Steroids for sepsis: yes, no or maybe

Intranasal steroid use and COVID-19 mortality among patients with asthma and COPD: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Systemic corticosteroids have been widely used for treating patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. Inhaled corticosteroids may have a protective effect for treating acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19); however, little is known about the potential effect of intranasal corticosteroids (INCS) on COVID-19 outcomes and severity.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of prior long-term INCS exposure on COVID-19 mortality among patients with chronic respiratory disease and in the general population.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted. Cox regression models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the association between INCS exposure and all-cause and COVID-19 mortality, adjusted by age, sex, deprivation, exacerbations in the last year, and comorbidities.

RESULTS

Exposure to INCS did not have a significant association with COVID-19 mortality among the general population or cohorts with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or asthma, with HRs of 0.8 (95% CI, 0.6-1.0, P = .06), 0.6 (95% CI, 0.3-1.1, P = .1), and 0.9 (95% CI, 0.2-3.9, P = .9), respectively. Exposure to INCS was, however, significantly associated with reduction in all-cause mortality in all groups, which was 40% lower (HR, 0.6 [95% CI, 0.5-0.6, P < .001]) among the general population, 30% lower (HR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.6-0.8, P < .001) among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and 50% lower (HR, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.3-0.7, P = .003) among patients with asthma.

CONCLUSION

The role of INCS in COVID-19 is still unclear, but exposure to INCS does not adversely affect COVID-19 mortality. Further studies are needed to explore the association between their use and inflammatory activation, viral load, angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 gene expression, and outcomes, exploring different types and doses of INCS.

Clinical benefits of inhaled ciclesonide for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 infection: a retrospective study

Background

The successful management of patients infected with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with inhaled ciclesonide has been reported, however few studies have investigated its application among hospitalized patients.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study enrolled all adult patients admitted to our hospital with confirmed COVID-19 infection from May to June 2021. Critical patients who received mechanical ventilation within 24 h after admission and those who started ciclesonide more than 14 days after symptom onset were excluded. The in-hospital mortality rate was compared between those who did and did not receive inhaled ciclesonide.

Results

A total of 269 patients were enrolled, of whom 184 received inhaled ciclesonide and 85 did not. The use of ciclesonide was associated with lower in-hospital mortality (7.6% vs. 23.5%, p = 0.0003) and a trend of shorter hospital stay (12.0 (10.0–18.0) days vs. 13.0 (10.0–25.3) days, p = 0.0577). In subgroup analysis, the use of inhaled ciclesonide significantly reduced mortality in the patients with severe COVID-19 infection (6.8% vs. 50.0%, p < 0.0001) and in those with a high risk of mortality (16.4% vs. 43.2%, p = 0.0037). The use of inhaled ciclesonide also reduced the likelihood of receiving mechanical ventilation in the patients with severe COVID-19 infection. After multivariate analysis, inhaled ciclesonide remained positively correlated with a lower risk of in-hospital mortality (odds ratio: 0.2724, 95% confidence interval: 0.087–0.8763, p = 0.0291).

Conclusions

The use of inhaled ciclesonide in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 infection can reduce in-hospital mortality. Further randomized studies in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 infection are urgently needed.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12890-022-02168-8.

Dexamethasone or methylprednisolone therapy in covid-19 pneumonia: A retrospective and comparative study of 513 cases

Backgrounds

Corona virus disease 19 (Covid-19) affects especially the respiratory tract, and induces lung injury which may progress to the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Various treatment options were tried all over the world, corticosteroids had showed beneficial effects.The Objective of this study, is to compare the safety and efficiency of two corticosteroids: dexamethasone and prednisolone in the treatment of Covid-19 infection.

Methods

This retrospective and comparative study included 513 patients diagnosed with Covid-19 infection and were admitted to intensive care unit of our university hospital center of MOHAMMED VI Oujda from March 1, 2020, to December 31st^, 2020.

Results

In this study, 513 cases were included, 230 patients were received methylprednisolone, and 283 were treated with dexamethasone. The median age in methylprednisolone group was 64 years, and 63 years in the second group treated with dexamethasone. Patients treated with dexamethasone had more critically lesions compared to patients treated with methylprednisolone (67.6%), these patients had a good evolution with a significant reduction of oxygen supplementation, lower use of invasive ventilation and a significant improvement in biological parameters. The difference in outcome between the two groups in terms of mortality was significantly reduced in the second group.

Conclusion

Both steroids are efficient in the management of mild, moderate and severe Covid-19 pneumonia with a clear superiority of dexamethasone especially in severe forms.

Therapeutic Approaches in Modulating the Inflammatory and Immunological Response in Patients With Sepsis, Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome, and Pancreatitis: An Expert Opinion Review

Immunomodulation has long been an adjunct approach in treating critically ill patients with sepsis, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and acute pancreatitis (AP). Hyperactive immune response with immunopathogenesis leads to organ dysfunction and alters the clinical outcomes in critically ill. Though the immune response in the critically ill might have been overlooked, it has gathered greater attention during this novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Modulating hyperactive immune response, the cytokine storm, especially with steroids, has shown to improve the outcomes in COVID-19 patients. In this review, we find that immune response pathogenesis in critically ill patients with sepsis, ARDS, and AP is nearly similar. The use of immunomodulators such as steroids, broad-spectrum serine protease inhibitors such as ulinastatin, thymosin alpha, intravenous immunoglobulins, and therapies such as CytoSorb and therapeutic plasma exchange may help in improving the clinical outcomes in these conditions. As the experience of the majority of physicians in using such therapeutics may be limited, we provide our expert comments regarding immunomodulation to optimize outcomes in patients with sepsis/septic shock, ARDS, and AP.

Effectiveness of adjunctive corticosteroid therapy in patients with severe COVID-19: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of adjunctive corticosteroid use in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains inconclusive.

AIM

To investigate the effectiveness of adjunctive corticosteroid therapy in patients with severe COVID-19.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of the difference in several outcomes between patients with severe COVID-19 who received corticosteroid therapy (the corticosteroid group) and patients with severe COVID-19 who did not receive corticosteroid therapy (the non-corticosteroid group).

RESULTS

Seventy-five patients were included in this study. Of these, 47 patients were in the corticosteroid group and 28 patients were in the non-corticosteroid group. There were no differences between the two groups in the total length of hospital stay, the length of intensive care unit stay, high-flow oxygen days, non-invasive ventilator days, invasive ventilation days, and mortality rate. Total lesion volume ratio, consolidation volume ratio and ground-glass opacity volume ratio in the corticosteroid group decreased significantly on day 14, while those in the non-corticosteroid group did not show a significant decrease.

CONCLUSION

Our results show that adjunctive corticosteroid use did not significantly improve clinical outcomes in severe COVID-19 patients, but might promote the absorption of pulmonary lesions. Larger multicenter randomized controlled studies may be needed to confirm this.

Comparison of efficacy of dexamethasone and methylprednisolone in moderate to severe covid 19 disease

Background

The first case of Infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) were diagnosed in Wuhan, China in 2019. In the first half of 2020 this disease has already converted into a global pandemic. Various treatment options were being tried all over the world. Some studies showed beneficial effects of corticosteroids in covid 19. Hence, we designed this study to compare the effect of two steroids in moderate to severe covid 19 disease.

Objectives

To compare the efficacy and safety of dexamethasone and methylprednisolone in moderate to severe covid 19 disease.

Study Settings

Fatima Memorial Hospital, Lahore and Ganga Ram hospital, Lahore.

Study Design

Quasi experimental, interventional study.

Duration of Study

From 1st June 2020 to 30th June 2020.

Methodology

Sample size and technique: there were total 100 patients; 35 patients received dexamethasone and 65 were kept in methylprednisolone receiving group.

Results

The mean age of patients was 57.91 years in dexamethasone group and 54.86 years in methylprednisolone group. In dexamethasone group, there were 15 (42.8%) critically ill patients who were shifted to Intensive care unit (ICU) and seven (20%) of them needed ventilatory support, whereas in methylprednisolone group 22 (33.8%) had to be admitted in ICU with eight (12.3%) patient needing ventilator. As outcome measure, patients in both the groups showed marked improvement in temperature, oxygen requirement and C-reactive protein (CRP) on day 5. Only six (17.1%) patient died who received dexamethasone while 10 (15.3%) patients died among those receiving methylprednisolone.

Conclusion

Dexamethasone and methylprednisolone both are equally effective in treating moderate to severe covid 19 disease.

Assessment of sublingual microcirculation in critically ill patients: consensus and debate

The main concern in shock and resuscitation is whether the microcirculation can carry adequate oxygen to the tissues and remove waste. Identification of an intact coherence between macro- and microcirculation during states of shock and resuscitation shows a functioning regulatory mechanism. However, loss of hemodynamic coherence between the macro and microcirculation can be encountered frequently in sepsis, cardiogenic shock, or any hemodynamically compromised patient. This loss of hemodynamic coherence results in an improvement in macrohemodynamic parameters following resuscitation without a parallel improvement in microcirculation resulting in tissue hypoxia and tissue compromise. Hand-held vital microscopes (HVMs) can visualize the microcirculation and help to diagnose the nature of microcirculatory shock. Although treatment with the sole aim of recruiting the microcirculation is as yet not realized, interventions can be tailored to the needs of the patient while monitoring sublingual microcirculation. With the help of the newly introduced software, called MicroTools, we believe sublingual microcirculation monitoring and diagnosis will be an essential point-of-care tool in managing shock patients.

Effect of Electroacupuncture on Urea and Creatinine Levels in the Wistar Sepsis Model

Objective: Sepsis is a life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by dysregulation of a host's response to infections. Sepsis-one of the most common contributing factors to acute kidney injuries in critically ill patients-is caused by bacterial endotoxins that lead to excessive production of proinflammatory cytokines. This condition can be treated with few side-effects by using electroacupuncture (EA) to regulate the neuroendocrine immune system to control the production of these cytokines. A number of studies have proven that EA stimulates the vagus nerve to manage inflammatory responses through the cholinergic pathway, slowing sepsis. This study was conducted to investigate the effect of bilateral EA at ST 36 (Zusanli) on rats' renal function by measuring their levels of plasma urea and creatinine. Materials and Methods: This study was a randomized, double-blinded, laboratory experimental post-test, with both subjects and laboratory investigators blinded. Twenty-eight male Wistar rats were divided randomly into 4 groups of 7 rats each: (1) a control group; (2) a sepsis group; (3) an EA + group; and (4) a sham EA + group. EA and sham EA was applied once for 30 minutes before intraperitoneal administration of live Eschericia coli bacteria ATCC 25922. Six hours after administration of the bacteria the rats' plasma urea and creatinine levels were measured. Results: There was a statistically significant difference in the mean levels of urea (P < 0.001, 95% confidence interval (CI): 57.1-76.6) and creatinine (P = 0.005, 95% CI: 0.14-0.62) between the sepsis and control groups. Conclusions: These findings suggest that EA pretreatment at ST 36 attenuated the induced inflammatory bacteria response and mitigated acute kidney injury.

Efficacy and Safety of Corticosteroid Treatment in Patients With COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 is a type of pneumonia caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection that was identified in December 2019. Corticosteroid therapy was empirically used for clinical treatment in the early stage of the disease outbreak; however, data regarding its efficacy and safety are controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of corticosteroid therapy in patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

The PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, and China Science and Technology Journal (VIP) databases were searched for studies. Data on clinical improvement, mortality, virus clearance time, adverse events (AEs), utilization of mechanical ventilation, length of intensive care unit (ICU) hospitalization, and hospital stay were extracted by two authors independently. Study quality was assessed by the Newcastle Ottawa Scale (cohort studies). The pooled data were meta-analyzed using a random effects model, and the quality of evidence was rated using the GRADE approach.

RESULTS

Eleven cohort studies (corticosteroid group vs control group), two retrospective cohort studies (without control group), and seven case studies were identified. A total of 2840 patients were included. Compared with the control treatments, corticosteroid therapy was associated with clinical recovery (RR = 1.30, 95% CI [0.98, 1.72]) and a significantly shortened length of ICU hospitalization (RR = -6.50; 95% CI [-7.63 to -5.37]), but it did not affect the mortality ((RR = 1.59; 95% CI [0.69-3.66], I² = 93.5%), utilization of mechanical ventilation (RR = 0.35; 95% CI [0.10, 1.18]), duration of symptoms (WMD = 1.69; 95% CI [-0.24 to 3.62]) or virus clearance time (RR = 1.01; 95% CI [-0.91 to 2.92], I² = 57%) in COVID-19 patients. Treatment with corticosteroids in patients with COVID-19 may cause mild adverse outcomes. The quality of evidence was low or very low for all outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The findings of our study indicate that corticosteroid therapy is not highly effective, but it appears to improve prognosis and promote clinical recovery in patients with severe COVID-19.