Background: Most patients with COVID-19 receive antibiotics despite the fact that bacterial co-infections are rare. This can lead to increased complications, including antibacterial resistance. We aim to analyze risk factors for inappropriate antibiotic prescription in these patients and describe possible complications arising from their use. Methods: The SEMI-COVID-19 Registry is a multicenter, retrospective patient cohort. Patients with antibiotic were divided into two groups according to appropriate or inappropriate prescription, depending on whether the patient fulfill any criteria for its use. Comparison was made by means of multilevel logistic regression analysis. Possible complications of antibiotic use were also identified. Results: Out of 13,932 patients, 3047 (21.6%) were prescribed no antibiotics, 6116 (43.9%) were appropriately prescribed antibiotics, and 4769 (34.2%) were inappropriately prescribed antibiotics. The following were independent factors of inappropriate prescription: February-March 2020 admission (OR 1.54, 95%CI 1.18–2.00), age (OR 0.98, 95%CI 0.97–0.99), absence of comorbidity (OR 1.43, 95%CI 1.05–1.94), dry cough (OR 2.51, 95%CI 1.94–3.26), fever (OR 1.33, 95%CI 1.13–1.56), dyspnea (OR 1.31, 95%CI 1.04–1.69), flu-like symptoms (OR 2.70, 95%CI 1.75–4.17), and elevated C-reactive protein levels (OR 1.01 for each mg/L increase, 95% CI 1.00–1.01). Adverse drug reactions were more frequent in patients who received ANTIBIOTIC (4.9% vs 2.7%, p < .001). Conclusion: The inappropriate use of antibiotics was very frequent in COVID-19 patients and entailed an increased risk of adverse reactions. It is crucial to define criteria for their use in these patients. Knowledge of the factors associated with inappropriate prescribing can be helpful.

Background: Since December 2019, the COVID-19 pandemic has changed the concept of medicine. This work aims to analyze the use of antibiotics in patients admitted to the hospital due to SARS-CoV-2 infection.Methods: This work analyzes the use and effectiveness of antibiotics in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 based on data from the SEMI-COVID-19 registry, an initiative to generate knowledge about this disease using data from electronic medical records. Our primary endpoint was all-cause in-hospital mortality according to antibiotic use. The secondary endpoint was the effect of macrolides on mortality.Results: Of 13,932 patients, antibiotics were used in 12,238. The overall death rate was 20.7% and higher among those taking antibiotics (87.8%). Higher mortality was observed with use of all antibiotics (OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.21–1.62;p < .001) except macrolides, which had a higher survival rate (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.64–0.76;p < .001). The decision to start antibiotics was influenced by presence of increased inflammatory markers and any kind of infiltrate on an x-ray. Patients receiving antibiotics required respiratory support and were transferred to intensive care units more often.Conclusions: Bacterial co-infection was uncommon among COVID-19 patients, yet use of antibiotics was high. There is insufficient evidence to support widespread use of empiric antibiotics in these patients. Most may not require empiric treatment and if they do, there is promising evidence regarding azithromycin as a potential COVID-19 treatment.

Severely ill COVID-19 patients are at high risk of nosocomial infections. The aim of the study was to describe the characteristics of candidemia during the pre-pandemic period (January 2019–February 2020) compared to the pandemic period (March 2020–September 2021). Antifungal susceptibilities were assessed using the EUCAST E.Def 7.3.2 broth dilution method. Fluconazole-resistant C. parapsilosis isolates (FRCP) were studied for sequencing of the ERG11 gene. The incidence of candidemia and C. parapsilosis bloodstream infection increased significantly in the pandemic period (p = 0.021). ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, parenteral nutrition and corticosteroids administration were more frequent in patients with candidemia who had been admitted due to COVID-19. Fifteen cases of FRCP fungemia were detected. The first case was recorded 10 months before the pandemic in a patient transferred from another hospital. The incidence of FRCP in patients admitted for COVID-19 was 1.34 and 0.16 in all other patients (p < 0.001). ICU admission, previous Candida spp. colonization, arterial catheter use, parenteral nutrition and renal function replacement therapy were more frequent in patients with candidemia due to FRCP. All FRCP isolates showed the Y132F mutation. In conclusion, the incidence of candidemia experienced an increase during the COVID-19 pandemic and FRCP fungemia was more frequent in patients admitted due to COVID-19.

Background: COVID‐19‐associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) is a major complication of critically ill COVID‐19 patients, with a high mortality rate and potentially preventable. Thus, identifying patients at high risk of CAPA would be of great interest. We intended to develop a clinical prediction score capable of stratifying patients according to the risk for CAPA at ICU admission.Methods: Single centre retrospective case–control study. A case was defined as a patient diagnosed with CAPA according to 2020 ECMM/ISHAM consensus criteria. 2 controls were selected for each case among critically ill COVID‐19 patients.Results: 28 CAPA patients and 56‐matched controls were included. Factors associated with CAPA included old age (68 years vs. 62, p = .033), active smoking (17.9% vs. 1.8%, p = .014), chronic respiratory diseases (48.1% vs. 26.3%, p = .043), chronic renal failure (25.0% vs. 3.6%, p = .005), chronic corticosteroid treatment (28.6% vs. 1.8%, p < .001), tocilizumab therapy (92.9% vs. 66.1%, p = .008) and high APACHE II at ICU admission (median 13 vs. 10 points, p = .026). A score was created including these variables, which showed an area under the receiver operator curve of 0.854 (95% CI 0.77‐0.92). A punctuation below 6 had a negative predictive value of 99.6%. A punctuation of 10 or higher had a positive predictive value of 27.9%.Conclusion: We present a clinical prediction score that allowed to stratify critically ill COVID‐19 patients according to the risk for developing CAPA. This CAPA score would allow to target preventive measures. Further evaluation of the score, as well as the utility of these targeted preventive measures, is needed.

Background: Passive immunotherapy with convalescent plasma (CP) is a potential treatment for COVID-19 for which evidence from controlled clinical trials is lacking. Methods: We conducted a multi-center, randomized clinical trial in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. All patients received standard of care treatment, including off-label use of marketed medicines, and were randomized 1:1 to receive one dose (250-300 mL) of CP from donors with IgG anti-SARS-CoV-2. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients in categories 5, 6 or 7 of the COVID-19 ordinal scale at day 15. Results: The trial was stopped after first interim analysis due to the fall in recruitment related to pandemic control. With 81 patients randomized, there were no patients progressing to mechanical ventilation or death among the 38 patients assigned to receive plasma (0%) versus 6 out of 43 patients (14%) progressing in control arm. Mortality rates were 0% vs 9.3% at days 15 and 29 for the active and control groups, respectively. No significant differences were found in secondary endpoints. At inclusion, patients had a median time of 8 days (IQR, 6-9) of symptoms and 49,4% of them were positive for anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies. Conclusions: Convalescent plasma could be superior to standard of care in avoiding progression to mechanical ventilation or death in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The strong dependence of results on a limited number of events in the control group prevents drawing firm conclusions about CP efficacy from this trial. (Funded by Instituto de Salud Carlos III; NCT04345523 ).