The COVID-19 pandemic has posed a threat to hospital capacity due to the high number of admissions, which has led to the development of various strategies to release and create new hospital beds. Due to the importance of systemic corticosteroids in this disease, we assessed their efficacy in reducing the length of stay (LOS) in hospitals and compared the effect of 3 different corticosteroids on this outcome. MéTHOD: We conducted a real-world, controlled, retrospective cohort study that analysed data from a hospital database that included 3934 hospitalised patients diagnosed with COVID-19 in a tertiary hospital from April to May 2020. Hospitalised patients who received systemic corticosteroids (CG) were compared with a propensity score control group matched by age, sex and severity of disease who did not receive systemic corticosteroids (NCG). The decision to prescribe CG was at the discretion of the primary medical team.
A total of 199 hospitalized patients in the CG were compared with 199 in the NCG. The LOS was shorter for the CG than for the NCG (median=3 [interquartile range=0-10] vs. 5 [2-8.5]; p=0.005, respectively), showing a 43% greater probability of being hospitalised ≤4 days than >4 days when corticosteroids were used. Moreover, this difference was only noticed in those treated with dexamethasone (76.3% hospitalised ≤4 days vs. 23.7% hospitalised >4 days [p<0.001]). Serum ferritin levels, white blood cells and platelet counts were higher in the CG. No differences in mortality or intensive care unit admission were observed.
Treatment with systemic corticosteroids is associated with reduced LOS in hospitalised patients diagnosed with COVID-19. This association is significant in those treated with dexamethasone, but no for methylprednisolone and prednisone.

The COVID-19 pandemic has posed a threat to hospital capacity due to the high number of admissions, which has led to the development of various strategies to release and create new hospital beds. Due to the importance of systemic corticosteroids in this disease, we assessed their efficacy in reducing the length of stay (LOS) in hospitals and compared the effect of 3 different corticosteroids on this outcome.
We conducted a real-world, controlled, retrospective cohort study that analysed data from a hospital database that included 3934 hospitalised patients diagnosed with COVID-19 in a tertiary hospital from April to May 2020. Hospitalised patients who received systemic corticosteroids (CG) were compared with a propensity score control group matched by age, sex and severity of disease who did not receive systemic corticosteroids (NCG). The decision to prescribe CG was at the discretion of the primary medical team.
A total of 199 hospitalized patients in the CG were compared with 199 in the NCG. The LOS was shorter for the CG than for the NCG (median = 3 [interquartile range = 0-10] vs. 5 [2-8.5]; p = 0.005, respectively), showing a 43% greater probability of being hospitalised ≤ 4 days than > 4 days when corticosteroids were used. Moreover, this difference was only noticed in those treated with dexamethasone (76.3% hospitalised ≤ 4 days vs. 23.7% hospitalised > 4 days [p < 0.001]). Serum ferritin levels, white blood cells and platelet counts were higher in the CG. No differences in mortality or intensive care unit admission were observed.
Treatment with systemic corticosteroids is associated with reduced LOS in hospitalised patients diagnosed with COVID-19. This association is significant in those treated with dexamethasone, but no for methylprednisolone and prednisone.

To determine if the use of corticosteroids was associated with Intensive Care Unit (ICU) mortality among whole population and pre-specified clinical phenotypes.
A secondary analysis derived from multicenter, observational study.
Critical Care Units.
Adult critically ill patients with confirmed COVID-19 disease admitted to 63 ICUs in Spain.
Corticosteroids vs. no corticosteroids.
Three phenotypes were derived by non-supervised clustering analysis from whole population and classified as (A: severe, B: critical and C: life-threatening). We performed a multivariate analysis after propensity optimal full matching (PS) for whole population and weighted Cox regression (HR) and Fine-Gray analysis (sHR) to assess the impact of corticosteroids on ICU mortality according to the whole population and distinctive patient clinical phenotypes.
A total of 2017 patients were analyzed, 1171 (58%) with corticosteroids. After PS, corticosteroids were shown not to be associated with ICU mortality (OR: 1.0; 95% CI: 0.98-1.15). Corticosteroids were administered in 298/537 (55.5%) patients of \"A\" phenotype and their use was not associated with ICU mortality (HR=0.85 [0.55-1.33]). A total of 338/623 (54.2%) patients in \"B\" phenotype received corticosteroids. No effect of corticosteroids on ICU mortality was observed when HR was performed (0.72 [0.49-1.05]). Finally, 535/857 (62.4%) patients in \"C\" phenotype received corticosteroids. In this phenotype HR (0.75 [0.58-0.98]) and sHR (0.79 [0.63-0.98]) suggest a protective effect of corticosteroids on ICU mortality.
Our finding warns against the widespread use of corticosteroids in all critically ill patients with COVID-19 at moderate dose. Only patients with the highest inflammatory levels could benefit from steroid treatment.

BACKGROUND: The objective of these study is to know the characteristics of COVID-19 in patients with uveitis associated with Systemic Autoimmune Disease (SAD) through telematic survey.
METHODS: Internal Medicine Society and Group of Systemic Autoimmune disease conducted a telematic survey of patients with SAD to learn about the characteristics of COVID-19 in this population.
RESULTS: A total of 2,789 patients answered the survey, of which 28 had a diagnosis of uveitis associated with SAE. The majority (82%) were female and caucasian (82%), with a mean age of 48 years. The most frequent SAEs were Behçet\'s disease followed by sarcoidosis and systemic lupus erythematosus. 46% of the patients were receiving corticosteroid treatment at a mean prednisone dose of 11 mg/day. Regarding infection, 14 (50%) patients reported symptoms compatible with SARS-CoV-2 infection. RT-PCR was performed on the nasopharyngeal smear in two patients and in one of them (4%) it was positive.
CONCLUSIONS: Both asymptomatic and symptomatic COVID-19 patients with ASD-associated UNI had received similar immunosuppressive treatment.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study is to identify the risk factors associated with mortality at six weeks, especially by analyzing the role of antivirals and munomodulators.
METHODS: Prospective descriptive multicenter cohort study.
METHODS: 26 Intensive care units (ICU) from Andalusian region in Spain.
METHODS: Consecutive critically ill patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were included from March 8 to May 30.
METHODS: None.
METHODS: Variables analyzed were demographic, severity scores and clinical condition. Support therapy, drug and mortality were analyzed. An univariate followed by multivariate Cox regression with propensity score analysis was applied.
RESULTS: 495 patients were enrolled, but 73 of them were excluded for incomplete data. Thus, 422 patients were included in the final analysis. Median age was 63 years and 305 (72.3%) were men. ICU mortality: 144/422 34%; 14 days mortality: 81/422 (19.2%); 28 days mortality: 121/422 (28.7%); 6-week mortality 152/422 36.5%. By multivariable Cox proportional analysis, factors independently associated with 42-day mortality were age, APACHE II score, SOFA score at ICU admission >6, Lactate dehydrogenase at ICU admission >470U/L, Use of vasopressors, extrarenal depuration, %lymphocytes 72h post-ICU admission <6.5%, and thrombocytopenia whereas the use of lopinavir/ritonavir was a protective factor.
CONCLUSIONS: Age, APACHE II, SOFA>value of 6 points, along with vasopressor requirements or renal replacement therapy have been identified as predictor factors of mortality at six weeks. Administration of corticosteroids showed no benefits in mortality, as did treatment with tocilizumab. Lopinavir/ritonavir administration is identified as a protective factor.

Several studies have reported the beneficial effect of glucocorticoids in the treatment of cytokine storm that occurs in patients with severe COVID-19. Various glucocorticoids regimens have been proposed.
Retrospective observational study that includes patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia and compares admission to an Intensive Care Unit (ICU) or death during hospitalization in three groups of patients: no glucocorticoids treatment, use of glucocorticoids doses equivalent to less than 250mg of prednisone daily and use of equivalent doses greater than or equal to 250mg of prednisone daily. Multivariate analysis was performed using logistic regression, using the propensity index as a covariant.
Of the 259 patients enrolled in the study, 67 (25.9%) had an unfavorable evolution, dying or requiring ICU admission. Comparative analyzes between different glucocorticoids treatments and the association with ICU admission or death were: glucocorticoids treatment (any dose) versus no glucocorticoids treatment (OR: 0.71 [0.30-1.66]), treatment with glucocorticoids (≥250mg prednisone daily) versus no glucocorticoids treatment (OR: 0.35 [0.11-1.08]) and glucocorticoids treatment (≥250mg prednisone daily) versus patients with glucocorticoids doses <250mg prednisone daily or without glucocorticoids treatment (OR: 0.30 [0.10-0.88]).
The results of this study show that patients with severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia treated with glucocorticoids pulses with equivalent doses of prednisone greater than or equal to 250mg have a more favorable evolution (less mortality and less admission to ICU).

There are limited information on outcome, complications and treatments of critically ill COVID-19 patients requiring admission to an intensive care unit (ICU). The aim of this study is to describe the clinical ICU course, treatments used, complications and outcomes, of critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted in seven ICU in Galicia region during the 2020 March-April pandemic peak.
Between March 21 and April 19, 2020, we evaluated critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU of Anesthesia of seven hospitals in Galicia, northwestern Spain. Outcome, complications, and treatments were monitored until May 6, 2020, the final date of follow-up.
A total of 97 critically ill COVID-19 patients were included. During ICU stay, mechanical ventilation became necessary in 80 (82.5%) patients, and tracheostomy in 22 (22.7%) patients. Prone position was used frequently in both intubated (67.5%) and awake (27.8%) patients. Medications consisted of antivirals agents (92.7%), corticosteroids (93.8%), tocilizumab (57.7%), and intermediate or high doses of anticoagulants (83.5%). The most frequent complications were ICU-acquired infection (52.6%), thrombosis events (16.5%), and reintubation (9.3%). After a median follow-up of 42 (34-45) days, 15 patients (15.5%) deceased, 73 patients (75.2%) had been discharged from ICU, and nine patients (9.3%) were still in the ICU.
A high proportion of our critically ill COVID-19 patients required mechanical ventilation, prone positioning, antiviral medication, corticosteroids, and anticoagulants. ICU complications were frequent, mainly infections and thrombotic events. We had a relatively low mortality of 15,5%.

BACKGROUND: Autoimmune hemolytic anemia (AIHA) is a rare and generally self-limiting disease in children.
METHODS: A descriptive cross-sectional study was performed in children under 18 years diagnosed with AIHA from January/1997 to July/2019. Clinical variables were collected and AIHA was classified according to the direct antiglobulin test (DAT) in warm AIHA (IgG+/-C3d) and cold AIHA (C3d). Response to treatment and evolution were analyzed.
RESULTS: 25 patients were included and 72% were males. The median age at diagnosis was 2 years (range 0.4 to 9). Fever (72%), pallor (68%), jaundice (64%), hepatosplenomegaly and coluria (48%) were the most common presenting symptoms. The median hemoglobin at diagnosis was 5.4 g/dl. DAT was positive in 96%, with detection of IgG antibodies in 76%. A single case presented negative DAT. 20% of the patients associated another cytopenia, one of which was subsequently diagnosed with common variable immunodeficiency. Concomitant viral infection was suspected or documented in 32%. Most of the cases were self-limiting and responded to corticosteroid treatment (72%). Those with partial response (24%), mainly those associated with other cytopenias, required other lines of treatment (rituximab, mycophenolate, immunoglobulins). Complications (32%) and relapses (26%) were detected only in warm AIHA.
CONCLUSIONS: Our case series confirms that AIHA is a very rare disease in childhood. Most cases evolve favorably, although up to a quarter of them require second lines of treatment and, in exceptional cases, they need very aggressive treatments. These latter cases generally correspond to patients who present more than one cytopenia in the course of the disease.

BACKGROUND: In recent months, doubts have arisen among patients, general practitioners, and neurologists as to whether some drugs commonly used in patients with headaches and neuralgia may favour or complicate the disease caused by SARS-CoV-2.
METHODS: We collected information on the opinions of scientific societies and medicines agencies (American, European, and Spanish) to clarify doubts regarding the use of drugs such as lisinopril, candesartan, ibuprofen, corticosteroids, carbamazepine, and monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.
RESULTS: We make recommendations about the use of standard headache treatments in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, based on the current scientific evidence.
CONCLUSIONS: At present, there is no robust scientific argument to formally contraindicate any of the standard treatments employed for headaches and neuralgias.

BACKGROUND: Since the first edition of the Guidelines was published in 2013, much information has been generated around the treatment of ulcerative colitis, and new drugs and action protocols have been introduced. Clinical practice has changed substantially, warranting new approaches and a comprehensive review and update of the evidence.
METHODS: Once again, we used the GRADE approach, supported by an electronic tool (https://gradepro.org). The clinical scenarios are the same as in the previous version (induction and maintenance in severe and mild-moderate flare-ups), as are the variables and their evaluation. However, in the updated guidelines, three questions have been deleted, 14 added and 30 maintained, making a total of 44 clinical questions. After an exhaustive review of the evidence, the recommendations are now updated.
RESULTS: Of the 44 questions analysed, no recommendation could be established in two due to the very low quality of the evidence, while in the other 42, based on different degrees of quality of evidence, recommendations were made according to the GRADE system. In 25 of these questions the final recommendation is strongly in favour, in six strongly against, in seven weakly in favour and in four weakly against. According to the scenarios and recommendations, six algorithms are proposed as a simple guide for practical decision-making.
CONCLUSIONS: The aim of this update of the 2013 guidelines is to provide answers, based on the GRADE approach, to the different questions we ask ourselves daily when deciding the most appropriate treatment for our patients with ulcerative colitis in the different clinical scenarios.