首页> 外文期刊>Cardiology and therapy. >Safety and Effectiveness of Hydroxychloroquine and Azithromycin Combination Therapy for Treatment of Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19: A Propensity-Matched Study
【24h】

Safety and Effectiveness of Hydroxychloroquine and Azithromycin Combination Therapy for Treatment of Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19: A Propensity-Matched Study

机译:羟基氯喹的安全性和有效性和氮杂霉素组合治疗治疗住院治疗患者 - 19:匹配研究

获取原文
       

摘要

IntroductionWe sought to determine the effectiveness and safety of hydroxychloroquine–azithromycin (HCQ-AZM) therapy in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study of 613 patients hospitalized (integrated health system involving three hospitals) for RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 infection between March?1, 2020 and April?25, 2020. Intervention was treatment with HCQ-AZM in hospitalized patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus?2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Outcomes of interest were in-hospital all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, pulseless electrical activity (PEA) arrest, non-lethal arrhythmias, and length of hospital stay. Secondary measures included in-hospital corrected QT (QTc) interval parameters and serum biomarkers levels.ResultsPropensity-matched groups were composed of 173 patients given HCQ-AZM and 173 matched patients who did not receive treatment. There was no significant difference in in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR] 1.52; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.80–2.89; p =?0.2), PEA arrest (OR 1.68, CI 0.68–4.15; p =?0.27), or incidence of non-lethal arrhythmias (10.4% vs. 6.8%; p =?0.28). Length of hospital stay (10.5?±?7.4 vs. 5.8?±?6.1; p ?0.001), peak CRP levels (252?±?136 vs. 166?±?124; p ?0.0001), and degree of QTc interval prolongation was higher for the HCQ-AZM group (28?±?32 vs. 9?±?32; p ?0.0001), but there was no significant difference in incidence of sustained ventricular arrhythmias (2.8% vs. 1.7%; p =?0.52). HCQ-AZM was stopped in 10 patients because of QT interval prolongation and 1 patient because of drug-related polymorphic ventricular tachycardia.ConclusionIn this propensity-matched study, there was no difference in in-hospital mortality, life-threatening arrhythmias, or incidence of PEA arrest between the HCQ-AZM and untreated control groups. QTc intervals were longer in patients receiving HCQ-AZM, but only one patient developed drug-related ventricular tachycardia.
机译:引进我们试图确定羟氯喹 - 二十霉素(HCQ-AZM)治疗在住院治疗的Covid-19患者的有效性和安全性。方法是RT-PCR证实的613名患者的回顾性队列研究,用于RT-PCR确认Covid-19 3月间的感染?1,2020和4月25日,2020年。干预是用HCQ-AZM治疗住院治疗患者严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒?2(SARS-COV-2)感染。兴趣的结果是医院内部死亡率,心血管死亡率,无紫外线电活动(PEA)逮捕,非致命心律失常和住院时间。辅助措施包括在医院校正的QT(QTC)间隔参数和血清生物标志物水平。结果匹配组由173名患者组成HCQ-AZM和173名没有接受治疗的患者。在医院死亡率没有显着差异(差距[或] 1.52; 95%置信区间[CI] 0.80-2.89; p =?0.2),PEA骤停(或1.68,CI 0.68-4.15; P = 0.27 )或非致命性心律失常的发生率(10.4%与6.8%; p = 0.28)。住院时间长度(10.5?±7.4与5.8?±6.1; P <0.001),峰CRP水平(252?±136 vs.166?±124; P <0.0001)和程度HCQ-AZM组的QTC间隔延长(28?±32 vs. 9?±32; p <0.0001),但持续的心间心律失常发病率没有显着差异(2.8%与1.7%) ; p = 0.52)。由于QT间隔延长和1名患者因毒品有关的多晶晶型心室动力计而停止了HCQ-AZM。这种倾向匹配的研究,医院死亡率没有差异,危及生命的心律失常或发病率HCQ-AZM和未经处理的对照组之间的豌豆骤停。接受HCQ-AZM的患者QTC间隔较长,但只有一名患者开发出与药物相关的心室性心动过速。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号