- Browse by Author
Browsing by Author "Holt, Daniel B."
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Characteristics of COVID-19 Patients with Bacterial Co-infection Admitted to the Hospital from the Emergency Department in a Large Regional Healthcare System(Wiley, 2021) Lardaro, Thomas; Wang, Alfred Z.; Bucca, Antonino; Croft, Alexander; Glober, Nancy; Holt, Daniel B.; Musey, Paul I., Jr.; Peterson, Kelli D.; Trigonis, Russell A.; Hunter, Benton R.; Emergency Medicine, School of MedicineIntroduction The rate of bacterial coinfection with SARS‐CoV‐2 is poorly defined. The decision to administer antibiotics early in the course of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection depends on the likelihood of bacterial coinfection. Methods We performed a retrospective chart review of all patients admitted through the emergency department with confirmed SARS‐CoV‐2 infection over a 6‐week period in a large healthcare system in the United States. Blood and respiratory culture results were abstracted and adjudicated by multiple authors. The primary outcome was the rate of bacteremia. We secondarily looked to define clinical or laboratory features associated with bacteremia. Results There were 542 patients admitted with confirmed SARS‐CoV‐2 infection, with an average age of 62.8 years. Of these, 395 had blood cultures performed upon admission, with six true positive results (1.1% of the total population). An additional 14 patients had positive respiratory cultures treated as true pathogens in the first 72 h. Low blood pressure and elevated white blood cell count, neutrophil count, blood urea nitrogen, and lactate were statistically significantly associated with bacteremia. Clinical outcomes were not statistically significantly different between patients with and without bacteremia. Conclusions We found a low rate of bacteremia in patients admitted with confirmed SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. In hemodynamically stable patients, routine antibiotics may not be warranted in this population.Item Fluid Resuscitation and Progression to Renal Replacement Therapy in Patients With COVID-19(Elsevier, 2022-02) Holt, Daniel B.; Lardaro, Thomas; Wang, Alfred Z.; Musey, Paul I.; Trigonis, Russell; Bucca, Antonino; Croft, Alexander; Glober, Nancy; Peterson, Kelli; Schaffer, Jason T.; Hunter, Benton R.; Medicine, School of MedicineBackground Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with respiratory symptoms and renal effects. Data regarding fluid resuscitation and kidney injury in COVID-19 are lacking, and understanding this relationship is critical. Objectives To determine if there is an association between fluid volume administered in 24 h and development of renal failure in COVID-19 patients. Methods Retrospective chart review; 14 hospitals in Indiana. Included patients were adults admitted between March 11, 2020 and April 13, 2020 with a positive test for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 within 3 days of admission. Patients requiring renal replacement therapy prior to admission were excluded. Volumes and types of resuscitative intravenous fluids in the first 24 h were obtained with demographics, medical history, and other objective data. The primary outcome was initiation of renal replacement therapy. Logistic regression modeling was utilized in creating multivariate models for determining factors associated with the primary outcome. Results The fluid volume received in the first 24 h after hospital admission was associated with initiation of renal replacement therapy in two different multivariate logistic regression models. An odds ratio of 1.42 (95% confidence interval 1.01–1.99) was observed when adjusting for age, heart failure, obesity, creatinine, bicarbonate, and total fluid volume. An odds ratio of 1.45 (95% confidence interval 1.02–2.05) was observed when variables significant in univariate analysis were adjusted for. Conclusions Each liter of intravenous fluid administered to patients with COVID-19 in the first 24 h of presentation was independently associated with an increased risk for initiation of renal replacement therapy, supporting judicious fluid administration in patients with this disease.Item Incidence of Venous Thromboembolism in Critically Ill Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients Receiving Prophylactic Anticoagulation(Wolters Kluwer, 2020-06-30) Trigonis, Russell A.; Holt, Daniel B.; Yuan, Rebecca; Siddiqui, Asma A.; Craft, Mitchell K.; Khan, Babar A.; Kapoor, Rajat; Rahman, Omar; Medicine, School of MedicineObjectives: One of the defining features of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 infection has been high rates of venous thromboses. The present study aimed to describe the prevalence of venous thromboembolism in critically ill patients receiving different regimens of prophylactic anticoagulation. Design: Single-center retrospective review using data from patients with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 requiring intubation. Setting: Tertiary-care center in Indianapolis, IN, United States. Patients: Patients hospitalized at international units Health Methodist Hospital with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 requiring intubation between March 23, 2020, and April 8, 2020, who underwent ultrasound evaluation for venous thrombosis. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: A total of 45 patients were included. Nineteen of 45 patients (42.2%) were found to have deep venous thrombosis. Patients found to have deep venous thrombosis had no difference in time to intubation (p = 0.97) but underwent ultrasound earlier in their hospital course (p = 0.02). Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores were similar between the groups on day of intubation and day of ultrasound (p = 0.44 and p = 0.07, respectively). d-dimers were markedly higher in patients with deep venous thrombosis, both for maximum value and value on day of ultrasound (p < 0.01 for both). Choice of prophylactic regimen was not related to presence of deep venous thrombosis (p = 0.35). Ultrasound evaluation is recommended if d-dimer is greater than 2,000 ng/mL (sensitivity 95%, specificity 46%) and empiric anticoagulation considered if d-dimer is greater than 5,500 ng/mL (sensitivity 53%, specificity 88%). Conclusions: Deep venous thrombosis is very common in critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019. There was no difference in incidence of deep venous thrombosis among different pharmacologic prophylaxis regimens, although our analysis is limited by small sample size. d-dimer values are elevated in the majority of these patients, but there may be thresholds at which screening ultrasound or even empiric systemic anticoagulation is indicated.