Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Clinical course and outcomes of critically ill COVID-19 patients in two successive pandemic waves

Athanasios Chalkias, Ioannis Pantazopoulos, Nikolaos Papagiannakis, Anargyros Skoulakis, Eleni Laou, Konstantina Kolonia, Nicoletta Ntalarizou, Dimitrios Ragias, Christos Kampolis, Luis García de Guadiana Romualdo, Konstantinos Tourlakopoulos, Athanasios Pagonis, Salim S Hayek, Jesper Eugen-Olsen, Konstantinos Gourgoulianis, Eleni Arnaoutoglou
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.02.26.21251848
Athanasios Chalkias
1University of Thessaly, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, Larisa, Greece
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: thanoschalkias@yahoo.gr
Ioannis Pantazopoulos
2University of Thessaly, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine, Larisa, Greece
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Nikolaos Papagiannakis
3st, Athens, Greece
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Anargyros Skoulakis
1University of Thessaly, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, Larisa, Greece
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Eleni Laou
1University of Thessaly, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, Larisa, Greece
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Konstantina Kolonia
1University of Thessaly, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, Larisa, Greece
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Nicoletta Ntalarizou
1University of Thessaly, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, Larisa, Greece
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Dimitrios Ragias
1University of Thessaly, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, Larisa, Greece
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Christos Kampolis
4Hippokrateion University Hospital, Department of Emergency Medicine, Athens, Greece
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Luis García de Guadiana Romualdo
5Hospital Universitario Santa Lucía, Laboratory Medicine Department, Cartagena, Spain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Konstantinos Tourlakopoulos
6University of Thessaly, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Respiratory Medicine, Larisa, Greece
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Athanasios Pagonis
6University of Thessaly, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Respiratory Medicine, Larisa, Greece
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Salim S Hayek
7University of Michigan, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jesper Eugen-Olsen
8Copenhagen University Hospital Hvidovre, Department of Clinical Research, Hvidovre, Denmark
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Konstantinos Gourgoulianis
6University of Thessaly, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Respiratory Medicine, Larisa, Greece
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Eleni Arnaoutoglou
1University of Thessaly, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, Larisa, Greece
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Supplementary material
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Rationale The progress of COVID-19 from moderate to severe may be precipitous, while the heterogenous characteristics of the disease pose challenges to the management of these patients.

Objectives To characterize the clinical course and outcomes of critically ill patients with COVID-19 during two successive waves.

Methods We leveraged the multi-center SuPAR in Adult Patients With COVID-19 (SPARCOL) study and collected data from consecutive patients requiring admission to the intensive care unit from April 1st to December 31st, 2020.

Measurements and Main Results Of 252 patients, 81 (32%) required intubation and mechanical ventilation. Of them, 17 (20.9%) were intubated during the first wave, while 64 (79%) during the second wave. The most prominent difference between the two waves was the overall survival (first wave 58.9% vs. second wave 15.6%, adjusted p-value=0.006). This difference is reflected in the prolonged hospitalization during the first wave. The mean ICU length of stay (19.1 vs. 11.7 days, p=0.022), hospital length of stay (28.5 vs. 17.1 days, p=0.012), and days on ventilator (16.7 vs. 11.5, p=0.13) were higher during the first wave. A significant difference between the two waves was the development of bradycardia. In the first wave, 2 (11.7%) patients developed sinus bradycardia only after admission to the intensive care unit, while in the second wave, 63 (98.4%) patients developed sinus bradycardia during hospitalization.

Conclusions Survival of critically ill patients with COVID-19 was significantly lower during the second wave. The majority of these patients developed sinus bradycardia during hospitalization.

Introduction

Although several months have been passed after the inception of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, the global numbers of critically ill patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are increasing in many European countries. The progress of the disease from moderate to severe may be precipitous requiring life-sustaining interventions and admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) (1,2). For example, in the early stages of the disease, patients may be characterized by mild hypoxemia and a hyperdynamic circulatory state with high cardiac index (3), but as the disease progresses, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), high left ventricular filling pressure, and heart failure may ensue (4,5).

The heterogenous characteristics of COVID-19 pose challenges to the management of these patients (6). Intubation and mechanical ventilation may improve outcome, but may aggravate lung injury and induce circulatory derangement as well. Of note, the 24-h mortality after tracheal intubation has been reported 2-10.4% (7,8), but the effects of peri-intubation interventions are largely unknown and may differ between outbreaks. In addition, a range of multiorgan complications following COVID-19 infection may develop and further aggravate the clinical course and prognosis (9).

To better describe the clinical course and outcomes of critically ill patients with COVID-19, we leveraged the multi-center SuPAR in Adult Patients With COVID-19 (SPARCOL) study to assess the clinical characteristics and interventions used in patients requiring ICU admission during the two COVID-19 spikes.

Materials and methods

The SuPAR in Adult Patients With COVID-19 study

The SuPAR in Adult Patients With COVID-19 is an ongoing multi-center observational study (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04590794) which primary purpose is to characterize levels of biomarker soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR) and its association with respiratory complications, admission to ICU, organ injury, and survival of patients with COVID-19. Participating centers include: University of Thessaly, Larisa, Greece; the Hippokration University Hospital, Athens, Greece; the Evangelismos University Hospital, Athens, Greece; and the University of Copenhagen at Hvidovre, Denmark. Ethical approval was provided by the Ethical Committee of the University Hospital of Larisa (IRB no. 17543), Larisa, Greece on 24 April 2020. The study was performed according to national and international guidelines. Written informed consent was obtained from the patients.

Inclusion criteria for this study were: (1) adult (≥18 years old) patients hospitalized primarily for COVID-19; (2) a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection diagnosed through reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction test of nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal samples; (3) at least one blood sample collected at admission and stored for biomarker testing; and (4) admission to ICU.

Study design and outcomes definitions

For the purpose of this study, we collected data from consecutive patients hospitalized for COVID-19 (n=252) during the period of April 1st to December 31st, 2020, the date the database was locked for the purpose of this analysis. Furthermore, we divided the study period into two smaller ones according to the duration of the two COVID-19 waves in most European countries (March 2020 - July 2020 and August 2020 - December 2020).

Local investigators screened and reported all intubations occurring in the emergency department, ICU, and wards during the study period. Manual chart review was used to gather details of the demographics and past medical history, peri-intubation period, laboratory studies, ICU course, and outcomes. All patients were followed until the 30th day post-discharge or death. We excluded from this analysis patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection who were not primarily admitted for COVID-19, patients with incomplete data, patients with pre-existing severe cardiac or respiratory disease, such as heart failure, more than mild chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or pulmonary vascular disease, patients with pacemaker or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, and patients who underwent intubation following a cardiac arrest.

The primary aim of the study was to assess the differences in the clinical characteristics and outcome of critically ill patients with COVID-19 requiring ICU admission between the two waves. Secondary aims were to evaluate the incidence and nature of major complications during hospitalization, including intubation-related major complications, and characterize levels of various inflammatory biomarkers and their association with outcomes of patients with COVID-19. Intubation-related complications were defined as the occurrence of at least one of the following events: (a) aggravation of hypoxemia (defined as SpO2<80% or by a decrease in the pre-induction SpO2 value of more than 20%); (b) severe cardiovascular collapse [systolic arterial pressure (SAP)<65 mmHg recorded once or SAP <90 mmHg for >30 minutes or new need/increase of vasopressor/inotrope support and/or fluid load > 15 ml/kg); (c) cardiac arrhythmia; (d) cardiac arrest; (e) other outcomes (incidence of difficult intubation, ‘cannot intubate cannot oxygenate’ scenario, emergency front of neck airway, esophageal intubation, dental injury or airway injury, pneumothorax, pneumomediastinum, subcutaneous emphysema, or aspiration of gastric contents).

We followed the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement guidelines for observational cohort studies (10).

Data collection and monitoring

The data collected included details at presentation, past medical history, home medications, hospitalization course, and outcomes. Laboratory testing included general blood count; biochemical profile including levels of BUN, creatinine, protein, albumin, high-sensitive C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), ferritin, D-Dimer, and lactate dehydrogenase; arterial blood gases; and suPAR levels at admission. All serum samples were obtained on admission to hospital, before any treatment or non-invasive/invasive ventilation. The data analysis was based on predefined data points on a prospective data collection form. The authors and laboratory technicians were blinded to clinical data and measurements until the end of the study and all data were analyzed. Also, an independent data and safety monitoring research staff monitored safety, ethical, and scientific aspects of the study, while an independent enrollment research staff was responsible for exclusion of all patients not meeting inclusion criteria.

Statistical analysis

Statistical analysis was performed using R v4.0. The non-parametric Mann-Whitney test was used to observe differences between numerical observations in the first and second wave. Additionally, the chi-square test of independence was applied to the categorical observations. In both cases, the Benjamini–Hochberg false discovery rate correction was applied in the resulting P values to account for the multiple number of tests. Adjusted p-values less than 0.05 were deemed significant. Spearman’s rho coefficient was used for linear correlation. To assess the impact of the variables of interest (summarized in Table 5) to overall survival, we have fitted a logistic regression statistical model with survival as the dependent variable and the other variables as independent variables. For each variable the respective odds ratio and p-value was computed. No adjustment was applied in the resulting p-values from this model.

Results

During the period April 1st to December 31st, 252 consecutive patients were hospitalized for COVID-19 and 81 (32%) required intubation and mechanical ventilation and were included in the study. Of them, 17 (20.9%) were intubated during the first wave, while 64 (79%) during the second wave. Their demographic and clinical characteristics are presented in Tables 1 and 2.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Demographics and clinical characteristics at presentation

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

Medical history of study population

A significant difference between the two waves was the development of bradycardia after admission. In the first wave, 2 (11.7%) patients developed sinus bradycardia only after ICU admission (at the 14th and 28th day, respectively), while in the second wave, 63 (98.4%) patients developed sinus bradycardia before admission to ICU (Fig. 1). In the second wave, the average time for development of bradycardia was 5 and 10 days from admission and onset of symptoms, respectively. In all patients, bradycardia developed without clinically detectable myocardial necrosis, while none of them was receiving drugs inducing bradycardia, such as hydroxychloroquine, moxifloxacin, azithromycin, or remdesivir. In all patients, bradycardia was diagnosed and monitored with serial electrocardiograms, cardiac telemetry, and/or continuous electrocardiography.

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
Figure 1.

The incidence of bradycardia during the two waves.

Peri-intubation period

Oxygen administration during laryngoscopy was used in both waves, with high-flow nasal cannula being the preferred method during the second one (p<0.001). However, oxygen administration during laryngoscopy did not seem to prevent desaturation during or after intubation (p=0.53). Peri-intubation characteristics and complications are presented in Table 3, as well as in Tables E1 and E2 in the online data supplement. No difference in overall survival (p=0.85) and risk of developing any post-intubation complications (p=0.28) were found in patients intubated using rapid vs. delayed sequence intubation.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table 3.

Post-intubation complications (within 30 minutes after endotracheal tube placement confirmation)

Clinical course and outcome after admission to ICU

The most prominent difference between the two waves was the overall survival (first wave 58.9% vs. second wave 15.6%, adjusted p-value=0.006). This difference is reflected in the prolonged hospitalization during the first wave. The mean ICU length of stay during the first and second wave was 19.1 and 11.7 days (p=0.022), respectively. Accordingly, the mean hospital length of stay was 28.5 and 17.1 days (p=0.012), respectively, while the number of days on ventilator were also greater in the first wave (16.7 vs. 11.5, p=0.13) (Table 4). In multivariable analysis, only increasing age was associated with mortality (Table 5).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table 4.

Main outcomes of the study

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table 5.

Multivariable analysis of the association between patient characteristics and survival

Patient characteristics and disease progression after admission to the ICU are presented in Tables E3-E7 in the online data supplement. Vasoactive drugs were administered in both waves, but the doses of isoprenaline and norepinephrine were higher during the second wave (Tables E8, E9, and Figure E4 in the online data supplement). The incidence of complications after admission to the ICU was higher in the second wave, but not statistically significant (59% vs. 75%, p=0.3114) (see Table E10 in the online data supplement). We found no differences in acute coronary syndromes (23.5% vs. 9.3%, p=0.245) and ventilator-associated pneumonia (29.4% vs. 15.6%, p= 0.342) during ICU stay between patients of the first and second wave, respectively. The causes of death during the first wave were respiratory failure and sepsis (n=3). During the second wave, the most common causes of death were respiratory failure and multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) (n=49).

Biomarkers of inflammation

In total, 66 (81.4%) patients had suPAR ≥ 5 ng/ml and 52 (64.2%) patients had suPAR ≥ 6 ng/ml. Mean suPAR was higher in the second wave, but after p-value adjustment, the difference between the two waves was statistically non-significant (7.33 vs. 9.3, p=0.023, adjusted p=0.1). We conducted a further analysis after dividing the patients into two subgroups, survivors vs. non-survivors, and found a positive correlation between suPAR and ICU length of stay in survivors (rho = 0.225, p=0.33). In addition, we found a statistically significant negative correlation between suPAR and ICU length of stay (rho= - 0.322, p=0.011) among non-survivors (Fig. 2).

Figure 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
Figure 2.

Correlation between suPAR and ICU length of stay in survivors (rho = 0.225, p=0.33) and non-survivors (rho= - 0.322, p=0.011).

Lower high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) levels at presentation were associated with better survival (unadjusted p=0.034) (see Figure E1 in the online data supplement), but in multivariate analysis, hs-CRP was not associated with outcome. Ferritin at admission did not differ between the first and second wave, but lower ferritin levels were associated with prolonged days on ventilator and hospital stay (unadjusted p=0.033 and 0.026, respectively) (see Figures E2 and E3 in the online data supplement).

Discussion

In this multicenter observational study, the most prominent finding was the difference in the severity of the disease and in overall survival between the first and second wave. Another significant characteristic of the second wave was the development of sinus bradycardia during hospitalization without clinically detectable myocardial necrosis nor being induced by drugs, indicating involvement of cardiac conduction system with SARS-CoV-2 infection that did not progress in parallel with pulmonary abnormalities (5).

The ICU mortality rate among patients with COVID-19 has been reported to be 30.6%, although it may increase up to 93% in mechanically ventilated patients with ARDS (11). In our study, the majority of critically ill patients was admitted during the second wave, with mortality being more than doubled (84.4% vs. 41.1%) despite the comparable patient characteristics between the two outbreak waves. This is the first report on mortality during the second wave in Greece, and is consistent with the upsurge in COVID-19 witnessed in Europe since September 2020 (12). Our findings are in contrast to studies from other countries reporting a lower disease severity and/or mortality in the second wave (13), but the degree of hypoxemia in our patients was among the most severe of those reported worldwide (1,4,7,8,13). Our results confirm that the risk of severe adverse outcomes and death in SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals shows extreme stratification according to age, which may improve understanding of the disease and patient management (14).

Other settings in our country have reported a lower mortality (32%) for overall ICU admissions during the first wave, highlighting the effects of an overburdened medical system on mortality rates rather than the severity of the disease per se (15). However, in a recently published Swedish registry-based cohort study of patients admitted from 6 March to 6 May 2020, the ICU mortality was even lower (23.1%) (16). The healthcare system in Sweden has never been overwhelmed, but until 10 November 2020 they reported one of the highest numbers of COVID-19 deaths per inhabitant globally (17). Therefore, the increased severity and mortality during the second wave in our study could be attributed to a more dangerous SARS-CoV-2 variant (18), which may have been introduced and transmitted regionally long before the first relevant announcement by the Hellenic National Organization for Public Health on December 23, 2020 (19). Continued community-based transmission of the European or other strains has been reported in several populations and may result in unknown mutations that are associated with severe disease, while they are usually identified much later from the peak of an outbreak (20). This is a major issue in countries like ours, which followed a strategy focused hard lockdowns and on hospital preparedness but failed to reinforce primary/community care and epidemiological surveillance (21,22).

A striking finding was the development of sinus bradycardia in 98.4% of the patients of the second wave without clinically detectable myocardial necrosis or after treatment with medications affecting heart rate. The average time for development of bradycardia was 5 and 10 days from admission and onset of symptoms, respectively (23), which is significantly shorter compared to other cohorts (5). The development of bradycardia in our patients may reflect the activation of the cholinergic nervous system in an effort to regulate the inflammatory response (24). However, recent evidence suggest that SARS-CoV-2 S1 protein may bind to nicotinic acetylcholine receptors and adversely affect their function by preventing acetylcholine’s action, causing dysregulation of the cholinergic anti-inflammatory pathway and leading to uncontrolled immune response and cytokine storm (24,25). Heart rate should normally have increased in these patients, but we did not observe such change. The combination of bradycardia and uncontrolled inflammatory response may be a novel clinical manifestation related to a new SARS-CoV-2 variant. In addition, the absence of myocardial necrosis together with the increase in D-Dimer in our patients may indicate an involvement through an uncharacterized pathway. In patients with COVID-19, dysfunctional endothelium may display a hypercoagulant/prothrombotic/pro-oxidant state and impairs microvascular reactivity (26). The latter, together with the increased levels of inflammatory mediators, enhances mechanical stress of cardiomyocytes and metabolic demands of conduction muscle cells, promoting metabolic instability and conduction disorders (23,27,28).

Although we did not find an association between bradycardia and outcome, our sample does not allow for a firm conclusion. Until now, patient characteristics, baseline ECG features, respiratory function, serum biomarkers of inflammation, and myocardial injury have an insufficient discriminatory power to identify subjects at increased risk for the development of new ECG changes (5). Nevertheless, these data suggest an inhibitory influence of the virus on cardiac conduction system and considering the high mortality in our study, we recommend close monitoring of patients with COVID-19 (28). Also, the use of drugs affecting the conduction system of the heart should be avoided in patients with sinus bradycardia or other conduction disorders, while the use of anticholinergics, such as atropine, could inhibit the protective effects of the cholinergic anti-inflammatory pathway.

A typical feature of our patients was the rapid progression to ARDS approximately 10 days after the onset of symptoms. However, time to intubation did not differ significantly between the two waves, although it was longer in the second one. The reasons for this were the concern that early intubation of every hypoxemic patient would be impossible due to the limited ICU capacity and resources, and the possible beneficial effects of avoiding early endotracheal intubation in significantly hypoxemic patients (29). Also, this practice was based in part on evidence from other ICUs showing that a strategy of early intubation was not associated with higher ICU-mortality, fewer ventilator-free days, or fewer ICU-free days than delayed or no intubation (15,30,31). Until now, optimal timing of initiation of invasive mechanical ventilation in COVID-19 patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure remains unknown.

In this cohort, overall survival and post-intubation complications did not differ significantly between rapid and delayed sequence intubation. Critically ill patients with COVID-19 usually have low functional residual capacity and minimal physiological reserve, which can prompt providers to try to secure the airway rapidly without adequate preoxygenation. However, rapid sequence intubation may result in immediate and profound desaturation even after a successful first intubation attempt (32). In patients with respiratory failure, apneic oxygenation has been recommended to prevent desaturation during intubation (33,34), but this technique did not prevent desaturation during or after intubation in our patients (7,8,35). We agree that patients with COVID-19 require detailed planning and strategy for tracheal intubation and therefore, delayed sequence intubation may be a valuable technique for maximizing safety, especially in ward patients with limited staff and equipment availability (8,32). This technique can offer an alternative to rapid sequence intubation in patients who will not tolerate preoxygenation or other peri-intubation procedures. However, the superiority of one technique vs. the other must be investigated in randomized controlled studies. In our study, ICU and hospital length of stay were higher during the first wave. This is attributed mainly to the severity of COVID-19 and the increased mortality during the second wave, and less to the differences in complications between the two waves. For example, the percentage of ICU patients who were diagnosed with ventilator-associated pneumonia in our study is lower when compared to other studies (36,37). Considering that the mean number of days on ventilator was higher in the first wave, the most possible explanation for the higher (but not statistically significant) prevalence of ventilator-associated pneumonia during the second wave may be the increased predisposition due to the increased severity of lung damage caused by COVID-19 (38). Also, the cumulative risk of secondary sepsis increases with ICU stay (38), and bacterial DNA and toxins have been discovered in all severely ill patients with COVID-19 (39,40). Until now, clinically relevant sepsis and septic shock have been reported in up to 60% of cases, which is in accordance with our results (first wave 47%, second wave 50%) (41,42). On the other hand, respiratory failure and MODS were key determinants of survival during the second wave. MODS was related to the direct and indirect pathogenic features of SARS-CoV-2 and was induced by the hyperinflammation and humoral and cell-mediated immune response (42). However, hs-CRP was not an independent predictor of disease severity in our study.

suPAR has been shown to provide important indications for required early admission and treatment in non-COVID-19 patients; the TRIAGE III trial including 4420 patients reported that suPAR ranged between 2.6 and 4.7 ng/ml in 30-day survivors and between 6.7 and 11.8 ng/ml in 30-day non-survivors (43). The dysregulation of the urokinase plasminogen activator/urokinase plasminogen activator receptor system may be also a main cause of organ failure in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection and especially in those with chronic inflammation (44). A suPAR level ≥ 6 ng/ml has been independently associated with the development of severe respiratory failure in patients with COVID-19 (45–47), which is in agreement with our results. Moreover, we observed for the first time that a higher suPAR at presentation was correlated with earlier death after ICU admission among non-survivors, while a lower suPAR (but still >6 ng/ml) was correlated with prolonged ICU length of stay in critically ill patients who survived. This finding is important because ferritin levels were markedly increased in our patients, but their difference between the two waves did not reach statistical significance. Although ferritin has been repeatedly reported as a potent marker of disease severity (48), a smaller increase in ferritin levels at admission was associated with prolonged days on ventilator and hospital stay, possibly reflecting a reduced immune activation due to the milder form of the disease at that point. Considering that patients with COVID-19 have heterogeneous cytokine profiles, suPAR seems extremely promising as a prognostic marker in those with severe disease and after ICU admission (49,50). Two ongoing large multicenter observational studies whose primary purpose is to characterize levels of suPAR among various biomarkers of inflammation and its association with in-hospital outcomes of patients with COVID-19 are expected to conclude by the end of spring 2021.

The study has several strengths. It is a multicenter study that relied on collection of clinical, laboratory, and outcome data throughout the COVID-19 hospitalization during two successive outbreak waves, capturing a diverse patient population. Data collection was systematic and all patients admitted/intubated during the period April 1st to December 31st were enrolled. Our sample was limited to patients consecutively hospitalized specifically for COVID-19 and without receiving any specific treatment besides dexamethasone, allowing for a better description of the effect of SARS-CoV-2 infection on different organs of the human body. The major limitations of the present study are the relatively small sample and its observational nature. Despite the careful analysis, it is not possible to fully account for all potential confounders and therefore, the study cannot be trusted per se as a basis of clinical decision. However, our findings have significant implications for a better understanding of the epidemiology of COVID-19 and for better planning and organization in the future.

The present study adds to the growing body of research that indicates differences in the severity of COVID-19 and in overall survival between successive outbreak waves. Moreover, it provides additional evidence with respect to the involvement of cardiac conduction system with SARS-CoV-2. These findings may help in the classification of novel phenotypes for informing treatment strategy and for identifying populations that may benefit from early admission to ICU.

Data Availability

Data can be made available upon request through a collaborative process

Funding

None

Conflicts of interest

Jesper Eugen-Olsen is a co-founder, shareholder and CSO of ViroGates A/S and is mentioned inventor on patients on suPAR owned by Copenhagen University Hospital Hvidovre, Denmark. All other authors report no conflicts of interest. Due to protection of sensitive patient data, the data used are not publicly available. Data from SPARCOL can be made available upon request through a collaborative process. Please contact thanoschalkias{at}yahoo.gr for additional information.

Acknowledgements

Nothing to acknowledge

Footnotes

  • Study period updated

References

  1. 1.↵
    Zheng H, Li S, Sun R, Yang H, Chi X, Chen M, Xu L, Deng Q, Li X, Yu J, Wan L, Luo A. Clinical experience with emergency endotracheal intubation in COVID-19 patients in the intensive care units: a single-centered, retrospective, descriptive study. Am J Transl Res 2020;12:6655–6664.
    OpenUrl
  2. 2.↵
    Chalkias A, Barreto EF, Laou E, Kolonia K, Scheetz MH, Gourgoulianis K, Pantazopoulos I, Xanthos T. A Critical Appraisal of the Effects of Anesthetics on Immune-system Modulation in Critically Ill Patients with COVID-19. Clin Ther. (In press)
  3. 3.↵
    Busana M, Schiavone M, Lanfranchi A, Battista Forleo G, Ceriani E, Beatrice Cogliati C, Gasperetti A. Non-invasive hemodynamic profile of early COVID-19 infection. Physiol Rep 2020;8:e14628.
    OpenUrl
  4. 4.↵
    Caravita S, Baratto C, Di Marco F, Calabrese A, Balestrieri G, Russo F, Faini A, Soranna D, Perego GB, Badano LP, Grazioli L, Lorini FL, Parati G, Senni M. Haemodynamic characteristics of COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome requiring mechanical ventilation. An invasive assessment using right heart catheterization. Eur J Heart Fail 2020;22:2228–2237.
    OpenUrl
  5. 5.↵
    Angeli F, Spanevello A, De Ponti R, Visca D, Marazzato J, Palmiotto G, Feci D, Reboldi G, Fabbri LM, Verdecchia P. Electrocardiographic features of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Eur J Intern Med 2020;78:101–106.
    OpenUrl
  6. 6.↵
    Kasal DA, De Lorenzo A, Tibiriçá E. COVID-19 and Microvascular Disease: Pathophysiology of SARS-CoV-2 Infection With Focus on the Renin-Angiotensin System. Heart Lung Circ 2020;29:1596–1602.
    OpenUrl
  7. 7.↵
    de Alencar JCG, Marques B, Marchini JFM, Marino LO, Ribeiro SCDC, Bueno CG, da Cunha VP, Lazar Neto F, Valente FS, Rahhal H, Pereira JBR, Padrão EMH, Wanderley APB, Costa MGP, Brandão Neto RA, Souza HP. First-attempt intubation success and complications in patients with COVID-19 undergoing emergency intubation. J Am Coll Emerg Physicians Open 2020;1:699-705.
    OpenUrl
  8. 8.↵
    Yao W, Wang T, Jiang B, Gao F, Wang L, Zheng H, Xiao W, Yao S, Mei W, Chen X, Luo A, Sun L, Cook T, Behringer E, Huitink JM, Wong DT, Lane-Fall M, McNarry AF, McGuire B, Higgs A, Shah A, Patel A, Zuo M, Ma W, Xue Z, Zhang LM, Li W, Wang Y, Hagberg C, O’Sullivan EP, Fleisher LA, Wei H; collaborators. Emergency tracheal intubation in 202 patients with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China: lessons learnt and international expert recommendations. Br J Anaesth 2020;125:e28–e37.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    Magadum A, Kishore R. Cardiovascular Manifestations of COVID-19 Infection. Cells 2020;9:2508.
    OpenUrl
  10. 10.↵
    von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP; STROBE Initiative. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. BMJ 2007;335:806–808.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  11. 11.↵
    Serafim RB, Póvoa P, Souza-Dantas V, Kalil AC, Salluh JIF. Clinical course and outcomes of critically ill patients with COVID-19 infection: a systematic review. Clin Microbiol Infect 2021;27:47–54.
    OpenUrl
  12. 12.↵
    Nørgaard SK, Vestergaard LS, Nielsen J, Richter L, Schmid D, Bustos N, Braye T, Athanasiadou M, Lytras T, Denissov G, Veideman T, Luomala O, Möttönen T, Fouillet A, Caserio-Schönemann C, An der Heiden M, Uphoff H, Gkolfinopoulou K, Bobvos J, Paldy A, Rotem N, Kornilenko I, Domegan L, O’Donnell J, Donato F, Scortichini M, Hoffmann P, Velez T, England K, Calleja N, van Asten L, Stoeldraijer L, White RA, Paulsen TH, da Silva SP, Rodrigues AP, Klepac P, Zaletel M, Fafangel M, Larrauri A, León I, Farah A, Galanis I, Junker C, Perisa D, Sinnathamby M, Andrews N, O’Doherty MG, Irwin D, Kennedy S, McMenamin J, Adlhoch C, Bundle N, Penttinen P, Pukkila J, Pebody R, Krause TG, Mølbak K. Real-time monitoring shows substantial excess all-cause mortality during second wave of COVID-19 in Europe, October to December 2020. Euro Surveill 2021;26:2002023.
    OpenUrl
  13. 13.↵
    Fan G, Yang Z, Lin Q, Zhao S, Yang L, He D. Decreased Case Fatality Rate of COVID-19 in the Second Wave: A study in 53 countries or regions. Transbound Emerg Dis. (In press)
  14. 14.↵
    Ioannidis JPA. Precision shielding for COVID-19: metrics of assessment and feasibility of deployment. BMJ Glob Health 2021;6:e004614.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  15. 15.↵
    Routsi C, Magira E, Kokkoris S, Siembos I, Vrettou C, Zervakis D, Ischaki E, Malahias S, Sigala I, Asimakos A, Daidou T, Kaltsas P, Douka E, Sotiriou A, Markaki V, Temberikidis P, Koroneos A, Politis P, Mastora Z, Dima E, Tsoutsouras T, Papahatzakis I, Gioni P, Strilakou A, Maragouti A, Mizi E, Kanavou A, Sarri A, Gavrielatou E, Mentzelopoulos S, Kalomenidis I, Papastamopoulos V, Kotanidou A, Zakynthinos S. Hospital Resources May Be an Important Aspect of Mortality Rate among Critically Ill Patients with COVID-19: The Paradigm of Greece. J Clin Med 2020;9:3730
    OpenUrl
  16. 16.↵
    Chew MS, Blixt PJ, Åhman R, Engerström L, Andersson H, Berggren RK, Tegnell A, McIntyre S. National outcomes and characteristics of patients admitted to Swedish intensive care units for COVID-19: A registry-based cohort study. Eur J Anaesthesiol. (In press)
  17. 17.↵
    Modig K, Ahlbom A, Ebeling M. EXCESS MORTALITY FROM COVID-19. WEEKLY EXCESS DEATH RATES BY AGE AND SEX FOR SWEDEN AND ITS MOST AFFECTED REGION. Eur J Public Health 2020;31:17–22.
    OpenUrl
  18. 18.↵
    I. Spanakis N, Kassela K, Dovrolis N, Bampali M, Gatzidou E, Kafasi A, Froukala E, Stavropoulou A, Lilakos K, Veletza S, Tsiodras S, Tsakris A, Karakasiliotis I. A main event and multiple introductions of SARS-Cov2 initiated the COVID-19 epidemic in Greece. J Med Virol. (In press)
  19. 19.↵
    Press release: Information on the results of the Genomic Surveillance Network for SARS-CoV-2 mutations [cited 2021 Jan 24]. Available from: https://eody.gov.gr/enimerosi-schetika-me-ta-apotelesmata-diktyoy-gonidiomatikis-epitirisis-gia-tis-metallaxeis-toy-sars-cov-2/.
  20. 20.↵
    . Loney T, Khansaheb H, Ramaswamy S, Harilal D, Deesi ZO, Varghese RM, Al Ali AB, Khadeeja A, Al Suwaidi H, Alkhajeh A, AlDabal LM, Uddin M, Al Faresi M, Joshi M, Senok A, Nowotny N, Alsheikh-Ali A, Abou Tayoun A. Genotype-phenotype correlation identified a novel SARS-CoV-2 variant possibly linked to severe disease. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2021. (In press)
  21. 21.↵
    Farsalinos K, Poulas K, Kouretas D, Vantarakis A, Leotsinidis M, Kouvelas D, Docea AO, Kostoff R, Gerotziafas GT, Antoniou MN, Polosa R, Barbouni A, Yiakoumaki V, Giannouchos TV, Bagos PG, Lazopoulos G, Izotov BN, Tutelyan VA, Aschner M, Hartung T, Wallace HM, Carvalho F, Domingo JL, Tsatsakis A. Improved strategies to counter the COVID-19 pandemic: Lockdowns vs. primary and community healthcare. Toxicol Rep 2021;8:1–9.
    OpenUrl
  22. 22.↵
    Thompson HA, Mousa A, Dighe A, Fu H, Arnedo-Pena A, Barrett P, Bellido-Blasco J, Bi Q, Caputi A, Chaw L, De Maria L, Hoffmann M, Mahapure K, Ng K, Raghuram J, Singh G, Soman B, Soriano V, Valent F, Vimercati L, Wee LE, Wong J, Ghani AC, Ferguson NM. SARS-CoV-2 setting-specific transmission rates: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Infect Dis. (In press)
  23. 23.↵
    Hirawat R, Saifi MA, Godugu C. Targeting inflammatory cytokine storm to fight against COVID-19 associated severe complications. Life Sci 2021;267:118923.
    OpenUrl
  24. 24.↵
    Lagoumintzis G, Chasapis CT, Alexandris N, Kouretas D, Tzartos S, Eliopoulos E, Farsalinos K, Poulas K. Nicotinic cholinergic system and COVID-19: In silico identification of interactions between α7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor and the cryptic epitopes of SARS-Co-V and SARS-CoV-2 Spike glycoproteins. Food Chem Toxicol 2021;149:112009.
    OpenUrl
  25. 25.↵
    Alexandris N, Lagoumintzis G, Chasapis CT, Leonidas DD, Papadopoulos GE, Tzartos SJ, Tsatsakis A, Eliopoulos E, Poulas K, Farsalinos K. Nicotinic cholinergic system and COVID-19: In silico evaluation of nicotinic acetylcholine receptor agonists as potential therapeutic interventions. Toxicol Rep 2020;8:73–83.
    OpenUrl
  26. 26.↵
    Dekker RJ, van Thienen JV, Rohlena J, de Jager SC, Elderkamp YW, Seppen J, de Vries CJ, Biessen EA, van Berkel TJ, Pannekoek H, Horrevoets AJ. Endothelial KLF2 links local arterial shear stress levels to the expression of vascular tone-regulating genes. Am J Pathol 2005;167:609–618.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  27. 27.↵
    Nicolás-Ávila JA, Lechuga-Vieco AV, Esteban-Martínez L, Sánchez-Díaz M, Díaz-García E, Santiago DJ, Rubio-Ponce A, Li JL, Balachander A, Quintana JA, Martínez-de-Mena R, Castejón-Vega B, Pun-García A, Través PG, Bonzón-Kulichenko E, García-Marqués F, Cussó L, A-González N, González-Guerra A, Roche-Molina M, Martin-Salamanca S, Crainiciuc G, Guzmán G, Larrazabal J, Herrero-Galán E, Alegre-Cebollada J, Lemke G, Rothlin CV, Jimenez-Borreguero LJ, Reyes G, Castrillo A, Desco M, Muñoz-Cánoves P, Ibáñez B, Torres M, Ng LG, Priori SG, Bueno H, Vázquez J, Cordero MD, Bernal JA, Enríquez JA, Hidalgo A. A Network of Macrophages Supports Mitochondrial Homeostasis in the Heart. Cell 2020;183:94–109.e23.
    OpenUrl
  28. 28.↵
    Moey MYY, Sengodan PM, Shah N, McCallen JD, Eboh O, Nekkanti R, Carabello BA, Naniwadekar AR. Electrocardiographic Changes and Arrhythmias in Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol 2020;13:e009023.
    OpenUrl
  29. 29.↵
    Leone M, Einav S, Chiumello D, Constantin JM, De Robertis E, Abreu MG, Gregoretti C, Jaber S, Maggiore SM, Pelosi P, Sorbello M, Afshari A. Noninvasive respiratory support in the hypoxaemic peri-operative/periprocedural patient: A joint ESA/ESICM guideline. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2020;37:265–279.
    OpenUrl
  30. 30.↵
    Siempos II, Xourgia E, Ntaidou TK, Zervakis D, Magira EE, Kotanidou A, Routsi C, Zakynthinos SG. Effect of Early vs. Delayed or No Intubation on Clinical Outcomes of Patients With COVID-19: An Observational Study. Front Med (Lausanne) 2020;7:614152.
    OpenUrl
  31. 31.↵
    Lee YH, Choi KJ, Choi SH, Lee SY, Kim KC, Kim EJ, Lee J. Clinical Significance of Timing of Intubation in Critically Ill Patients with COVID-19: A Multi-Center Retrospective Study. J Clin Med 2020;9:2847.
    OpenUrl
  32. 32.↵
    Castro de Oliveira BM, de Souza RLP. Advantages of Delayed Sequence Intubation in Selected Patients With COVID-19. Anesth Analg 2020;131:e133–e134.
    OpenUrl
  33. 33.↵
    Sorbello M, El-Boghdadly K, Di Giacinto I, Cataldo R, Esposito C, Falcetta S, Merli G, Cortese G, Corso RM, Bressan F, Pintaudi S, Greif R, Donati A, Petrini F; Società Italiana di Anestesia Analgesia Rianimazione e Terapia Intensiva (SIAARTI) Airway Research Group, and The European Airway Management Society. The Italian coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak: recommendations from clinical practice. Anaesthesia 2020;75:724-732.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  34. 34.↵
    Pantazopoulos I, Daniil Z, Moylan M, Gourgoulianis K, Chalkias A, Zakynthinos S, Ischaki E. Nasal High Flow Use in COPD Patients with Hypercapnic Respiratory Failure: Treatment Algorithm & Review of the Literature. COPD 2020;17:101–111.
    OpenUrl
  35. 35.↵
    Gandhi A, Sokhi J, Lockie C, Ward PA. Emergency Tracheal Intubation in Patients with COVID-19: Experience from a UK Centre. Anesthesiol Res Pract 2020;2020:8816729.
    OpenUrl
  36. 36.↵
    Maes M, Higginson E, Pereira-Dias J, Curran MD, Parmar S, Khokhar F, Cuchet-Lourenço D, Lux J, Sharma-Hajela S, Ravenhill B, Hamed I, Heales L, Mahroof R, Solderholm A, Forrest S, Sridhar S, Brown NM, Baker S, Navapurkar V, Dougan G, Bartholdson Scott J, Conway Morris A. Ventilator-associated pneumonia in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Crit Care 2021;25:25.
    OpenUrl
  37. 37.↵
    Giacobbe DR, Battaglini D, Enrile EM, Dentone C, Vena A, Robba C, Ball L, Bartoletti M, Coloretti I, Di Bella S, Di Biagio A, Brunetti I, Mikulska M, Carannante N, De Maria A, Magnasco L, Maraolo AE, Mirabella M, Montrucchio G, Patroniti N, Taramasso L, Tiseo G, Fornaro G, Fraganza F, Monastra L, Roman-Pognuz E, Paluzzano G, Fiorentino G, Corcione A, Bussini L, Pascale R, Corcione S, Tonetti T, Rinaldi M, Falcone M, Biagioni E, Ranieri VM, Giannella M, De Rosa FG, Girardis M, Menichetti F, Viale P, Pelosi P, Bassetti M. Incidence and Prognosis of Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia in Critically Ill Patients with COVID-19: A Multicenter Study. J Clin Med 2021;10:555.
    OpenUrl
  38. 38.↵
    Søgaard KK, Baettig V, Osthoff M, Marsch S, Leuzinger K, Schweitzer M, Meier J, Bassetti S, Bingisser R, Nickel CH, Khanna N, Tschudin-Sutter S, Weisser M, Battegay M, Hirsch HH, Pargger H, Siegemund M, Egli A. Community-acquired and hospital-acquired respiratory tract infection and bloodstream infection in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia. J Intensive Care 2021;9:10.
    OpenUrl
  39. 39.↵
    Sirivongrangson P, Kulvichit W, Payungporn S, Pisitkun T, Chindamporn A, Peerapornratana S, Pisitkun P, Chitcharoen S, Sawaswong V, Worasilchai N, Kampunya S, Putcharoen O, Thawitsri T, Leelayuwatanakul N, Kongpolprom N, Phoophiboon V, Sriprasart T, Samransamruajkit R, Tungsanga S, Tiankanon K, Lumlertgul N, Leelahavanichkul A, Sriphojanart T, Tantawichien T, Thisyakorn U, Chirathaworn C, Praditpornsilpa K, Tungsanga K, Eiam-Ong S, Sitprija V, Kellum JA, Srisawat N. Endotoxemia and circulating bacteriome in severe COVID-19 patients. Intensive Care Med Exp 2020;8:72.
    OpenUrl
  40. 40.↵
    Buetti N, Ruckly S, de Montmollin E, Reignier J, Terzi N, Cohen Y, Shiami S, Dupuis C, Timsit JF. COVID-19 increased the risk of ICU-acquired bloodstream infections: a case-cohort study from the multicentric OUTCOMEREA network. Intensive Care Med 2021:1–8.
  41. 41.↵
    Bardi T, Pintado V, Gomez-Rojo M, Escudero-Sanchez R, Azzam Lopez A, Diez-Remesal Y, Martinez Castro N, Ruiz-Garbajosa P, Pestaña D. Nosocomial infections associated to COVID-19 in the intensive care unit: clinical characteristics and outcome. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2021:1–8.
  42. 42.↵
    Iwasaki M, Saito J, Zhao H, Sakamoto A, Hirota K, Ma D. Inflammation Triggered by SARS-CoV-2 and ACE2 Augment Drives Multiple Organ Failure of Severe COVID-19: Molecular Mechanisms and Implications. Inflammation 2021;44:13–34.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  43. 43.↵
    Hayek SS, Leaf DE, Samman Tahhan A, Raad M, Sharma S, Waikar SS, Sever S, Camacho A, Wang X, Dande RR, Ibrahim NE, Baron RM, Altintas MM, Wei C, Sheikh-Hamad D, Pan JS, Holliday MW Jr., Januzzi JL, Weisbord SD, Quyyumi AA, Reiser J. Soluble Urokinase Receptor and Acute Kidney Injury. N Engl J Med 2020;382:416–426.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  44. 44.↵
    D’Alonzo D, De Fenza M, Pavone V. COVID-19 and pneumonia: a role for the uPA/uPAR system. Drug Discov Today 2020;25:1528–1534.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  45. 45.↵
    Rovina N, Akinosoglou K, Eugen-Olsen J, Hayek S, Reiser J, Giamarellos-Bourboulis EJ. Soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR) as an early predictor of severe respiratory failure in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Crit Care 2020;24:187.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  46. 46.
    Azam TU, Shadid HR, Blakely P, O’Hayer P, Berlin H, Pan M, Zhao P, Zhao L, Pennathur S, Pop-Busui R, Altintas I, Tingleff J, Stauning MA, Andersen O, Adami ME, Solomonidi N, Tsilika M, Tober-Lau P, Arnaoutoglou E, Keitel V, Tacke F, Chalkias A, Loosen SH, Giamarellos-Bourboulis EJ, Eugen-Olsen J, Reiser J, Hayek SS; International Study of Inflammation in COVID-19. Soluble Urokinase Receptor (SuPAR) in COVID-19-Related AKI. J Am Soc Nephrol 2020;31:2725-2735.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  47. 47.↵
    Huang M, Li L, Shen J, Wang Y, Wang R, Yuan C, Huang M, Jiang L. Plasma levels of the active form of suPAR are associated with COVID-19 severity. Crit Care 2020;24:704.
    OpenUrl
  48. 48.↵
    Mudatsir M, Fajar JK, Wulandari L, Soegiarto G, Ilmawan M, Purnamasari Y, Mahdi BA, Jayanto GD, Suhendra S, Setianingsih YA, Hamdani R, Suseno DA, Agustina K, Naim HY, Muchlas M, Alluza HHD, Rosida NA, Mayasari M, Mustofa M, Hartono A, Aditya R, Prastiwi F, Meku FX, Sitio M, Azmy A, Santoso AS, Nugroho RA, Gersom C, Rabaan AA, Masyeni S, Nainu F, Wagner AL, Dhama K, Harapan H. Predictors of COVID-19 severity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. F1000Res 2020;9:1107.
    OpenUrl
  49. 49.↵
    Geboers DG, de Beer FM, Tuip-de Boer AM, van der Poll T, Horn J, Cremer OL, Bonten MJ, Ong DS, Schultz MJ, Bos LD. Plasma suPAR as a prognostic biological marker for ICU mortality in ARDS patients. Intensive Care Med 2015;41:1281–1290.
    OpenUrl
  50. 50.↵
    Wu X, Hu K, Yu L, Wang H, Long D. Correlation of plasma suPAR expression with disease risk and severity as well as prognosis of sepsis-induced acute respiratory distress syndrome. Int J Clin Exp Pathol 2017;10:11378–11383.
    OpenUrl
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted April 15, 2021.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Clinical course and outcomes of critically ill COVID-19 patients in two successive pandemic waves
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Clinical course and outcomes of critically ill COVID-19 patients in two successive pandemic waves
Athanasios Chalkias, Ioannis Pantazopoulos, Nikolaos Papagiannakis, Anargyros Skoulakis, Eleni Laou, Konstantina Kolonia, Nicoletta Ntalarizou, Dimitrios Ragias, Christos Kampolis, Luis García de Guadiana Romualdo, Konstantinos Tourlakopoulos, Athanasios Pagonis, Salim S Hayek, Jesper Eugen-Olsen, Konstantinos Gourgoulianis, Eleni Arnaoutoglou
medRxiv 2021.02.26.21251848; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.02.26.21251848
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Clinical course and outcomes of critically ill COVID-19 patients in two successive pandemic waves
Athanasios Chalkias, Ioannis Pantazopoulos, Nikolaos Papagiannakis, Anargyros Skoulakis, Eleni Laou, Konstantina Kolonia, Nicoletta Ntalarizou, Dimitrios Ragias, Christos Kampolis, Luis García de Guadiana Romualdo, Konstantinos Tourlakopoulos, Athanasios Pagonis, Salim S Hayek, Jesper Eugen-Olsen, Konstantinos Gourgoulianis, Eleni Arnaoutoglou
medRxiv 2021.02.26.21251848; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.02.26.21251848

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (216)
  • Allergy and Immunology (495)
  • Anesthesia (106)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (1096)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (196)
  • Dermatology (141)
  • Emergency Medicine (274)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (502)
  • Epidemiology (9772)
  • Forensic Medicine (5)
  • Gastroenterology (481)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (2313)
  • Geriatric Medicine (223)
  • Health Economics (462)
  • Health Informatics (1561)
  • Health Policy (736)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (603)
  • Hematology (238)
  • HIV/AIDS (504)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (11649)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (617)
  • Medical Education (238)
  • Medical Ethics (67)
  • Nephrology (257)
  • Neurology (2144)
  • Nursing (134)
  • Nutrition (337)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (427)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (518)
  • Oncology (1180)
  • Ophthalmology (364)
  • Orthopedics (128)
  • Otolaryngology (220)
  • Pain Medicine (146)
  • Palliative Medicine (50)
  • Pathology (311)
  • Pediatrics (695)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (300)
  • Primary Care Research (267)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (2182)
  • Public and Global Health (4661)
  • Radiology and Imaging (778)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (457)
  • Respiratory Medicine (624)
  • Rheumatology (274)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (226)
  • Sports Medicine (210)
  • Surgery (252)
  • Toxicology (43)
  • Transplantation (120)
  • Urology (94)