Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has found the whole world unprepared for its correct management. Italy was the first European country to experience the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus at the end of February 2020. As a result of hospital overcrowding, the quality of care delivered was not always optimal. A substantial number of patients admitted to non-ICU units could have been treated at home. It would have been extremely useful to have a score that, based on personal and clinical characteristics and simple blood tests, could have predicted with sufficient reliability the probability that a patient had or did not have a disease that could have led to their death. This study aims to develop a scoring system to identify which patients with COVID-19 are at high mortality risk upon hospital admission, to expedite and enhance clinical decision making. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed to develop a multivariable prognostic prediction model. Results: Derivation and external validation cohorts were obtained from two Italian University Hospital databases, including 388 (10.31% deceased) and 1357 (7.68% deceased) patients with confirmed COVID-19, respectively. A multivariable logistic model was used to select seven variables associated with in-hospital death (age, baseline oxygen saturation, hemoglobin value, white blood cell count, percentage of neutrophils, platelet count, and creatinine value). Calibration and discrimination were satisfactory with a cumulative AUC for prediction mortality of 0.924 (95% CI: 0.893–0.944) in derivation cohorts and 0.808 (95% CI: 0.886–0.828) in external validation cohorts. The risk score obtained was compared with the ISARIC 4C Mortality Score, and with all the other most important scores considered so far, to evaluate the risk of death of patients with COVID-19. It performed better than all the above scores to evaluate the predictability of dying. Its sensitivity, specificity, and AUC were higher than the other COVID-19 scoring systems when the latter were calculated for the 388 patients in our derivation cohort. Conclusions: In conclusion, the CZ-COVID-19 Score may help all physicians by identifying those COVID-19 patients who require more attention to provide better therapeutic regimens or, on the contrary, by identifying those patients for whom hospitalization is not necessary and who could therefore be sent home without overcrowding healthcare facilities. We developed and validated a new risk score based on seven variables for upon-hospital admission of COVID-19 patients. It is very simple to calculate and performs better than all the other similar scores to evaluate the predictability of dying. Full article

Introduction: The objective of this study is to assess the failure of therapies with HFNO (high-flow nasal oxygen), CPAP, Bilevel, or combined therapy in patients with hypoxemic acute respiratory failure due to SARS-CoV-2 during their hospitalization. Methods: This was a retrospective and observational study of SARS-CoV-2-positive patients who required non-invasive respiratory support (NIRS) at the Reina Sofía General University Hospital of Murcia between March 2020 and May 2021. Results: Of 7355 patients, 197 (11.8%) were included; 95 of them failed this therapy (48.3%). We found that during hospitalization in the ward, the combined therapy of HFNO and CPAP had an overall lower failure rate and the highest treatment with Bilevel (p = 0.005). In the comparison of failure in therapy without two levels of airway pressure, HFNO, CPAP, and combined therapy of HFNO with CPAP, (35.6% of patients) presented with 24.2% failure, compared to those who had two levels of pressure with Bilevel and combined therapy of HFNO with Bilevel (64.4% of patients), with 75.8% associated failure (OR: 0, 374; CI 95%: 0.203–0.688. p = 0.001). Conclusions: The use of NIRS during conventional hospitalization is safe and effective in patients with respiratory failure secondary to SARS-CoV-2 infection. The therapeutic strategy of Bilevel increases the probability of failure, with the combined therapy strategy of CPAP and HFNO being the most promising option. Full article

Aero-medical evacuation has been considered as a feasible and safe treatment option during COVID pandemic, particularly when the needs of affected patients exceed what local clinics and hospitals are supposed to provide. In this article, we analyzed the clinical course of 17 patients medically evacuated to the “L. Spallanzani” Institute in Rome, Italy from foreign countries, mainly Africa and Eastern Europe, who had COVID-19 pneumonia with, or without, coinfections such as malaria, HIV, tuberculosis and microbiologically confirmed sepsis syndrome. The aero-medical evacuation of patients with infectious diseases has become one of the greatest medical achievements we have reached during this pandemic; in fact, only two patients with life threatening coinfections have died. Although logistically difficult and cost consuming, medical evacuation should be considered as a treatment option more than a single extraordinary measure, especially among complex cases that require specific technical and human resources. Full article

Background: Since data on the safety and effectiveness of home telemonitoring and oxygen therapy started directly after Emergency Department (ED) assessment in COVID-19 patients are sparse but could have many advantages, we evaluated these parameters in this study. Methods: All COVID-19 patients ≥18 years eligible for receiving home telemonitoring (November 2020-February 2022, Albert Schweitzer hospital, the Netherlands) were included: patients started directly after ED assessment (ED group) or after hospital admission (admission group). Safety (number of ED reassessments and hospital readmissions) and effectiveness (number of phone calls, duration of oxygen usage and home telemonitoring) were described in both groups. Results: 278 patients were included (n = 65 ED group, n = 213 admission group). ED group: 23.8% (n = 15) was reassessed, 15.9% (n = 10) was admitted and 7.7% (n = 5) ICU admitted. Admission group: 15.8% (n = 37) was reassessed, 6.5% (n = 14) was readmitted and 2.4% (n = 5) ICU (re)admitted. Ten patients died, of whom 7 due to COVID-19 (1 in ED group; 6 in the admission group). ED group: median duration of oxygen therapy was 9 (IQR 7–13) days; the total duration of home telemonitoring was 14 (IQR 9–18) days. Admission group: duration of oxygen therapy was 10 (IQR 6–16) days; total duration of home telemonitoring was 14 (IQR 10–20) days. Conclusion: it appears to be safe to start home telemonitoring and oxygen therapy directly after ED assessment. Full article

Background: It is unclear whether and how COVID-19 vaccination may affect the outcome of patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS). We investigated this potential association in a retrospective study by comparing previously vaccinated (VAX) versus unvaccinated (NoVAX) stroke patients. Methods: We collected clinical reports for all consecutive AIS patients admitted to our hospital and evaluated the outcome predictors in VAX and NoVAX groups. Adjustments were made for possible confounders in multivariable logistic regression analysis, and adjusted hazard ratios were calculated. Results: A total of 466 AIS patients (287 VAX and 179 NoVAX) were included in this study. The NIHSS score at discharge and mRS score at a 3-month follow-up visit were significantly lower in VAX patients compared to NoVAX patients (p < 0.001). Good outcomes (mRS 0–2) were significantly associated with COVID-19 vaccination before AIS (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.400 [95% CI = 0.216–0.741]). Conclusions: The observation that COVID-19 vaccination can influence the outcome of AIS provides support for further studies investigating the role of immunity in ischemic brain damage. Full article

A continuous demand for assistance and an overcrowded emergency department (ED) require early and safe discharge of low-risk severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-infected patients. We developed (n = 128) and validated (n = 330) the acute PNeumonia early assessment (aPNea) score in a tertiary hospital and preliminarily tested the score on an external secondary hospital (n = 97). The score’s performance was compared to that of the National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2). The composite outcome of either death or oral intubation within 30 days from admission occurred in 101 and 28 patients in the two hospitals, respectively. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve of the aPNea model was 0.86 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.78–0.93) and 0.79 (95% CI, 0.73–0.89) for the development and validation cohorts, respectively. The aPNea score discriminated low-risk patients better than NEWS2 at a 10% outcome probability, corresponding to five cut-off points and one cut-off point, respectively. aPNea’s cut-off reduced the number of unnecessary hospitalizations without missing outcomes by 27% (95% CI, 9–41) in the validation cohort. NEWS2 was not significant. In the external cohort, aPNea’s cut-off had 93% sensitivity (95% CI, 83–102) and a 94% negative predictive value (95% CI, 87–102). In conclusion, the aPNea score appears to be appropriate for discharging low-risk SARS-CoV-2-infected patients from the ED. Full article

(1) Background: Based on its antiviral activity, anti-inflammatory properties, and functional inhibition effects on the acid sphingomyelinase/ceramide system (FIASMA), we sought to examine the potential usefulness of the H1 antihistamine hydroxyzine in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. (2) Methods: In a multicenter observational study, we included 15,103 adults hospitalized for COVID-19, of which 164 (1.1%) received hydroxyzine within the first 48 h of hospitalization, administered orally at a median daily dose of 25.0 mg (SD = 29.5). We compared mortality rates between patients who received hydroxyzine at hospital admission and those who did not, using a multivariable logistic regression model adjusting for patients’ characteristics, medical conditions, and use of other medications. (3) Results: This analysis showed a significant association between hydroxyzine use and reduced mortality (AOR, 0.51; 95%CI, 0.29–0.88, p = 0.016). This association was similar in multiple sensitivity analyses. (4) Conclusions: In this retrospective observational multicenter study, the use of the FIASMA hydroxyzine was associated with reduced mortality in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Double-blind placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials of hydroxyzine for COVID-19 are needed to confirm these results, as are studies to examine the potential usefulness of this medication for outpatients and as post-exposure prophylaxis for individuals at high risk for severe COVID-19. Full article

Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) is a predominantly respiratory syndrome. Growing reports about a SARS-CoV-2 neurological involvement, including autonomic dysfunction (AD), have been reported, mostly in critically-ill patients, or in the long-COVID syndrome. In this observational, cross-sectional study, we investigated the prevalence of AD in 20 non-critically-ill COVID-19 patients (COVID+ group) in the acute phase of the disease through a composite instrumental evaluation consisting of Sudoscan, automated pupillometry, heart rate variability (HRV), and pulse transit time (PTT). All the parameters were compared to a control group of 20 healthy volunteers (COVID− group). COVID+ group presented higher values of pupillary dilatation velocities, and baseline pupil diameter than COVID− subjects. Moreover, COVID+ patients presented a higher incidence of feet sudomotor dysfunction than COVID− group. No significant differences emerged in HRV and PTT parameters between groups. In this study we observed the occurrence of autonomic dysfunction in the early stage of the disease. Full article

Background: Risk stratification of COVID-19 patients is fundamental to improving prognosis and selecting the right treatment. We hypothesized that a combination of lung ultrasound (LUZ-score), biomarkers (sST2), and clinical models (PANDEMYC score) could be useful to improve risk stratification. Methods: This was a prospective cohort study designed to analyze the prognostic value of lung ultrasound, sST2, and PANDEMYC score in COVID-19 patients. The primary endpoint was in-hospital death and/or admission to the intensive care unit. The total length of hospital stay, increase of oxygen flow, or escalated medical treatment during the first 72 h were secondary endpoints. Results: a total of 144 patients were included; the mean age was 57.5 ± 12.78 years. The median PANDEMYC score was 243 (52), the median LUZ-score was 21 (10), and the median sST2 was 53.1 ng/mL (30.9). Soluble ST2 showed the best predictive capacity for the primary endpoint (AUC = 0.764 (0.658–0.871); p = 0.001), towards the PANDEMYC score (AUC = 0.762 (0.655–0.870); p = 0.001) and LUZ-score (AUC = 0.749 (0.596–0.901); p = 0.002). Taken together, these three tools significantly improved the risk capacity (AUC = 0.840 (0.727–0.953); p ≤ 0.001). Conclusions: The PANDEMYC score, lung ultrasound, and sST2 concentrations upon admission for COVID-19 are independent predictors of intra-hospital death and/or the need for admission to the ICU for mechanical ventilation. The combination of these predictive tools improves the predictive power compared to each one separately. The use of decision trees, based on multivariate models, could be useful in clinical practice. Full article

Upon the eruption of COVID-19, frontline health-care workers confronted substantial workload and stress along with braving additional difficulties when performing at work. The main aim of this research was to assess the mediating role of work engagement in the direct impact of emotional intelligence on health-care professionals’ work performance. A cross-sectional study was conducted in several Spanish hospitals during the second half of 2020. A total of 1549 health-care workers (62.1% women; mean age 36.51 years) filled the Wong and Law Emotional Intelligence Scale, the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale and the Individual Work Performance Questionnaire. Our findings demonstrated that work engagement plays a mediating effect between emotional intelligence and work performance, even when accounting for sociodemographic variables. Indeed, among the three constructs of engagement, vigor dimension (a1b1 = 0.09; CI: 0.06; 0.12; p < 0.01) emerges over dedication (a2b2 = 0.083; CI = 0.05, 0.1; p < 0.01) and absorption (a3b3 = 0.047; CI = 0.02, 0.07; p < 0.01) as the most decisive one. Herewith, it is apparent that professionals with a higher self-perception of emotional intelligence report stronger levels of engagement, thereby leading to greater performance overall. The present work evinces the necessity for proactively developing the emotional competencies of the health-care workforce, especially in high-emotional demand contexts. Full article

Background: Several easy-to-use risk scoring systems have been built to identify patients at risk of developing complications associated with COVID-19. However, information about the ability of each score to early predict major adverse outcomes during hospitalization of severe COVID-19 patients is still scarce. Methods: Eight risk scoring systems were rated upon arrival at the Emergency Department, and the occurrence of thrombosis, need for mechanical ventilation, death, and a composite that included all major adverse outcomes were assessed during the hospital stay. The clinical performance of each risk scoring system was evaluated to predict each major outcome. Finally, the diagnostic characteristics of the risk scoring system that showed the best performance for each major outcome were obtained. Results: One hundred and fifty-seven adult patients (55 ± 12 years, 66% men) were assessed at admission to the Emergency Department and included in the study. A total of 96 patients (61%) had at least one major outcome during hospitalization; 32 had thrombosis (20%), 80 required mechanical ventilation (50%), and 52 eventually died (33%). Of all the scores, Obesity and Diabetes (based on a history of comorbid conditions) showed the best performance for predicting mechanical ventilation (area under the ROC curve (AUC), 0.96; positive likelihood ratio (LR+), 23.7), death (AUC, 0.86; LR+, 4.6), and the composite outcome (AUC, 0.89; LR+, 15.6). Meanwhile, the inflammation-based risk scoring system (including leukocyte count, albumin, and C-reactive protein levels) was the best at predicting thrombosis (AUC, 0.63; LR+, 2.0). Conclusions: Both the Obesity and Diabetes score and the inflammation-based risk scoring system appeared to be efficient enough to be integrated into the evaluation of COVID-19 patients upon arrival at the Emergency Department. Full article

We aimed to compare the mortality and comfort associated with high-flow nasal cannula oxygenation (HFNCO) and high-concentration mask (HCM) in older SARS-CoV-2 infected patients who were hospitalized in non-intensive care units. In this retrospective cohort study, we included all consecutive patients aged 75 years and older who were hospitalized for acute respiratory failure (ARF) in either an acute geriatric unit or an acute pulmonary care unit, and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. We compared the in-hospital prognosis between patients treated with HFNCO and patients treated with HCM. To account for confounders, we created a propensity score for HFNCO, and stabilizing inverse probability of treatment weighting (SIPTW) was applied. From March 2020 to January 2021, 67 patients (median age 87 years, 41 men) were hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2-related ARF, of whom 41 (61%) received HFNCO and 26 (39%) did not. Age and comorbidities did not significantly differ in the two groups, whereas clinical presentation was more severe in the HFNCO group (NEW2 score: 8 (5–11) vs. 7 (5–8), p = 0.02, and Sp02/Fi02: 88 (98–120) vs. 117 (114–148), p = 0.03). Seven (17%) vs. two (5%) patients survived at 30 days in the HFNCO and HCM group, respectively. Overall, after SIPTW, HFNCO was significantly associated with greater survival (adjusted hazard ratio (AHR) 0.57, 95% CI 0.33–0.99; p = 0.04). HFNCO use was associated with a lower need for morphine (AHR 0.39, 95% CI 0.21–0.71; p = 0.005), but not for midazolam (AHR 0.66, 95% CI 0.37–1.19; p = 0.17). In conclusion, HFNCO use in non-intensive care units may reduce mortality and discomfort in older inpatients with SARS-CoV-2-related ARF. Full article

Background and Aims: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) increases hyperinflammatory state, leading to acute lung damage, hyperglycemia, vascular endothelial damage, and a higher mortality rate. Metformin is a first-line treatment for type 2 diabetes and is known to have anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive effects. Previous studies have shown that metformin use is associated with decreased risk of mortality among patients with COVID-19; however, the results are still inconclusive. This study investigated the association between metformin and the risk of mortality among diabetes patients with COVID-19. Methods: Data were collected from online databases such as PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science, and reference from the most relevant articles. The search and collection of relevant articles was carried out between 1 February 2020, and 20 June 2021. Two independent reviewers extracted information from selected studies. The random-effects model was used to estimate risk ratios (RRs), with a 95% confidence interval. Results: A total of 16 studies met all inclusion criteria. Diabetes patients given metformin had a significantly reduced risk of mortality (RR, 0.65; 95% CI: 0.54–0.80, p < 0.001, heterogeneity I² = 75.88, Q = 62.20, and τ² = 0.06, p < 0.001) compared with those who were not given metformin. Subgroup analyses showed that the beneficial effect of metformin was higher in the patients from North America (RR, 0.43; 95% CI: 0.26–0.72, p = 0.001, heterogeneity I² = 85.57, Q = 34.65, τ² = 0.31) than in patients from Europe (RR, 0.67; 95% CI: 0.47–0.94, p = 0.02, heterogeneity I² = 82.69, Q = 23.11, τ² = 0.10) and Asia (RR, 0.90; 95% CI: 0.43–1.86, p = 0.78, heterogeneity I² = 64.12, Q = 11.15, τ² = 0.40). Conclusions: This meta-analysis shows evidence that supports the theory that the use of metformin is associated with a decreased risk of mortality among diabetes patients with COVID-19. Randomized control trials with a higher number of participants are warranted to assess the effectiveness of metformin for reducing the mortality of COVID-19 patients. Full article

Backgrounds Health care workers’ (HCWs) knowledge of and compliance with personal protective procedures is a key for patients’ and personnel safety. The aim of this study was to assess which factors are associated with higher self-evaluations of training on infection prevention and control (IPC) and higher self-assessment of IPC practices used by HCWs regarding COVID-19 in University Hospital in Krakow, Poland, in January 2021. Material and methods This was an online survey on the preparedness for COVID-19 epidemic of medical/non-medical staff and medical students. Questions included in the survey concerned participants’ socio-demographic characteristics, hospital staff involvement in the training, knowledge about the hand hygiene, and adherence to IPC measures. Knowledge and Performance Index (K&PI) based on selected questions was constructed for to reflect both subjective (self-evaluation) of preparedness and objective IPC knowledge and skills of HCWs participated in the IPC training. Results A total of 1412 health care workers, including 129 medical students, participated in the study. The largest group, 53.6%, was made up of nurses and paramedics. Age of respondents significantly correlated with knowledge of IPC and with K&PI. The mean age of workers with high K&PI was 42.39 ± 12.53, and among those with low, 39.71 ± 13.10, p < 0.001. 51% UHK workers participated in IPC training, but 11.3% of physicians, 28.8% of other HCWs, and 55.8% of students did not know the IPC standard precaution. Most participants, 72.3%, felt that they had received sufficient training; however, 45.8% of students declined this. There was no correlation between self-reported preparedness and the K&PI, indicating that self-reported preparedness was inadequate for knowledge and skills. Nurses and paramedics assessed their knowledge most accurately. Participants with low K&PI and high subjective evaluation constituted a substantial group in all categories. Students least often overestimated (23.8%) and most often (9.6%) underestimated their knowledge and skills. Conclusions Our study revealed inadequate IPC practice, especially as it refers to the training programme. We confirmed the urgent need of including theory and practice of IPC in curricula of health professions’ training in order to provide students with knowledge and skills necessary not only for future pandemic situations but also for everyday work. Full article

Aim: this work aims to assess if telemedicine and telemonitoring are clinically useful and safe for at-home monitoring of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study of all patients diagnosed with COVID-19 in Galicia (Northwestern Spain) between 26 December 2020 and 15 February 2021. The structured, proactive monitoring via telemonitoring (TELEA) of patients considered to be high-risk in the Lugo, A Mariña, and Monforte Healthcare Area (ASLAM) was evaluated compared to other models in the remaining healthcare areas of Galicia. Results: Of the 47,053 COVID-19 patients, 4384 (9.3%) were in ASLAM. Of them, 1187 (27.1%) were monitored via TELEA, and the rest (3197 in ASLAM and 42,669 in the rest of Galicia) were monitored via other methods. Patients monitored in ASLAM via TELEA were older, consulted in the emergency department less frequently (p = 0.05), were hospitalized less frequently (p < 0.01), had shorter hospital stays (p < 0.0001), and had a lower mortality rate in their first hospitalization (p = 0.03). No at-home life-threatening emergencies were recorded. Conclusions: these data suggest that, for COVID-19 patients, a care model involving proactive at-home monitoring with telemedicine and telemonitoring is associated with reduced pressure on hospital services and a lower mortality rate. Full article

Our main aim was to describe the effect on the severity of ACEI (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor) and ARB (angiotensin II receptor blocker) during COVID-19 hospitalization. A retrospective, observational, multicenter study evaluating hospitalized patients with COVID-19 treated with ACEI/ARB. The primary endpoint was the incidence of the composite outcome of prognosis (IMV (invasive mechanical ventilation), NIMV (non-invasive mechanical ventilation), ICU admission (intensive care unit), and/or all-cause mortality). We evaluated both outcomes in patients whose treatment with ACEI/ARB was continued or withdrawn. Between February and June 2020, 11,205 patients were included, mean age 67 years (SD = 16.3) and 43.1% female; 2162 patients received ACEI/ARB treatment. ACEI/ARB treatment showed lower all-cause mortality (p < 0.0001). Hypertensive patients in the ACEI/ARB group had better results in IMV, ICU admission, and the composite outcome of prognosis (p < 0.0001 for all). No differences were found in the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events. Patients previously treated with ACEI/ARB continuing treatment during hospitalization had a lower incidence of the composite outcome of prognosis than those whose treatment was withdrawn (RR 0.67, 95%CI 0.63–0.76). ARB was associated with better survival than ACEI (HR 0.77, 95%CI 0.62–0.96). ACEI/ARB treatment during COVID-19 hospitalization was associated with protection on mortality. The benefits were greater in hypertensive, those who continued treatment, and those taking ARB. Full article

(1) Background: Patients suffering from the novel coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) disease could experience several extra-pulmonary involvements, including cardiovascular complications and liver injury. This study aims to evaluate the presence of cardiac and liver alterations in patients with post-acute COVID-19 syndrome using transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) and liver elastography (LE). (2) Methods: A total of 97 subjects recovering from COVID-19, attending the hospital’s specialized outpatient clinic for persisting symptoms at 3 to 11 weeks after the acute illness, were included in this study. They all had a basal COVID-19 assessment, and subsequently, a clinical evaluation, laboratory tests, TTE, and LE. (3) Results: considering the presence of pulmonary injury during COVID-19, patients were divided into two groups. Although none of them had altered systolic function, we evidenced pulmonary hypertension, diastolic dysfunction, increased liver stiffness, viscosity, and steatosis in around one-third of the patients, with significantly higher values in subjects with pulmonary injury compared to those without. (4) Conclusion: persisting symptoms characterizing the post-acute COVID-19 syndrome could be explained by residual cardiac and hepatic lesions, which were worse in more severe COVID-19 forms. These patients may be at risk of developing liver fibrosis and cardiac alterations and should be investigated in the first 12 weeks after the onset of the infection. Full article

(1) Background: The inflammation or cytokine storm that accompanies COVID-19 marks the prognosis. This study aimed to identify three risk categories based on inflammatory parameters on admission. (2) Methods: Retrospective cohort study of patients diagnosed with COVID-19, collected and followed-up from 1 March to 31 July 2020, from the nationwide Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. The three categories of low, intermediate, and high risk were determined by taking into consideration the terciles of the total lymphocyte count and the values of C-reactive protein, lactate dehydrogenase, ferritin, and D-dimer taken at the time of admission. (3) Results: A total of 17,122 patients were included in the study. The high-risk group was older (57.9 vs. 64.2 vs. 70.4 years; p < 0.001) and predominantly male (37.5% vs. 46.9% vs. 60.1%; p < 0.001). They had a higher degree of dependence in daily tasks prior to admission (moderate-severe dependency in 10.8% vs. 14.1% vs. 17%; p < 0.001), arterial hypertension (36.9% vs. 45.2% vs. 52.8%; p < 0.001), dyslipidemia (28.4% vs. 37% vs. 40.6%; p < 0.001), diabetes mellitus (11.9% vs. 17.1% vs. 20.5%; p < 0.001), ischemic heart disease (3.7% vs. 6.5% vs. 8.4%; p < 0.001), heart failure (3.4% vs. 5.2% vs. 7.6%; p < 0.001), liver disease (1.1% vs. 3% vs. 3.9%; p = 0.002), chronic renal failure (2.3% vs. 3.6% vs. 6.7%; p < 0.001), cancer (6.5% vs. 7.2% vs. 11.1%; p < 0.001), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (5.7% vs. 5.4% vs. 7.1%; p < 0.001). They presented more frequently with fever, dyspnea, and vomiting. These patients more frequently required high flow nasal cannula (3.1% vs. 4.4% vs. 9.7%; p < 0.001), non-invasive mechanical ventilation (0.9% vs. 3% vs. 6.3%; p < 0.001), invasive mechanical ventilation (0.6% vs. 2.7% vs. 8.7%; p < 0.001), and ICU admission (0.9% vs. 3.6% vs. 10.6%; p < 0.001), and had a higher percentage of in-hospital mortality (2.3% vs. 6.2% vs. 23.9%; p < 0.001). The three risk categories proved to be an independent risk factor in multivariate analyses. (4) Conclusion: The present study identifies three risk categories for the requirement of high flow nasal cannula, mechanical ventilation, ICU admission, and in-hospital mortality based on lymphopenia and inflammatory parameters. Full article

The most severe clinical manifestations of the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), are due to an unbalanced immune response and a pro-thrombotic hemostatic disturbance, with arterial hypertension or diabetes as acknowledged risk factors. While waiting for a specific treatment, the clinical management of hospitalized patients is still a matter of debate, and the effectiveness of treatments to manage clinical manifestations and comorbidities has been questioned. In this study, we aim to assess the impact of the clinical management of arterial hypertension, inflammation and thrombosis on the survival of COVID-19 patients. The Spanish cohorts included in this observational retrospective study are from HM Hospitales (2035 patients) and from Hospital Universitario Central de Asturias (72 patients). Kaplan Meier survival curves, Cox regression and propensity score matching analyses were employed, considering demographic variables, comorbidities and treatment arms (when opportune) as covariates. The management of arterial hypertension with angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers is not detrimental, as was initially reported, and neither was the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). On the contrary, our analysis shows that the use on itself of corticosteroids is not beneficial. Importantly, the management of COVID-19 patients with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) as an anticoagulant significantly improves the survival of hospitalized patients. These results delineate the current treatment options under debate, supporting the effectiveness of thrombosis prophylaxis on COVID-19 patients as a first-line treatment without the need for compromising the treatment of comorbidities, while suggesting cautiousness when administering corticosteroids. Full article

The COVID-19 pandemic has entailed consequences on any type of physical activities, mainly due to the social restriction measures applied to reduce the spreading of SARS-CoV-2. When public health policies progressively reduced limitations and resuming a normal life was possible, the return to previous physical activity and sports was not only requested by people who had deeply suffered from limitations, but was also recommended by experts as a means of reducing the physical and psychological consequences induced by the pandemic. The aim of this narrative review is to summarize the available evidence on the return to play in children after SARS-CoV-2 infection, suggesting an algorithm for clinical practice and highlighting priorities for future studies. Criteria to identify subjects requiring laboratory and radiological tests before returning to physical activity are severity of COVID-19 and existence of underlying disease. Children of any age with asymptomatic infection or mild disease severity, i.e., the great majority of children with previous COVID-19, do not need a cardiologic test before resumption of previous physical activity. Only a visit or a telephonic contact with the primary care pediatricians should be established. On the contrary, children with moderate COVID-19 should not exercise until they are cleared by a physician and evaluated for resting electrocardiogram, exercise testing, and echocardiogram. Finally, in those with severe COVID-19, return to play should be delayed for several months, should be gradual and should be performed only after a cardiologist’s clearance. Further studies are needed to assess the risks of returning to sports activity in pediatric age, including careful age-adjusted risk stratification, in order to improve the cost–benefit ratio of specific screenings. Full article

Background: COVID-19 infection has dominated our lives and left its mark on it. The impact on fertility is major, and the long-term consequences may be disastrous. When we talk about oncofertility, we are talking about those patients worried about the delay in receiving medical services (possible cancelation of surgery, decreased availability of medical services, reorientation of medical resources) due to COVID-19. Finally, patients’ worsening biological and reproductive statuses, associated with high levels of anxiety and depression, are closely related to social restrictions, economic impact, reorientation of medical resources, health policies, and fears of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Aim: We reviewed the current literature on fertility during the COVID-19 pandemic and its effect on cancer patients. Specifically, how cancer treatment can affect fertility, the options to maintain fertility potential, and the recovery options available after treatment are increasingly common concerns among cancer patients. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted using two main central databases (PubMed^®/MEDLINE, and Web of Science) to identify relevant studies using keywords SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19, oncofertility, young cancer patient, cryopreservation, assisted reproductive techniques (ART), psychosocial, telemedicine. Results: In the present study, 45 papers were included, centered on the six main topics related to COVID-19. Conclusions: Fertility preservation (FP) should not be discontinued, but instead practiced with adjustments to prevent SARS-CoV-2 transmission. The increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in cancer patients requires screening for COVID-19 before FP procedures, among both patients and medical staff in FP clinics, to prevent infection that would rapidly worsen the condition and lead to severe complications. Full article

Although autonomic dysfunction (AD) after the recovery from Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been thoroughly described, few data are available regarding the involvement of the autonomic nervous system (ANS) during the acute phase of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The primary aim of this review was to summarize current knowledge regarding the AD occurring during acute COVID-19. Secondarily, we aimed to clarify the prognostic value of ANS involvement and the role of autonomic parameters in predicting SARS-CoV-2 infection. According to the PRISMA guidelines, we performed a systematic review across Scopus and PubMed databases, resulting in 1585 records. The records check and the analysis of included reports’ references allowed us to include 22 articles. The studies were widely heterogeneous for study population, dysautonomia assessment, and COVID-19 severity. Heart rate variability was the tool most frequently chosen to analyze autonomic parameters, followed by automated pupillometry. Most studies found ANS involvement during acute COVID-19, and AD was often related to a worse outcome. Further studies are needed to clarify the role of autonomic parameters in predicting SARS-CoV-2 infection. The evidence emerging from this review suggests that a complex autonomic nervous system imbalance is a prominent feature of acute COVID-19, often leading to a poor prognosis. Full article

Objective: We assessed the efficacy of colchicine in COVID-19 patients through a systematic review. Methods: Six databases were searched until March 2022 for studies assessing colchicine versus control in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The primary outcome was mortality, and secondary outcome was length of hospitalization. Inverse variance and random effect meta-analyses were performed. The strength of evidence was assessed using GRADE. Results: Nine studies (five randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and four non-randomized studies of intervention (NRSI); n = 13,478). Colchicine did not reduce mortality in comparison with the standard of care in RCTs (RR 0.99; 95%CI 0.90 to 1.10; p = 0.90); however, it did reduce mortality in NRSI studies (RR 0.45; 95%CI 0.26 to 0.77; p = 0.02). In the analysis of RCTs, colchicine did not reduce the length of hospitalization in comparison with the standard of care (MD: −2.25 days; 95%CI: −9.34 to 4.84; p = 0.15). Most studies were scored as having a high risk of bias. Quality of evidence was very low for primary and secondary outcomes. Conclusion: Colchicine did not reduce the mortality and length of hospitalization in comparison with the standard of care in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The published evidence is insufficient and of very low quality to recommend treatment in patients with COVID-19. Full article

The COVID-19 pandemic has produced an extraordinary care setting where physicians played, and continue to play, a critical role in containing viral spread and treating affected patients. Frontline workers have been receiving day-to-day new information about therapeutic advances. The purpose of the study is to analyse COVID-19 drug consumption trends in both acute and intensive care settings comparing Defined Daily Doses and the release of scientific clinical data from January to December 2020. Full article

Objective: Patients requiring hospital care for COVID-19 may be stable for discharge soon after admission. This study sought to describe patient characteristics associated with short-stay hospitalization for COVID-19. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients with COVID-19 admitted to five United States hospitals from March to December 2020. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify patient characteristics associated with short hospital length-of-stay. Results: Of 3103 patients, 648 (20.9%) were hospitalized for less than 48 h. These patients were significantly less likely to have an age greater than 60, diabetes, chronic kidney disease; emergency department vital sign abnormalities, or abnormal initial diagnostic testing. For patients with no significant risk factors, the adjusted probability of short-stay hospitalization was 62.4% (95% CI 58.9–69.6). Conclusion: Identification of candidates for early hospital discharge may allow hospitals to streamline throughput using protocols that optimize the efficiency of hospital care and coordinate post-discharge monitoring. Full article