Whether Early Steroid dose is Associated with Lower Mortality in COVID-19 Critically Ill Patients-An Exploratory Chart Review

  1. Abhishek Goyal
  2. Ankur Joshi
  3. Saurabh Saigal
  4. Dodda Brahmam
  5. Yogesh Niwariya
  6. Alkesh Khurana
  7. Sagar Khadanga
  8. Arun Mitra

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Steroids have shown its usefulness in critically ill COVID-19 patients. However, the time of starting steroid and dose tailored to severity remain a matter of inquiry due to still emerging evidences and wide-ranging concerns of benefits and harms. We did a retrospective record analysis in an apex teaching hospital ICU setting to explore optimal doses and duration of steroid therapy which can decrease mortality.

Methodology:

114 adults with COVID-19-ARDS admitted to ICU between 20thMarch-15thAugust2020 were included in chart review. We did preliminary exploratory analysis (rooted in steroid therapy matrix categorized by dose and duration) to understand the effect of several covariates on survival. This was followed by univariate and multivariate Cox proportion hazard regression analysis and model diagnostics.

Results:

Exploratory analysis and visualization indicated age, optimal steroid, severity (measured in P/F) of disease and infection status as potential covariates for survival. Univariate cox regression analysis showed significant positive association of age>60 years{2.6 (1.5-4.7)} and protective effect of optimum steroid{0.38(0.2-0.72)} on death (hazard) in critically ill patients. Multivariate cox regression analysis after adjusting effect of age showed protective effect of optimum steroid on hazard defined as death {0.46(0.23-0.87),LR=17.04,(p=2e-04)}.The concordance was 0.70 and model diagnostics fulfilled the assumption criteria for proportional hazard model.

Conclusion:

Optimal dose steroid as per defined ‘optimum’ (<24 hours and doses tailored to P/F at presentation) criteria can offer protective effect from mortality which persists after adjusting for age. This protective effect was not found to be negatively influenced by the risk of infection.

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.2174/2772434417666220817121439
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.08.19.20171868: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: Thank you for sharing your code.

    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.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2020.08.19.20171868v2 on medRxiv
  4. Version published to 10.1101/2020.08.19.20171868v1 on medRxiv