Lung transplantation protocols during the COVID-19 pandemic: a single center experience.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Chan EG
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8107516 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Apr
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Lung transplantation protocols during the COVID-19 pandemic: a single center experience.
Chan Ernest G EG Harano Takashi T Morrell Matthew R MR Sanchez Pablo G PG
Journal of thoracic disease 20210401 4
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundOrthotopic heart transplantation (OHT) recipients may be particularly vulnerable to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). OHT during the pandemic presents unique challenges in terms of feasibility and safety.MethodsChart review was performed for consecutive OHT recipients with COVID-19 and waitlisted patients who underwent OHT from March 1, 2020 to May 15, 2020.ResultsOf the approximately 400 OHT recipients followed at our institution, 22 acquired COVID-19. Clinical characteristics included median age 59 (range, 49-71) years, 14 (63.6%) were male, and median time from OHT to infection was 4.6 (2.5-20.6) years. Symptoms included fever (68.2%), gastrointestinal complaints (55%), and cough (46%). COVID-19 was severe or critical in 5 (23%). All patients had elevated inflammatory biomarkers. Immunosuppression was modified in 85% of patients. Most (n = 16, 86.4%) were hospitalized, 18% required intubation, and 14% required vasopressor support. Five patients (23%) expired. None of the patients requiring intubation survived. Five patients underwent OHT during the pandemic. They were all males, ranging from 30 to 59 years of age. Two were transplanted at United Network of Organ Sharing Status 1 or 2, 1 at Status 3, and 2 at Status 4. All were successfully discharged and are alive without allograft dysfunction or rejection. One contracted mild COVID-19 after the index hospitalization.ConclusionOHT recipients with COVID-19 appear to have outcomes similar to the general population hospitalized with COVID-19. OHT during the pandemic is feasible when appropriate precautions are taken. Further study is needed to guide immunosuppression management in OHT recipients affected by COVID-19.
| S-EPMC7316040 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8441788 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7768215 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The aim of the study was to investigate whether the COVID-19 pandemic caused an increased incidence of complicated appendicitis due to the late presentation when compared to the pre-COVID-19 period. Summary Background Data. Acute appendicitis is one of the most common surgical emergencies. During the coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) pandemic, there has been a reported delay in the presentation of some urgencies to the emergency hospital departments. Methods. A total of 427 patients who underwent surgical treatment due to suspected acute appendicitis from June 2019 to November 2020 were retrospectively included in this study. The patients were divided into two groups: the first (pre-COVID-19) group consisted of patients who had surgery before the onset of COVID-19 pandemic (n = 240), while the second (COVID-19) group consisted of those who were operated during the COVID-19 pandemic (n = 187). The primary outcome of the study was to compare the incidence of perforated appendicitis before and during the onset of COVID-19. Results. Overall, 84 patients (19.67%) were diagnosed with perforated appendicitis. We found a weak significance (p=0.085) in the rate of perforated appendicitis between the pre-COVID-19 (17.08%) and the COVID-19 era (22.99%). Conclusions. We did not observe any significant difference in the complications of acute appendicitis before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in a university hospital in Rijeka. An emergent medical care should always be accessible.
| S-EPMC8894033 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Craniofacial clinics are composed of multidisciplinary teams of providers to deliver coordinated and comprehensive patient care. The coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has disrupted this model, as social distancing guidelines have precluded in-person patient appointments and forced clinics to reconsider their method of care delivery. The University of California, San Francisco, Craniofacial Center has continued to serve patients during this acute period, adopting a hybrid model in which the vast majority of patients are seen through telehealth and a limited number of patients are evaluated in-person. Surveyed patients and families reported high rates of satisfaction, with time savings cited as a particular benefit. Furthermore, most felt comfortable using the video technology required for their appointment. This experience has demonstrated to us that multidisciplinary craniofacial evaluations can be effectively delivered in a telehealth format and has informed our conception of idealized clinic structure. Moving forward, we intend to utilize telehealth visits for selected components of craniofacial evaluations in an effort to maximize efficiency and minimize burden, including addressing barriers to accessing care. Benefits of a hybrid model will include decongestion of clinics and waiting areas, allowing social distancing, addressing clinic space limits, and increased efficiency by eliminating the need for patient and family movement. Demonstration of the safety and efficacy of telehealth visits, combined with regulatory reform that improves reimbursement and allows for appointments across state lines, will be critical for this model to persist beyond the pandemic.
| S-EPMC7544296 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In the early months of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, our center reported a mortality rate of 34% in a cohort of 32 lung transplant recipients with COVID-19 between March and May 2020. Since then, there has been evolving knowledge in prevention and treatments of COVID-19. To evaluate the impact of these changes, we describe the clinical presentation, management, and outcomes of a more recent cohort of lung transplant recipients during the second surge and provide a comparison with our first cohort.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study that included all consecutive lung transplant recipients who tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 between November 2020 and February 28, 2021. We compared baseline demographics and major outcomes between the first- and second-surge cohorts.ResultsWe identified 47 lung transplant recipients (median age, 60; 51% female) who tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 between November 2020 and February 28, 2021. The current cohort had a higher proportion of patients with mild disease (34% versus 16%) and fewer patients with a history of obesity (4% versus 25%). Sixty-six percent (n = 31) required hospitalization and were treated with remdesivir (90%) and dexamethasone (84%). Among those hospitalized, 77% (n = 24) required supplemental oxygen, and 22% (n = 7) required invasive mechanical ventilation. The overall 90-d mortality decreased from 34% to 17% from the first cohort to the second (adjusted odds ratio, 0.26; 95% confidence interval, 0.08-0.85; P = 0.026).ConclusionsAlthough COVID-19-associated mortality rate in lung transplant recipients at our center has decreased over time, COVID-19 continues to be associated with significant morbidity and mortality.
| S-EPMC8966964 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In response to the widespread COVID-19 pandemic, cryopreservation of allogeneic donor apheresis products was implemented to mitigate the challenges of donor availability and product transport. Although logistically beneficial, the impact of cryopreservation on clinical outcomes and graft composition remains unclear. In this study, we compared outcomes and graft composition with cryopreserved versus fresh allografts in the setting of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT). We retrospectively analyzed the clinical outcomes of 30 consecutive patients who received cryopreserved allografts between March and August 2020 and 60 consecutive patients who received fresh allografts before the COVID-19 pandemic. Primary endpoints were hematopoietic engraftment and graft failure (GF), and secondary outcomes were overall survival (OS), relapse-free survival (RFS) and nonrelapse mortality (NRM). In addition, extended immunophenotype analysis was performed on cryopreserved and prospectively collected fresh apheresis samples. Compared with recipients of fresh allografts, both neutrophil and platelet recovery were delayed in recipients of cryopreserved reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) allo-HCT, with a median time to engraftment of 24 days versus 18 days (P = .01) for neutrophils and 27 days versus 18 days (P = .069) for platelets. We observed primary GF in 4 of 30 patients in the cryopreserved cohort (13.3%) versus only 1 of 60 patients (1.7 %) in the fresh cohort (P = .03). Cryopreserved RIC allo-HCT was associated with significantly lower median total, myeloid, and T cell donor chimerism at 1 month. OS and RFS were inferior for cryopreserved graft recipients (hazard ratio [HR], 2.16; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00 to 4.67) and HR, 1.90; 95% CI, 0.95 to 3.79, respectively. Using an extended immunophenotype analysis, we compared 14 samples from the cryopreserved cohort to 6 prospectively collected fresh apheresis donor samples. These analyses showed both a decrease in total cell viability and a significantly reduced absolute number of natural killer cells (CD3-CD56+) in the cryopreserved apheresis samples. In this single-institution study, we found delayed engraftment and a trend toward clinical inferiority of cryopreserved allografts compared with fresh allografts. Further evaluation of the use of cryopreserved allografts and their impact on clinical and laboratory outcomes is warranted.
| S-EPMC8760704 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeCOVID-19 pandemic represents a novel challenge for healthcare systems, and it affects even the daily urological practice. Italy was the first country after China to experience a lock-down period. Our objective is to determine whether, during the COVID-19 period, there has been any modification in urological emergencies.Methodswe retrospectively reviewed urgent urological consultations requested by the Emergency Department (ED) of Padua University Hospital in the 36-day period between February 22nd and March 30th, 2020 and compared them to the prior year cases within a similar time frame (February 24th to March 31st, 2019). Pediatric population (age < 15 years); surgical complications and traumas were excluded to avoid confounding from the reduction of activities during the lockdown. The number of daily consultations, the number of invasive procedures performed and admissions were evaluated, together with the predictors of admission were identified through multivariate logistic regression models.ResultsThe final sample resulted in 107 consultations performed in 2020 and 266 in 2019. A higher number of daily consultations was performed during 2019 (7.33 vs 2.97, p < 0.001). Similarly, the number of daily-invasive procedures was higher in 2019 (p = 0.006), while there was no difference in the number of daily admissions (15 vs 12, p = 0.80). On multivariate analysis, the year (2020 vs 2019, OR 2.714, 95% CI 1.096-6.757, p = 0.0297) was a significant predictor of admission.ConclusionsUrgent urology practice was affected during COVID-19 pandemic with a remarkable reduction in urgent urological consultations; furthermore, a higher risk of admissions was observed in 2020. The consequences of a potentially delayed diagnosis remain to be determined.
| S-EPMC7245166 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Introduction/aimsThe initial surge of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in early 2020 led to widespread cancellation of elective medical procedures in the United States, including nonurgent outpatient and inpatient electrodiagnostic (EDx) studies. As certain regions later showed a downtrend in daily new cases, EDx laboratories have reopened under the guidance of the American Association of Neuromuscular & Electrodiagnostic Medicine (AANEM). In our reopening experience guided by the AANEM, we measured relevant outcomes to determine further workflow adaptations. We aimed to detail our experience and share the lessons learned.MethodsWe reviewed the clinical volumes, billing data, diagnosis distributions, and rates of COVID-19 exposure and transmission among patients and staff in our EDx laboratory during the first 6 months of reopening, starting on June 1, 2020. For context, we detailed the recent AANEM guidelines we adopted at our laboratory, supplemented by other consensus statements.ResultsWe completed 816 outpatient studies from June 1 to December 1, 2020, reaching 97% of the total volume and 97% of total billing compared with the same time period in 2019. The average relative value units per study were similar. There were no major shifts in diagnosis distributions. We completed 10 of 12 requested inpatient studies during this period. There were no known COVID-19 transmissions between patients and staff.DiscussionOur experience suggests that it is possible to safely operate an EDx laboratory under the guidance of the AANEM and other experts, with clinical volume and billing rates comparable to pre-pandemic baselines.
| S-EPMC8441863 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCurrent guidelines recommend a body mass index (BMI) of 16 kg/m2 as the minimum threshold for lung transplantation, despite mixed evidence on outcomes in underweight patients. The current study aimed to describe survival outcomes of underweight patients who underwent lung transplantation at a single center.MethodsThis retrospective observational study included adult lung transplant recipients who underwent transplantation for the first time between March 2010 and March 2022 at King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center and excluded patients with obesity. We defined an underweight status as a BMI <17 kg/m2.ResultsForty-eight of the 202 lung transplant recipients were underweight at the time of surgery. The underweight patients had similar lengths of hospital (p = 0.53) and intensive care unit (p = 0.81) stays compared to other patients. Thirty-three percent of underweight patients had died within 5-year follow-up, compared to 34% of patients who were not underweight. There was no significant difference in mortality risk between underweight patients and patients with normal BMIs in our multivariable Cox regression model (adjusted HR 1.57, 95%CI: 0.77-3.20, p = 0.21). Exploratory analyses revealed that a pre-transplant BMI <13 kg/m2 was associated with a trend towards increased 5-year mortality (adjusted HR 4.00, 95%CI: 0.87-18.35, p = 0.07).ConclusionsOur findings suggest that patients with BMIs of 13-17 kg/m2 may be candidates for lung transplantation. Large multi-center cohort studies are needed to confirm the lower BMI limit for safely transplanting patients.
| S-EPMC10121808 | biostudies-literature