testes estatísticos. Resultados Os principais desfechos trombóticos e hemorrágicos, hospitalizações e mortes serão avaliados centralmente por um comitê de eventos clínicos independente, sob a condição cega para a alocação dos grupos de tratamento. Conclusão O estudo CARE fornecerá informação relevante e contemporânea sobre o possível papel da tromboprofilaxia em pacientes ambulatoriais com COVID-19.

Objective: Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in patients with bipolar disorder. The aim of this study was to evaluate the factors associated with positive coronary calcium score (CCS) in individuals with bipolar disorder type 1. Methods: Patients from the Bipolar Disorder Program at Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Brazil, underwent computed tomography scanning for calcium score measurement. Clinical and sociodemographic variables were compared between patients according to their CCS status: negative (CCS = 0) or positive (CCS > 0). Poisson regression analysis was used to examine the association of CCS with number of psychiatric hospitalizations. Results: Out of 41 patients evaluated, only 10 had a positive CCS. Individuals in the CCS-positive group were older (55.2±4.2 vs. 43.1±10.0 years; p = 0.001) and had more psychiatric hospitalizations (4.7±3.0 vs. 2.6±2.5; p = 0.04) when compared with CCS- negative subjects. The number of previous psychiatric hospitalizations correlated positively with CCS (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Age and number of psychiatric hospitalizations were significantly associated with higher CCS, which might be a potential method for diagnosis and stratification of cardiovascular disease in bipolar patients. There is a need for increased awareness of risk assessment in this population.

Background. Polymorphism of the accessory gene regulator group II (agr) in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is predictive of vancomycin failure therapy. Nevertheless, the impact of group II agr expression on mortality of patients with severe MRSA infections is not well established. Objective. The goal of our study was to evaluate the association between agr polymorphism and all-cause in-hospital mortality among critically ill patients receiving vancomycin for nosocomial MRSA bacteremia. Methods. All patients with documented bacteremia by MRSA requiring treatment in the ICU between May 2009 and November 2011 were included in the study. Cox proportional hazards regression was performed to evaluate whether agr polymorphism was associated with all-cause in-hospital mortality. Covariates included age, APACHE II score, initial C-reactive protein plasma levels, initial serum creatinine levels, vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration, vancomycin serum levels, and time to effective antibiotic administration. Results. The prevalence of group I and group II agr expression was 52.4% and 47.6%, respectively. Bacteremia by MRSA group III or group IV agr was not documented in our patients. The mean APACHE II of the study population was 24.3 (standard deviation 8.5). The overall cohort mortality was 66.6% (14 patients). After multivariate analysis, initial plasma C-reactive protein levels (P=0.01), initial serum creatinine levels (P=0.008), and expression of group II agr (P=0.006) were positively associated with all-cause in-hospital mortality. Patients with bacteremia by MRSA with group II agr expression had their risk of death increased by 12.6 times when compared with those with bacteremia by MRSA with group I agr expression. Conclusion. Group II agr polymorphism is associated with an increase in mortality in critically ill patients with bacteremia by MRSA treated with vancomycin.