Você pesquisou por y - Critical Care Science (CCS)
You searched for:"Marcelo Basso Gazzana"
We found (4) results for your search.
, , , Abstract
Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva. 2021;33(1):31-37
04-19-2021
DOI 10.5935/0103-507X.20210003
, , , , , The long-term effects caused by COVID-19 are unknown. The present study aims to assess factors associated with health-related quality of life and long-term outcomes among survivors of hospitalization for COVID-19 in Brazil.
This is a multicenter prospective cohort study nested in five randomized clinical trials designed to assess the effects of specific COVID-19 treatments in over 50 centers in Brazil. Adult survivors of hospitalization due to proven or suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection will be followed-up for a period of 1 year by means of structured telephone interviews. The primary outcome is the 1-year utility score of health-related quality of life assessed by the EuroQol-5D3L. Secondary outcomes include all-cause mortality, major cardiovascular events, rehospitalizations, return to work or study, physical functional status assessed by the Lawton-Brody Instrumental Activities of Daily Living, dyspnea assessed by the modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale, need for long-term ventilatory support, symptoms of anxiety and depression assessed by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder assessed by the Impact of Event Scale-Revised, and self-rated health assessed by the EuroQol-5D3L Visual Analog Scale. Generalized estimated equations will be performed to test the association between five sets of variables (1- demographic characteristics, 2- premorbid state of health, 3- characteristics of acute illness, 4- specific COVID-19 treatments received, and 5- time-updated postdischarge variables) and outcomes.
The study protocol was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of all participant institutions. The results will be disseminated through conferences and peer-reviewed journals.
Abstract
Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva. 2021;33(1):31-37
04-19-2021
DOI 10.5935/0103-507X.20210003
, , , , , The long-term effects caused by COVID-19 are unknown. The present study aims to assess factors associated with health-related quality of life and long-term outcomes among survivors of hospitalization for COVID-19 in Brazil.
This is a multicenter prospective cohort study nested in five randomized clinical trials designed to assess the effects of specific COVID-19 treatments in over 50 centers in Brazil. Adult survivors of hospitalization due to proven or suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection will be followed-up for a period of 1 year by means of structured telephone interviews. The primary outcome is the 1-year utility score of health-related quality of life assessed by the EuroQol-5D3L. Secondary outcomes include all-cause mortality, major cardiovascular events, rehospitalizations, return to work or study, physical functional status assessed by the Lawton-Brody Instrumental Activities of Daily Living, dyspnea assessed by the modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale, need for long-term ventilatory support, symptoms of anxiety and depression assessed by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder assessed by the Impact of Event Scale-Revised, and self-rated health assessed by the EuroQol-5D3L Visual Analog Scale. Generalized estimated equations will be performed to test the association between five sets of variables (1- demographic characteristics, 2- premorbid state of health, 3- characteristics of acute illness, 4- specific COVID-19 treatments received, and 5- time-updated postdischarge variables) and outcomes.
The study protocol was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of all participant institutions. The results will be disseminated through conferences and peer-reviewed journals.
Abstract
Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva. 2020;32(4):487-492
11-27-2020
DOI 10.5935/0103-507X.20200082
This study aims to describe the clinical characteristics and predictors of mechanical ventilation of adult inpatients with COVID-19 in a single center.
A retrospective cohort study was performed and included adult inpatients hospitalized from March 17th to May 3rd, 2020, who were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Clinical and demographic characteristics were extracted from electronic medical records.
Overall, 88 consecutive patients were included in this study. The median age of the patients was 63 years (IQR 49 - 71); 59 (67%) were male, 65 (86%) had a college degree and 67 (76%) had at least one comorbidity. Twenty-nine (33%) patients were admitted to the intensive care unit, 18 (20%) patients needed mechanical ventilation, and 9 (10.2%) died during hospitalization. The median length of stay in the intensive care unit and the median duration of mechanical ventilation was 23 and 29.5 days, respectively. An age ≥ 65 years was an independent risk factor for mechanical ventilation (OR 8.4 95%CI 1.3 - 55.6 p = 0.02).
Our findings describe the first wave of Brazilian patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Age was the strongest predictor of respiratory insufficiency and the need for mechanical ventilation in our population.
Abstract
Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva. 2020;32(4):487-492
11-27-2020
DOI 10.5935/0103-507X.20200082
This study aims to describe the clinical characteristics and predictors of mechanical ventilation of adult inpatients with COVID-19 in a single center.
A retrospective cohort study was performed and included adult inpatients hospitalized from March 17th to May 3rd, 2020, who were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Clinical and demographic characteristics were extracted from electronic medical records.
Overall, 88 consecutive patients were included in this study. The median age of the patients was 63 years (IQR 49 - 71); 59 (67%) were male, 65 (86%) had a college degree and 67 (76%) had at least one comorbidity. Twenty-nine (33%) patients were admitted to the intensive care unit, 18 (20%) patients needed mechanical ventilation, and 9 (10.2%) died during hospitalization. The median length of stay in the intensive care unit and the median duration of mechanical ventilation was 23 and 29.5 days, respectively. An age ≥ 65 years was an independent risk factor for mechanical ventilation (OR 8.4 95%CI 1.3 - 55.6 p = 0.02).
Our findings describe the first wave of Brazilian patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Age was the strongest predictor of respiratory insufficiency and the need for mechanical ventilation in our population.
, Abstract
Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva. 2020;32(2):166-196
07-13-2020
DOI 10.5935/0103-507X.20200039
, , , Different therapies are currently used, considered, or proposed for the treatment of COVID-19; for many of those therapies, no appropriate assessment of effectiveness and safety was performed. This document aims to provide scientifically available evidence-based information in a transparent interpretation, to subsidize decisions related to the pharmacological therapy of COVID-19 in Brazil.
A group of 27 experts and methodologists integrated a task-force formed by professionals from the Brazilian Association of Intensive Care Medicine (Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira - AMIB), the Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases (Sociedad Brasileira de Infectologia - SBI) and the Brazilian Society of Pulmonology and Tisiology (Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia - SBPT). Rapid systematic reviews, updated on April 28, 2020, were conducted. The assessment of the quality of evidence and the development of recommendations followed the GRADE system. The recommendations were written on May 5, 8, and 13, 2020.
Eleven recommendations were issued based on low or very-low level evidence. We do not recommend the routine use of hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, azithromycin, lopinavir/ritonavir, corticosteroids, or tocilizumab for the treatment of COVID-19. Prophylactic heparin should be used in hospitalized patients, however, no anticoagulation should be provided for patients without a specific clinical indication. Antibiotics and oseltamivir should only be considered for patients with suspected bacterial or influenza coinfection, respectively.
So far no pharmacological intervention was proven effective and safe to warrant its use in the routine treatment of COVID-19 patients; therefore such patients should ideally be treated in the context of clinical trials. The recommendations herein provided will be revised continuously aiming to capture newly generated evidence.
Abstract
Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva. 2020;32(2):166-196
07-13-2020
DOI 10.5935/0103-507X.20200039
, , , Different therapies are currently used, considered, or proposed for the treatment of COVID-19; for many of those therapies, no appropriate assessment of effectiveness and safety was performed. This document aims to provide scientifically available evidence-based information in a transparent interpretation, to subsidize decisions related to the pharmacological therapy of COVID-19 in Brazil.
A group of 27 experts and methodologists integrated a task-force formed by professionals from the Brazilian Association of Intensive Care Medicine (Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira - AMIB), the Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases (Sociedad Brasileira de Infectologia - SBI) and the Brazilian Society of Pulmonology and Tisiology (Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisiologia - SBPT). Rapid systematic reviews, updated on April 28, 2020, were conducted. The assessment of the quality of evidence and the development of recommendations followed the GRADE system. The recommendations were written on May 5, 8, and 13, 2020.
Eleven recommendations were issued based on low or very-low level evidence. We do not recommend the routine use of hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, azithromycin, lopinavir/ritonavir, corticosteroids, or tocilizumab for the treatment of COVID-19. Prophylactic heparin should be used in hospitalized patients, however, no anticoagulation should be provided for patients without a specific clinical indication. Antibiotics and oseltamivir should only be considered for patients with suspected bacterial or influenza coinfection, respectively.
So far no pharmacological intervention was proven effective and safe to warrant its use in the routine treatment of COVID-19 patients; therefore such patients should ideally be treated in the context of clinical trials. The recommendations herein provided will be revised continuously aiming to capture newly generated evidence.
Abstract
Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva. 2013;25(1):12-16
04-23-2013
DOI 10.1590/S0103-507X2013000100004
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes for patients with lung cancer admitted to intensive care units and assess their clinical and demographic profiles. METHODS: Retrospective, analytical, observational study, wherein the outcomes for patients diagnosed with lung cancer admitted to the intensive care unit of university hospital from January 2010 until February 2011 were evaluated. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients' medical records were included. Twenty-six (76.5%) patients received some type of ventilatory support, of whom 21 (61.8%) used invasive mechanical ventilation and 11 (32.4%) used noninvasive ventilation at some point during their stay at the intensive care unit. Regarding mortality, 12 (35.3%) patients died during hospitalization at the intensive care unit, totaling 15 (44.1%) deaths during the entire hospitalization period; 19 (55.9%) patients were discharged from the hospital. The analysis of the variables showed that the patients who died had remained on invasive mechanical ventilation for a longer period 5.0 (0.25 to 15.0) days than the survivors (1.0 (0 to 1.0) days) (p=0.033) and underwent dialysis during their stay at the intensive care unit (p=0.014). CONCLUSIONS: The mortality of patients with lung cancer admitted to the intensive care unit is associated with the time spent on invasive mechanical ventilation and the need for dialysis.
Abstract
Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva. 2013;25(1):12-16
04-23-2013
DOI 10.1590/S0103-507X2013000100004
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes for patients with lung cancer admitted to intensive care units and assess their clinical and demographic profiles. METHODS: Retrospective, analytical, observational study, wherein the outcomes for patients diagnosed with lung cancer admitted to the intensive care unit of university hospital from January 2010 until February 2011 were evaluated. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients' medical records were included. Twenty-six (76.5%) patients received some type of ventilatory support, of whom 21 (61.8%) used invasive mechanical ventilation and 11 (32.4%) used noninvasive ventilation at some point during their stay at the intensive care unit. Regarding mortality, 12 (35.3%) patients died during hospitalization at the intensive care unit, totaling 15 (44.1%) deaths during the entire hospitalization period; 19 (55.9%) patients were discharged from the hospital. The analysis of the variables showed that the patients who died had remained on invasive mechanical ventilation for a longer period 5.0 (0.25 to 15.0) days than the survivors (1.0 (0 to 1.0) days) (p=0.033) and underwent dialysis during their stay at the intensive care unit (p=0.014). CONCLUSIONS: The mortality of patients with lung cancer admitted to the intensive care unit is associated with the time spent on invasive mechanical ventilation and the need for dialysis.