Evaluation of cognitive, mental, and sleep patterns of post-acute COVID-19 patients and their correlation with thorax CT.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we have evaluated the cognitive, mental, and sleep patterns of post-COVID patients 2 months after their hospitalization, and after scoring their hospitalization thorax CTs, we have compared the degree of the lung involvement with cognitive and mental states of the patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty post-COVID patients were included in our study. Patients who were hospitalized due to COVID-19 and who had thorax CT scan at the admission were included in the study. Thorax CT scans of the patients were scored using chest severity scoring (CT-SS). The Mini-Mental State Examination test (MMSE), the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Test (MoCA), the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, and the Hamilton Depression and Hamilton Anxiety scales of all the participants were evaluated by the same person. RESULTS: Early stage cognitive impairment was detected in 15% of post-COVID patients in the MMSE test and mean MMSE test score was 26.9 ± 2.1. The MoCA test detected cognitive impairment in 55% of the patients, and the mean MoCA score was 19.6 ± 5.2. Furthermore, all patients showed depressive symptoms in Hamilton Depression Scoring System and 57.5% of the patients showed anxiety symptoms in the Hamilton Anxiety Scoring System. The mean Pittsburg Sleep Quality Index of the patients was 10.7 ± 3.1, and it was found to be higher than normal. The mean CT-SS scores, which used to evaluate the lung involvement, of the patients were 4.7 ± 5.6. We did not find any correlation between patients' cognitive tests and CT-SS scores. CONCLUSION: When these results are taken into consideration, our study has shown that the neuropsychiatric symptoms of the patients who had COVID-19 continued even after 2 months of their illness. Therefore, long-term rehabilitation of these patients, including cognitive education and psychological services, should be continued.

Updated Guidance Regarding The Risk ofAllergic Reactions to COVID-19 Vaccines and Recommended Evaluation and Management: A GRADE Assessment, and International Consensus Approach.

This guidance updates 2021 GRADE recomendations regarding immediate allergic reactions following COVID-19 vaccines and addresses re-vaccinating individuals with 1st dose allergic reactions and allergy testing to determine re-vaccination outcomes. Recent meta-analyses assessed the incidence of severe allergic reactions to initial COVID-19 vaccination, risk of mRNA-COVID-19 re-vaccination after an initial reaction, and diagnostic accuracy of COVID-19 vaccine and vaccine excipient testing in predicting reactions. GRADE methods informed rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommenations. A modified Delphi panel consisting of experts in allergy, anaphylaxis, vaccinology, infectious diseases, emergency medicine, and primary care from Australia, Canada, Europe, Japan, South Africa, the UK, and the US formed the recommendations. We recommend vaccination for persons without COVID-19 vaccine excipient allergy, and re-vaccination after a prior immediate allergic reaction. We suggest against >15-minute post-vaccination observation. We recommend against mRNA vaccine or excipient skin testing to predict outcomes. We suggest re-vaccination of persons with an immediate allergic reaction to the mRNA vaccine or excipients be performed by a person with vaccine allergy expertise, in a properly equipped setting. We suggest against pre-medication, split-dosing, or special precautions because of a comorbid allergic history.

Sinus Tachycardia: a Multidisciplinary Expert Focused Review.

Sinus tachycardia (ST) is ubiquitous, but its presence outside of normal physiological triggers in otherwise healthy individuals remains a commonly encountered phenomenon in medical practice. In many cases, ST can be readily explained by a current medical condition that precipitates an increase in the sinus rate, but ST at rest without physiological triggers may also represent a spectrum of normal. In other cases, ST may not have an easily explainable cause but may represent serious underlying pathology and can be associated with intolerable symptoms. The classification of ST, consideration of possible etiologies, as well as the decisions of when and how to intervene can be difficult. ST can be classified as secondary to a specific, usually treatable, medical condition (eg, pulmonary embolism, anemia, infection, or hyperthyroidism) or be related to several incompletely defined conditions (eg, inappropriate ST, postural tachycardia syndrome, mast cell disorder, or post-COVID syndrome). While cardiologists and cardiac electrophysiologists often evaluate patients with symptoms associated with persistent or paroxysmal ST, an optimal approach remains uncertain. Due to the many possible conditions associated with ST, and an overlap in medical specialists who see these patients, the inclusion of experts in different fields is essential for a more comprehensive understanding. This article is unique in that it was composed by international experts in Neurology, Psychology, Autonomic Medicine, Allergy and Immunology, Exercise Physiology, Pulmonology and Critical Care Medicine, Endocrinology, Cardiology, and Cardiac Electrophysiology in the hope that it will facilitate a more complete understanding and thereby result in the better care of patients with ST.

Vaccination counseling with and without excipient skin testing in patients with suspected allergic reactions to mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and patients with atopy.

Background: Allergic reactions have been reported with mRNA vaccines for COVID-19 prevention. Patients perceived to be at higher risk for a reaction may be referred to an allergist, although evaluation strategies may differ between allergists. Objective: Our aim was to determine outcomes of COVID-19 vaccinations in patients evaluated by an allergist using different approaches. Methods: We conducted a retrospective case series evaluation of 98 patients seen at the University of Michigan Allergy Clinic for concerns regarding COVID-19 vaccination. Of these 98 patients, 34 underwent skin testing with polyethylene glycol (PEG) 2000 with or without PEG 3350/polysorbate 80 testing. Results: Of the 34 patients on whom skin testing was performed, 16 underwent testing before vaccination and 18 underwent testing after a reported vaccine-related event. One patient had a positive skin testing result in response to PEG 3350 following a vaccination reaction and natural infection and was advised against a second dose. One patient with a significant history concerning of anaphylaxis in response to PEG had positive results of testing to identify allergy to PEG 2000, PEG 3350, and polysorbate 80 and was advised against vaccination. Of the 98 patients, 63 (64%) tolerated COVID-19 vaccination without complication after evaluation by an allergist. Conclusion: No significant differences were found between vaccination counseling with and without skin testing to excipients. Patients who presented before the first dose of vaccination were more likely to proceed with COVID-19 vaccination and tolerate vaccination without complication.

Comparative Effectiveness of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Vaccines Against the Delta Variant.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of data regarding how the Delta variant of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has impacted the effectiveness of the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech), mRNA-1273 (Moderna), and Ad26.COV2.S (Johnson & Johnson-Janssen) vaccines at preventing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and COVID-19 hospitalization. METHODS: We compared the effectiveness of the three vaccines during the pre- and post-Delta variant period (before and after 1 July 2021) in a large cohort of vaccinated and unvaccinated patients in the Michigan Medicine healthcare system. We assessed vaccine effectiveness (VE) using 2 analyses: an inverse propensity weighted (IPW) Kaplan-Meier (KM) analysis based on time from vaccination, and a Cox model based on calendar time with vaccination as a time-varying covariate. RESULTS: Compared to Ad26.COV2.S recipients, the risk of hospitalization for COVID-19 in the post-Delta variant period was lower for BNT162b2 recipients (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.37; 95% confidence interval [CI]: [.14-.98]; P = .05) and mRNA-1273 recipients (HR = 0.21; 95% CI: [.07-.64]; P = .006). Recipients of the mRNA-1273 vaccine had a lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection than Ad26.COV2.S recipients (HR = 0.6; 95% CI: [.43-.83]; P = .003) and BNT162b2 recipients (HR = 0.64; 95% CI: [.54-.76]; P < .001). After 1 July, efficacy against SARS-CoV-2 infection declined for Ad26.COV2.S recipients (VE = 76% before; VE = 49% after; P = .02), BNT162b2 recipients (VE = 87% before; VE = 52% after; P < .001), and mRNA-1273 recipients (VE = 92% before; VE = 70% after; P < .001). Waning immunity and the Delta variant contributed independently and significantly to this decline. CONCLUSIONS: Although there is a substantial decline in effectiveness, the approved COVID-19 vaccines remain effective against infection and hospitalization due to the Delta variant. The mRNA-based vaccines are more effective than the Ad26.COV2.S vaccine.

Efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines in patients taking immunosuppressants.

OBJECTIVES: We intended to assess the effectiveness of all three US Food and Drug Administration approved COVID-19 vaccines at preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 hospitalisation in a large cohort of individuals on immunosuppressants for a diverse range of conditions. METHODS: We studied the effectiveness of BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech), mRNA-1273 (Moderna) and Ad26.COV2.S (Johnson & Johnson-Janssen) vaccines among individuals who take immunosuppressants (including disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs and glucocorticoids) by comparing vaccinated (n=97688) and unvaccinated (n=42094) individuals in the Michigan Medicine healthcare system from 1 January to 7 December 2021, using Cox proportional hazards modelling with time-varying covariates. RESULTS: Among vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals, taking immunosuppressants increased the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (adjusted HR (aHR)=2.17, 95% CI 1.69 to 2.79 for fully vaccinated and aHR=1.40, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.83 for unvaccinated). Among individuals taking immunosuppressants, we found: (1) vaccination reduced the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (aHR=0.55, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.78); (2) the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines were highly effective at reducing the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (n=2046, aHR=0.59, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.91 for BNT162b2; n=2064, aHR=0.52, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.82 for mRNA-1273); (3) with a smaller sample size (n=173), Ad26.COV2.S vaccine protection did not reach statistical significance (aHR=0.34, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.30, p=0.17); and (4) receiving a booster dose reduced the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (aHR=0.42, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.76). CONCLUSIONS: The mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2 vaccines are effective in individuals who take immunosuppressants. However, individuals who are vaccinated but on immunosuppressants are still at higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 hospitalisation than the broader vaccinated population. Booster doses are effective and crucially important for individuals on immunosuppressants.

The Risk of Allergic Reaction to SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines and Recommended Evaluation and Management: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, GRADE Assessment, and International Consensus Approach.

Concerns for anaphylaxis may hamper severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) immunization efforts. We convened a multidisciplinary group of international experts in anaphylaxis composed of allergy, infectious disease, emergency medicine, and front-line clinicians to systematically develop recommendations regarding SARS-CoV-2 vaccine immediate allergic reactions. Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, the World Health Organizstion (WHO) global coronavirus database, and the gray literature (inception, March 19, 2021) were systematically searched. Paired reviewers independently selected studies addressing anaphylaxis after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, polyethylene glycol (PEG) and polysorbate allergy, and accuracy of allergy testing for SARS-CoV-2 vaccine allergy. Random effects models synthesized the data to inform recommendations based on the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, agreed upon using a modified Delphi panel. The incidence of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine anaphylaxis is 7.91 cases per million (n = 41,000,000 vaccinations; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 4.02-15.59; 26 studies, moderate certainty), the incidence of 0.15 cases per million patient-years (95% CI 0.11-0.2), and the sensitivity for PEG skin testing is poor, although specificity is high (15 studies, very low certainty). We recommend vaccination over either no vaccination or performing SARS-CoV-2 vaccine/excipient screening allergy testing for individuals without history of a severe allergic reaction to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine/excipient, and a shared decision-making paradigm in consultation with an allergy specialist for individuals with a history of a severe allergic reaction to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine/excipient. We recommend further research to clarify SARS-CoV-2 vaccine/vaccine excipient testing utility in individuals potentially allergic to SARS-CoV2 vaccines or their excipients.

COVID-19 Vaccination in Mastocytosis: Recommendations of the European Competence Network on Mastocytosis (ECNM) and American Initiative in Mast Cell Diseases (AIM).

Mastocytosis is a neoplasm characterized by an accumulation of mast cells in various organs and increased risk for severe anaphylaxis in patients with concomitant allergies. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a pandemic that is associated with a relatively high rate of severe lung disease and mortality. The mortality is particularly high in those with certain comorbidities and increases with age. Recently, several companies have developed an effective vaccination against COVID-19. Although the reported frequency of severe side effects is low, there is an emerging discussion about the safety of COVID-19 vaccination in patients with severe allergies and mastocytosis. However, even in these patients, severe adverse reactions are rare. We therefore recommend the broad use of COVID-19 vaccination in patients with mastocytosis on a global basis. The only well-established exception is a known or suspected allergy against a constituent of the vaccine. Safety measures, including premedication and postvaccination observation, should be considered in all patients with mastocytosis, depending on the individual personal risk and overall situation in each case. The current article provides a summary of published data, observations, and expert opinion that form the basis of these recommendations.

Risk and management of patients with mastocytosis and MCAS in the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic: Expert opinions.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) (caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) pandemic has massively distorted our health care systems and caused catastrophic consequences in our affected communities. The number of victims continues to increase, and patients at risk can only be protected to a degree, because the virulent state may be asymptomatic. Risk factors concerning COVID-19-induced morbidity and mortality include advanced age, an impaired immune system, cardiovascular or pulmonary diseases, obesity, diabetes mellitus, and cancer treated with chemotherapy. Here, we discuss the risk and impact of COVID-19 in patients with mastocytosis and mast cell activation syndromes. Because no published data are yet available, expert opinions are, by necessity, based on case experience and reports from patients. Although the overall risk to acquire the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 may not be elevated in mast cell disease, certain conditions may increase the risk of infected patients to develop severe COVID-19. These factors include certain comorbidities, mast cell activation-related events affecting the cardiovascular or bronchopulmonary system, and chemotherapy or immunosuppressive drugs. Therefore, such treatments should be carefully evaluated on a case-by-case basis during a COVID-19 infection. In contrast, other therapies, such as anti-mediator-type drugs, venom immunotherapy, or vitamin D, should be continued. Overall, patients with mast cell disorders should follow the general and local guidelines in the COVID-19 pandemic and advice from their medical provider.