4.7 Article

Clinical Features of 69 Cases With Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Wuhan, China

Journal

CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Volume 71, Issue 15, Pages 769-777

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciaa272

Keywords

coronavirus; pneumonia; Wuhan

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. From December 2019 to February 2020, 2019 severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has caused a serious outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Wuhan, China. Related clinical features are needed. Methods. We reviewed 69 patients who were hospitalized in Union hospital in Wuhan between 16 January and 29 January 2020. All patients were confirmed to be infected with SARS-CoV-2, and the final date of follow-up was 4 February 2020. Results. The median age of 69 enrolled patients was 42.0 years (interquartile range 35.0-62.0), and 32 patients (46%) were men. The most common symptoms were fever (60 [87%]), cough (38 [55%]), and fatigue (29 [42%]). Most patients received antiviral therapy (66 [98.5%] of 67 patients) and antibiotic therapy (66 [98.5%] of 67 patients). As of 4 February 2020, 18 (26.9%) of 67 patients had been discharged, and 5 patients had died, with a mortality rate of 7.5%. According to the lowest SpO(2) during admission, cases were divided into the SpO(2) = 90% group (n = 55) and the SpO(2) < 90% group (n = 14). All 5 deaths occurred in the SpO(2) < 90% group. Compared with SpO(2) = 90% group, patients of the SpO(2) < 90% group were older and showed more comorbidities and higher plasma levels of interleukin (IL) 6, IL10, lactate dehydrogenase, and C reactive protein. Arbidol treatment showed tendency to improve the discharging rate and decrease the mortality rate. Conclusions. COVID-19 appears to show frequent fever, dry cough, and increase of inflammatory cytokines, and induced a mortality rate of 7.5%. Older patients or those with underlying comorbidities are at higher risk of death.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available