Literature DB >> 32954480

Correlation between laboratory parameters on admission and outcome of COVID-19 in maintenance hemodialysis patients.

Weifeng Shang1, Yuanyuan Li2, Hua Li1, Wei Li1, Chengxu Li1, Yuan Cai1, Junwu Dong3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: This present study aims to investigate the relationship between laboratory parameters on admission and prognosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in maintenance hemodialysis patients, as well as providing a theoretical basis for clinical evaluation of prognosis and corresponding intervention measures.
METHODS: Retrospective analysis was performed on the clinical data of 47 maintenance hemodialysis patients who infected with COVID-19 and admitted to our hospital. According to their clinical outcome, these patients were divided into a survival group (n = 38) and a fatality group (n = 9). Information on the general condition and laboratory parameters of the patients were collected. Laboratory parameters were compared between different groups. The area under the curve (AUC) was used to evaluate the prognosis of COVID-19 in maintenance hemodialysis patients.
RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were observed in age, white blood cell count, neutrophil count, albumin, C-reactive protein (CRP), procalcitonin, and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) on admission (P < 0.05). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis showed that the values of AUC of CRP, neutrophil count, LDH, white blood cell count, albumin, and procalcitonin were 0.895, 0.813, 0.758, 0.757, 0.743, and 0.728, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Laboratory parameters including CRP, neutrophil count, LDH, white blood cell count, albumin, and procalcitonin were predictive on the prognosis of maintenance hemodialysis patients with COVID-19. Among them, CRP was the strongest single predictive laboratory indicator.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Coronavirus disease 2019; Hemodialysis; Laboratory parameters; Novel coronavirus pneumonia

Year:  2020        PMID: 32954480      PMCID: PMC7502275          DOI: 10.1007/s11255-020-02646-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol        ISSN: 0301-1623            Impact factor:   2.370


Introduction

In late 2019, a series of pneumonia cases of unknown cause were recognized in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China. By Jan 7, 2020, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), previously known as 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), was detected in samples of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid from a patient in Wuhan [1, 2]. On February 11, 2020, the world health organization officially named the disease caused by SARS-CoV-2 as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). COVID-19 is a major infectious disease that seriously endangers the health of people. As of April 6, 2020, a total of 81,740 cases of COVID-19 have been confirmed and 3331 patients have died of the disease in China [3]. COVID-19 is primarily manifested as an acute respiratory illness but it can affect multiple organs [4]. Previous studies have suggested that the elderly and those with underlying diseases were susceptible to COVID-19 infection, and more likely to become critical cases or decrease [5]. Wang’s et al. study indicated that hemodialysis patients were at great risk of COVID-19 infection [6]. However, there is limited information regarding the prognosis of COVID-19 in maintenance hemodialysis patients. Therefore, we studied the association between laboratory parameters on the day of hospital admission and fatality of COVID-19 in maintenance hemodialysis patients. We hope that our findings could be helpful in finding key indicators of disease progression and unfavorable outcome, as well as providing guidance for subsequent clinical practice.

Methods

Study design and participants

COVID-19 in maintenance hemodialysis patients who were discharged or died in Wuhan Fourth Hospital from February 3 to April 4, 2020 were enrolled in this study. Clinical data of these patients were retrospectively collected and analyzed. All patients enrolled in this study were not less than 18 years old, who were diagnosed with COVID-19 according to the guidance provided by the Chinese National Health Committee(trial version 5 revision). The clinical diagnosis criteria of Hubei Province were as follows: (1) fever or respiratory symptoms; (2) leukopenia or lymphopenia; (3) abnormal imaging of the lung. Those with ≥ 2 clinical criteria and/or a positive result on real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay or high throughput sequencing were diagnosed with COVID-19 [7]. Exclusion criteria: patients with acute kidney injury undergoing temporary hemodialysis; patients transferred to other hospitals during treatment; pneumonia caused by infection with other pathogens. Throat-swab specimens were obtained for SARS-CoV-2 real-time PCR in every patient. The final date of follow-up was April 5, 2020.

Data collection

Clinical data of the patients were collected from electronic medical records, including age, sex, previous medical history, laboratory findings [complete blood count; liver and renal function tests; C-reactive protein (CRP), procalcitonin, and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) on the day of hospital admission], results of common bacterial and viral pathogens causing pneumonia, results of SARS-CoV-2 real-time PCR on throat swab specimens, and chest computed tomographic (CT) manifestations. The patients were divided into a survival group and a fatality group according to the clinical outcome.

Statistical analysis

Epidata 3.1 software was used for data collecting. Data input was performed twice for a double check to ensure accuracy. Categorical data were presented as counts and percentages, and the Chi-square test was used for comparison between groups. For the data of continuous variables, the normality test (Kolmogorov–Smirnov test) was first conducted. Nonnormally distributed continuous data were expressed by median (IQR) and the rank-sum test in the nonparametric test was used for pairwise comparison. Normally distributed continuous data were expressed as mean ± standard deviation and the t test was used for pairwise comparison. Spearman rank correlation coefficient was used to describe the correlation with outcome variables. We depicted the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and calculate the area under the curve (AUC) to evaluate the accuracy of the laboratory index in predicting the prognosis of COVID-19 in maintenance hemodialysis patients. All statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS statistics version 21.0, and P < 0.05 was considered significant.

Results

Comparison of baseline data and laboratory parameters between survival group and fatality group of COVID-19 in maintenance hemodialysis patients A total of 47 cases were included in this study, including 30 males and 17 females. The average age was 59.7 ± 15.3 years. Results of common bacterial and viral pathogens causing pneumonia were negative in all patients. 20 patients were tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by PCR. Comorbidities were present in all patients, with hypertension being the most common comorbidity. This study revealed that there were no statistically significant differences in gender distribution, hospital length of stay, lymphocyte count, platelet count, and D-dimer between the two groups (P > 0.05). However, there were statistically significant differences in age, white blood cell count, neutrophil count, albumin, CRP, procalcitonin, and LDH on admission (P < 0.05) (Table 1).
Table 1

Comparison of demographic data and laboratory parameters of survival and fatality groups

VariablesTotal (n = 47)Survival group (n = 38)Fatality group (n = 9)P value
Sex (male)30 (63.8%)23 (60.5%)7 (77.8%)0.560*
Age (years)59.7 ± 15.357.2 ± 15.070.6 ± 11.80.016
Hospital length of stay (days)18.9 ± 9.819.5 ± 9.316.4 ± 12.00.401
White blood cell count (109/L)5.49 ± 2.045.09 ± 1.767.17 ± 2.370.005
Neutrophil count (109/L)4.02 ± 1.803.60 ± 1.475.80 ± 2.030.001
Lymphocyte count (109/L)0.77 (0.62–1.01)0.82 (1.10–0.63)0.77 (1.22–0.44)0.756
Platelet count (109/L)194 ± 83197 ± 84181 ± 800.593
Albumin (g/L)33.7 ± 4.634.6 ± 3.929.9 ± 5.70.005
CRP (mg/L)43.6 (12.3–139.2)23.0 (5.9–49.9)98.7 (68.1–161.6)0.001
Procalcitonin (ng/mL)1.10 (0.48–2.49)0.58 (0.32–1.57)2.15 (0.99–5.73)0.035
LDH (U/L)#274 (185–331)249 (183–305)322 (293–460)0.030
D-dimer (mg/L)#1.83 (1.03–3.26)1.42 (0.80–3.49)2.15 (1.76–3.04)0.212

*One cell had expectation values between 1 and 5, thus Chi-square test for continuity correction was used

#LDH was absent in 14 patients (13 in the survival group and one in the fatality group). D-dimer was absent in five patients (four in the survival group and one in the fatality group)

Comparison of demographic data and laboratory parameters of survival and fatality groups *One cell had expectation values between 1 and 5, thus Chi-square test for continuity correction was used #LDH was absent in 14 patients (13 in the survival group and one in the fatality group). D-dimer was absent in five patients (four in the survival group and one in the fatality group) Spearman’s rank correlation analysis In the present study, Spearman’s rank correlation analysis manifested that the values of white blood cell count, neutrophil count, CRP, procalcitonin, and LDH were positively correlated with the prognosis of COVID-19 in maintenance hemodialysis patients (r = 0.351, 0.427, 0.538, 0.311 and 0.383, P < 0.05), while the value of albumin was negatively correlated with the prognosis (r = − 0.331, P < 0.05) The predictive value of each laboratory index on the prognosis of COVID-19 in maintenance hemodialysis patients In this study, as shown in Table 2, the above laboratory parameters were of the certain value in predicting the prognosis of COVID-19 in maintenance hemodialysis patients (P < 0.05). The AUC, 95% CI, optimal threshold, sensitivity, specificity and Youden index of each parameter were shown in Table 2.
Table 2

The AUC and optimal threshold of each related variable

VariablesAUC95% CIP valueOptimal threshold*SensitivitySpecificityYouden index
White blood cell count (109/L)0.7570.600–0.9140.017≥ 5.3950.8890.6320.520
Neutrophil count (109/L)0.8130.658–0.9680.004≥ 4.3550.8890.7630.652
Albumin (g/L)0.7430.532–0.9540.025≤ 31.10.6670.8420.509
CRP (mg/L)0.8950.793–0.997 < 0.001≥ 45.20.8890.6840.573
Procalcitonin (ng/mL)0.7280.512–0.9440.035≥ 0.9250.8890.5790.468
LDH (U/L)#0.7580.544–0.9710.031≥ 2810.87500.6400.515

#LDH was absent in 14 patients (13 in the survival group and one in the fatality group), and the ROC curve was used to analyze the data of 33 patients; *The Youden index was calculated based on the sensitivity and specificity of the ROC curve, and the cut-off point with higher sensitivity was selected as the optimal threshold among several points with relatively large Youden index

The AUC and optimal threshold of each related variable #LDH was absent in 14 patients (13 in the survival group and one in the fatality group), and the ROC curve was used to analyze the data of 33 patients; *The Youden index was calculated based on the sensitivity and specificity of the ROC curve, and the cut-off point with higher sensitivity was selected as the optimal threshold among several points with relatively large Youden index

Discussion

There were six previously identified coronaviruses that infected humans, four of which were more common and less pathogenic in humans. The other two were known as SARS-coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV), which caused severe respiratory diseases. The mortality of SARS has been reported as more than 10% and MERS at more than 35% [8, 9]. The SARS-CoV-2 was known as the seventh human coronavirus. The case fatality rate among hospitalized COVID-19 patients was reported to be 4.3–15% [5, 10–13], while the case fatality rate of COVID-19 in maintenance hemodialysis patients was 25–41% [14-16]. Our study showed that the case fatality rate of COVID-19 in maintenance hemodialysis patients was 19.1%. The mortality rate was much higher than that observed in the general population. Therefore, it is crucial to identify specific serological indicators for treatment decisions. In terms of laboratory tests, the main characteristics of COVID-19 in maintenance hemodialysis patients were normal white blood cell count, normal neutrophil count, normal platelet count, decreased lymphocyte count, decreased albumin, increased CRP, increased procalcitonin, and increased LDH and D-dimer. For those who died, the white blood cell count, neutrophil count, CRP, procalcitonin, and LDH were all significantly higher than that in the survival group, but the albumin was lower than that in the survival group. Elevated CRP and procalcitonin may indicate a secondary bacterial infection in the clinical course of hemodialysis patients with COVID-19. Low albumin and high LDH suggested poor prognosis for COVID-19 in hemodialysis patients, as well as COVID-19 patients without hemodialysis [17]. Our study showed an association between laboratory parameters on admission and poor outcome for COVID-19 in hemodialysis patients. We found that white blood cell count, neutrophil count, albumin, CRP, procalcitonin, and LDH were all associated with the prognosis of COVID-19 in maintenance hemodialysis patients. Previous studies suggested that lymphopenia were a predictor of prognosis in COVID-19 patients [18]. However, our study showed no association between lymphopenia and prognosis of COVID-19 in maintenance hemodialysis patients. The reason may be that hemodialysis patients exist peripheral blood lymphopenia, which is accompanied by decreased lymphocyte proliferative response when stimulated by different antigens [19]. In this study, the ROC curve was used to analyze the prognostic value of laboratory indicators. The AUC of white blood cell count, neutrophil count, albumin, CRP, procalcitonin, and LDH ranged from 0.728 to 0.895. The AUC of CRP was the largest. The optimal working point was 45.2 mg/L, and the sensitivity and specificity to predict the prognosis of maintenance hemodialysis patients infected with COVID-19 were 88.9% and 68.4%, respectively. CRP is a useful inflammatory marker and indicator that plays an important role in host resistance to invasive pathogens and inflammation [20]. CRP is highly correlated with acute lung injury in 2019-nCoV-infected patients [21]. Besides, higher CRP has been linked to unfavorable aspects of COVID-19 diseases, such as cardiac injury, and acute respiratory distress syndrome development, and fatality [22-24]. Therefore, the detection of CRP levels in COVID-19 with maintenance hemodialysis patients is of great value in assessing the severity of their condition. Several limitations of this study should be acknowledged. First, our study was a single-center retrospective study and some patients were clinically diagnosed with COVID-19, which may affect the generalization of the results due to the limitation of enrolled patients. Second, some important laboratory results were incomplete. Finally, we did not conduct logistic regression analysis due to the small sample size, therefore, we cannot evaluate the effect of other clinical indicators other than laboratory parameters, especially age, on the results.

Conclusions

Predictors of a fatal outcome in maintenance hemodialysis patients with COVID-19 included white blood cell count, neutrophil count, albumin, CRP, procalcitonin, and LDH. Among them, CRP was the strongest single predictive laboratory predictor. At present, a specific antiviral drug for COVID-19 is not available, and the fatality rate is still high. Moreover, the fatality rate of COVID-19 was even higher in maintenance hemodialysis patients. Therefore, clinicians should increase their awareness of COVID-19 in hemodialysis patients. Early detection and effective intervention might be a benefit on reducing mortality of COVID-19 in maintenance hemodialysis patients. Besides, effective medical measures are needed to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in hemodialysis centers, such as body temperature measurement when entering the hemodialysis ward, wearing a medical mask during hemodialysis, COVID-19 patients isolation by admission to designated hemodialysis centers.
  9 in total

1.  D-lactic acidosis after jejunoileal bypass.

Authors:  M Traube; J Bock; J L Boyer
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1982-10-14       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Amplification and the elderly patient.

Authors:  N D Matkin; W R Hodgson
Journal:  Otolaryngol Clin North Am       Date:  1982-05       Impact factor: 3.346

3.  [Studies of seminal vesicles. Report 2. Fructose secreting mechanism of the guinea-pig seminal vesicles (author's transl)].

Authors:  S Matsuda; M Kuwahara
Journal:  Nihon Hinyokika Gakkai Zasshi       Date:  1981-05

4.  Triacylglycerol turnover in large and small rat adipocytes: effects of lipolytic stimulation, glucose, and insulin.

Authors:  J M May
Journal:  J Lipid Res       Date:  1982-03       Impact factor: 5.922

5.  Association of Cardiac Injury With Mortality in Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19 in Wuhan, China.

Authors:  Shaobo Shi; Mu Qin; Bo Shen; Yuli Cai; Tao Liu; Fan Yang; Wei Gong; Xu Liu; Jinjun Liang; Qinyan Zhao; He Huang; Bo Yang; Congxin Huang
Journal:  JAMA Cardiol       Date:  2020-07-01       Impact factor: 14.676

6.  COVID-19: clinical course and outcomes of 36 hemodialysis patients in Spain.

Authors:  Marian Goicoechea; Luis Alberto Sánchez Cámara; Nicolás Macías; Alejandra Muñoz de Morales; Ángela González Rojas; Arturo Bascuñana; David Arroyo; Almudena Vega; Soraya Abad; Eduardo Verde; Ana María García Prieto; Úrsula Verdalles; Diego Barbieri; Andrés Felipe Delgado; Javier Carbayo; Antonia Mijaylova; Adriana Acosta; Rosa Melero; Alberto Tejedor; Patrocinio Rodriguez Benitez; Ana Pérez de José; María Luisa Rodriguez Ferrero; Fernando Anaya; Manuel Rengel; Daniel Barraca; José Luño; Inés Aragoncillo
Journal:  Kidney Int       Date:  2020-05-11       Impact factor: 10.612

7.  A new coronavirus associated with human respiratory disease in China.

Authors:  Fan Wu; Su Zhao; Bin Yu; Yan-Mei Chen; Wen Wang; Zhi-Gang Song; Yi Hu; Zhao-Wu Tao; Jun-Hua Tian; Yuan-Yuan Pei; Ming-Li Yuan; Yu-Ling Zhang; Fa-Hui Dai; Yi Liu; Qi-Min Wang; Jiao-Jiao Zheng; Lin Xu; Edward C Holmes; Yong-Zhen Zhang
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2020-02-03       Impact factor: 49.962

8.  COVID-19 in Hemodialysis Patients: A Report of 5 Cases.

Authors:  Rui Wang; Cong Liao; Hong He; Chun Hu; Zimeng Wei; Zixi Hong; Chengjie Zhang; Meiyan Liao; Hua Shui
Journal:  Am J Kidney Dis       Date:  2020-03-31       Impact factor: 8.860

9.  Clinical characteristics of novel coronavirus cases in tertiary hospitals in Hubei Province.

Authors:  Kui Liu; Yuan-Yuan Fang; Yan Deng; Wei Liu; Mei-Fang Wang; Jing-Ping Ma; Wei Xiao; Ying-Nan Wang; Min-Hua Zhong; Cheng-Hong Li; Guang-Cai Li; Hui-Guo Liu
Journal:  Chin Med J (Engl)       Date:  2020-05-05       Impact factor: 2.628

  9 in total
  8 in total

Review 1.  The frail world of haemodialysis patients in the COVID-19 pandemic era: a systematic scoping review.

Authors:  Gaetano Alfano; Annachiara Ferrari; Riccardo Magistroni; Francesco Fontana; Gianni Cappelli; Carlo Basile
Journal:  J Nephrol       Date:  2021-08-21       Impact factor: 3.902

Review 2.  COVID-19 and the kidney: time to take a closer look.

Authors:  Vassilios Liakopoulos; Stefanos Roumeliotis; Stella Papachristou; Nikolaos Papanas
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2021-08-12       Impact factor: 2.266

3.  Analysis of inflammatory factor levels in serum and risk factors in patients with chronic renal failure undergoing maintenance hemodialysis.

Authors:  Min Zhou; Yuan Du; Yanping Wu; Ping Zhang; Peng Liu; Jiarui Li
Journal:  Am J Transl Res       Date:  2021-06-15       Impact factor: 4.060

4.  Risk factors for mortality in hemodialysis patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Fengping Wang; Guangyu Ao; Yushu Wang; Fuqiang Liu; Mulong Bao; Ming Gao; Shulu Zhou; Xin Qi
Journal:  Ren Fail       Date:  2021-12       Impact factor: 2.606

5.  Clinical features, management, and outcome of hemodialysis patients with SARS-CoV-2.

Authors:  Burcın Sahin; Sennur Kose; Gulhan Eren; Gulsen Yoruk
Journal:  Ther Apher Dial       Date:  2021-06-09       Impact factor: 2.195

6.  Risk factors for infection and mortality among hemodialysis patients during COVID-19 pandemic.

Authors:  Özgür Can; Gunal Bilek; Sibel Sahan
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2021-07-05       Impact factor: 2.266

7.  Incidence and factors associated with COVID-19 in 13 hemodialysis units.

Authors:  Javier L Deira Lorenzo; Silvia González Sanchidrián; André Rocha Rodrigues; Rosa M Ruiz-Calero Cendrero; Miguel A Suarez Santisteban; José M Sánchez Montalbán; Josefa Galán González; Olga Sánchez García; María T Hernández Moreno; Juan Villa Rincón; María A Fernández Solís; Clarencio Cebrián Andrada; Gaspar Tovar Manzano; Vanesa García-Bernalt Funes; Alejandro Cives Muiño; Pedro Dorado Hernández
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2021-06-18       Impact factor: 2.266

8.  National Early Warning Score 2 and laboratory predictors correlate with clinical deterioration in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Authors:  Gulsah Tuncer; Serkan Surme; Osman F Bayramlar; Hatice K Karanalbant; Betul Copur; Meltem Yazla; Esra Zerdali; Inci Y Nakir; Ayse Rk Cinar; Ahmet Buyukyazgan; Hatice Balli; Yesim Kurekci; Serap Simsek-Yavuz; Mehmet M Sonmez; Gonul Sengoz; Filiz Pehlivanoglu
Journal:  Biomark Med       Date:  2021-07-21       Impact factor: 2.851

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.