Prognosis and hematological findings in patients with COVID-19 in an Amazonian population of Peru

  1. Sebastian Iglesias-Osores
  2. Arturo Rafael-Heredia
  3. Eric Ricardo Rojas-Tello
  4. Washington A. Ortiz-Uribe
  5. Leveau-Bartra Walter Román
  6. Leveau-Bartra Orison Armando
  7. Alcántara-Mimbela Miguel
  8. Lizbeth M. Córdova-Rojas
  9. Elmer López-López
  10. Virgilio E. Failoc-Rojas

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Objective

This study examined the laboratory results of COVID-19 patients from a hospital in the Peruvian Amazon and their clinical prognosis.

Methods

An analytical cross-sectional study was carried out whose purpose was to identify the laboratory tests of patients with COVID-19 and mortality in a hospital in Ucayali, Peru during the period from March 13 to May 9, 2020, selecting a total of 127 with Covid-19. Mean and the standard deviation was described for age, leukocytes, neutrophils, platelets, RDW-SD; median and interquartile range for the variables lymphocyte, RN / L, fibrinogen, CRP, D-dimer, DHL, hematocrit, monocytes, eosinophils.

Results

No differences were observed in this population regarding death and sex (OR: 1.31; 95% CI 0.92 to 1.87), however, it was observed that, for each one-year increase, the probability of death increased by 4% (PR: 1.04, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.05). The IRR (Incidence Risk Ratio) analysis for the numerical variables showed results strongly associated with hematological values such as Leukocytes (scaled by 2500 units) (IRR: 1.08, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.13), neutrophils (scaled by 2500 units) (IRR: 1.08; 95% CI 1.03 to 1.13), on the contrary, it is observed that the increase of 1000 units in lymphocytes, the probability of dying decreased by 48% (IRR: 0.52; 95% CI 0.38 to 071).

Conclusion

Parameters such as leukocytes and neutrophils were statistically much higher in patients who died.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.01.31.21250859: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementIRB: Ethical aspects: This research has been approved by the Ethics Committee of the National University of Ucayali.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Statistical analysis: Statistical analysis was performed in the STATA v.
    STATA
    suggested: (Stata, RRID:SCR_012763)
    16.1 software (StataCorp LP, College Station, TX, USA).
    StataCorp
    suggested: (Stata, RRID:SCR_012763)

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2021.01.31.21250859v1 on medRxiv