4.7 Article

Presentation and outcome of Middle East respiratory syndrome in Saudi intensive care unit patients

期刊

CRITICAL CARE
卷 20, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s13054-016-1303-8

关键词

Coronavirus; MERS-CoV; Respiratory failure; Epidemic; Saudi Arabia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus infection is associated with high mortality rates but limited clinical data have been reported. We describe the clinical features and outcomes of patients admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) with Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) infection. Methods: Retrospective analysis of data from all adult (> 18 years old) patients admitted to our 20-bed mixed ICU with Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus infection between October 1, 2012 and May 31, 2014. Diagnosis was confirmed in all patients using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction on respiratory samples. Results: During the observation period, 31 patients were admitted with MERS-CoV infection (mean age 59 +/- 20 years, 22 [71 %] males). Cough and tachypnea were reported in all patients; 22 (77.4 %) patients had bilateral pulmonary infiltrates. Invasive mechanical ventilation was applied in 27 (87.1 %) and vasopressor therapy in 25 (80.6 %) patients during the intensive care unit stay. Twenty-three (74.2 %) patients died in the ICU. Nonsurvivors were older, had greater APACHE II and SOFA scores on admission, and were more likely to have received invasive mechanical ventilation and vasopressor therapy. After adjustment for the severity of illness and the degree of organ dysfunction, the need for vasopressors was an independent risk factor for death in the ICU (odds ratio = 18.33, 95 % confidence interval: 1.11-302.1, P = 0.04). Conclusions: MERS-CoV infection requiring admission to the ICU is associated with high morbidity and mortality. The need for vasopressor therapy is the main risk factor for death in these patients.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据