Patients hospitalized with COVID-19 are at a higher risk of thrombotic events following discharge, however the role of extended thromboprophylaxis remains controversial. The purpose of this study is to evaluate current extended post-discharge thromboprophylaxis practice and its outcomes.This study was a single-center, retrospective chart review of patients within Hennepin Healthcare hospitalized with COVID-19 from April 1^st 2020 to December 31^st 2021 with increased risk of thrombotic event based on D-dimer. The primary outcome was to describe current prescribing practices based on the number of patients who were eligible and received anticoagulants on discharge. Secondary outcomes included comparing the patient’s risk for thromboembolism based on a modified International Medical Prevention Registry on Venous Thromboembolism (IMPROVE-VTE) score to the current internal prescribing practice guideline, evaluating efficacy outcomes based on new thromboembolic events, and assessing safety of extended-thromboprophylaxis using the International Society of Thrombosis and Hemostasis criteria for major bleeding within 30 days of hospitalization discharge.Of 1984 patients who were hospitalized with COVID-19 infection, 961 patients were eligible to receive thromboprophylaxis at discharge, with a total of 191 patients who received anticoagulation according to the Hennepin Healthcare practice guideline. However, using the IMPROVE-VTE score, only 206 patients qualified for post-discharge thromboprophylaxis, and 63 total patients received anticoagulation. A new thromboembolic event occurred in 20 patients (5.8%) and 14 patients (4.1%) experienced major bleeding.The Hennepin Healthcare guideline for extended thromboprophylaxis at discharge encompassed more patients compared to the IMPROVE-VTE score. The incidence of a new thromboembolic event and major bleeding were low in both groups, although venous thrombotic events occurred more in thromboprophylaxis group than in patients who did not receive anticoagulation at discharge, more clinical data are needed for a conclusion.

Currently, there is no specific treatment for COVID-19 proven by clinical trials. WHO and CDC guidelines therefore endorse supportive care only. However, frontline clinicians have been applying several virus-based and host-based therapeutics in order to combat SARS-CoV-2. Medications from COVID-19 case reports, observational studies and the COVID-19 Treatment Guideline issued by the China's National Health Commission (7^th edition published March 3^rd, 2020. Edited translation attached) are evaluated in this review. Key evidence from relevant in vitro researches, animal models and clinical studies in SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV are examined. Antiviral therapies remdesivir, lopinavir/ritonavir and umifenovir, if considered, could be initiated before the peak of viral replication for optimal outcomes. Ribavirin may be beneficial as an add-on therapy and is ineffective as a monotherapy. Corticosteroids use should be limited without indicating comorbidities. IVIG is not recommended due to lack of data in COVID-19. Xuebijing may benefit patients with complications of bacterial pneumonia or sepsis. The efficacy of interferon is unclear due to conflicting outcomes in SARS and MERS studies. Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine have shown in vitro inhibition of SARS-CoV-2 and may be beneficial as both prophylactic and treatment therapy. For patients who developed cytokine release syndrome, interleukin-6 inhibitors may be beneficial. Given the rapid disease spread and increasing mortality, active treatment with readily available medications may be considered timely prior to disease progression.