Preoperative anxiety during COVID-19 pandemic: A single-center observational study and comparison with a historical cohort.

Background: Preoperative anxiety is a common sensation experienced by patients undergoing surgical interventions. It can influence intraoperative and postoperative management through the activation of the neuroendocrine system, leading to tachycardia, hypertension, pulmonary complications, higher consumption of anesthetic drugs, and increased postoperative pain. Our aim was to investigate the level of preoperative anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic; we also compared it to the preoperative anxiety of a historical cohort before the outbreak. Methods: This is a single-center observational study. We enrolled 314 patients during the pandemic from May 2021 to November 2021, and our historical cohort consisted of 122 patients enrolled from July 2015 to May 2016 in the university hospital "Federico II" of Naples. The Amsterdam Preoperative Anxiety and Information Scale (APAIS) and the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) were used to evaluate preoperative anxiety. In particular, APAIS measures preoperative anxiety and the need for information, and STAI assesses state and trait anxiety through STAI-Y1 and STAI-Y2, respectively. We analyzed APAIS and STAI scores in our population stratified on the basis of age, gender, marital status, previous surgical experiences, and type of surgery, and we compared them to our historical cohort. Statistical analysis was performed through a t-test and ANOVA for parametric data, and the Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests for non-parametric data. Linear regression was used to investigate the correlation between demographic data and the scores of STAI and APAIS in both groups. Results: Our results showed that state and preoperative anxiety remained stable, whereas trait anxiety increased in all the subgroups analyzed. Discussion: Even if state anxiety is considered a variable characteristic of the emotional sphere and trait anxiety a stable element, our findings suggested that COVID-19 deeply influenced trait anxiety, thus altering the patients' psychological foundations.

Protocols of Anesthesia Management in Parturients with SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

BACKGROUND: Our hospital became a referral center for COVID-19-positive obstetric patients from 1 May 2020. The aim of our study is to illustrate our management protocols for COVID-19-positive obstetric patients, to maintain safety standards for patients and healthcare workers. METHODS: Women who underwent vaginal or operative delivery and induced or spontaneous abortion with a SARS-CoV-2-positive nasopharyngeal swab using real-time PCR (RT-PCR) were included in the study. Severity and onset of new symptoms were carefully monitored in the postoperative period. All the healthcare workers received a nasopharyngeal swab for SARS-CoV-2 using RT-PCR serially every five days. RESULTS: We included 152 parturients with COVID-19 infection. None of the included women had general anesthesia, an increase of severe symptoms or onset of new symptoms. The RT-PCR test was "negative" for the healthcare workers. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, neuraxial anesthesia for parturients' management with SARS-CoV-2 infection has been proven to be safe for patients and healthcare workers. Neuraxial anesthesia decreases aerosolization during preoxygenation, face-mask ventilation, endotracheal intubation, oral or tracheal suctioning and extubation. This anesthesia management protocol can be generalizable.

Fragility Index and Fragility Quotient in Randomized Controlled Trials on Corticosteroids in ARDS Due to COVID-19 and Non-COVID-19 Etiology.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of corticosteroids in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and COVID-19 still remains uncertain. Since ARDS is due to a hyperinflammatory response to a direct injury, we decided to perform a meta-analysis and an evaluation of robustness of randomised clinical trials (RCTs) investigating the impact of corticosteroids on mortality in ARDS in both COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients. We conducted a systematic search of the literature from inception up to 30 October 2020, using the MEDLINE database and the PubMed interface. We evaluated the fragility index (FI) of the included RCTs using a two-by-two contingency table and the p-value produced by the Fisher exact test; the fragility quotient (FQ) was calculated by dividing the FI score by the total sample size of the trial. RESULTS: Thirteen RCTs were included in the analysis; five of them were conducted in COVID-19 ARDS, including 7692 patients, while 8 RCTS were performed in non-COVID ARDS with 1091 patients evaluated. Three out of eight RCTs in ARDS had a FI > 0 while 2 RCTs out of five in COVID-19 had FI > 0. The median of FI for ARDS was 0.625 (0.47) while the median of FQ was 0.03 (0.014). The median of FI for COVID-19 was 6 (2) while the median of FQ was 0.059 (0.055). In this systematic review, we found that FI and FQ of RCTs evaluating the use of corticosteroids in ARDS and COVID-19 were low.

Venous Thromboembolism in COVID-19 Compared to Non-COVID-19 Cohorts: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: A high incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) is reported in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, in particular in patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). In patients with respiratory tract infections, including influenza A (H1N1), many studies have demonstrated an increased incidence of thromboses, but evidence is lacking regarding the risk difference (RD) of the occurrence of VTE between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients. METHODS: In this systematic review with meta-analysis, we evaluated the RD of the occurrence of VTE, pulmonary embolism (PE), and deep venous thrombosis (DVT) between COVID-19 and other pulmonary infection cohorts, in particular H1N1, and in an ICU setting. We searched for all studies comparing COVID-19 vs. non-COVID-19 regarding VTE, PE, and DVT. RESULTS: The systematic review included 12 studies and 1,013,495 patients. The RD for VTE in COVID-19 compared to non-COVID-19 patients was 0.06 (95% CI 0.11-0.25, p = 0.011, I2 = 97%), and 0.16 in ICU (95% CI 0.045-0.27, p = 0.006, I2 = 80%). The RD for PE between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients was 0.03 (95% CI, 0.006-0.045, p = 0.01, I2 = 89%). The RD for PE between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients was 0.021 in retrospective studies (95% CI 0.00-0.04, p = 0.048, I2 = 92%) and 0.11 in ICU studies (95% CI 0.06-0.16, p < 0.001, I2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: The growing awareness and understanding of a massive inflammatory response combined with a hypercoagulable state that predisposes patients to thrombosis in COVID-19, in particular in the ICU, may contribute to a more appropriate strategy of prevention and earlier detection of the thrombotic events.

From SARS-CoV-2 hematogenous spreading to endothelial dysfunction: clinical-histopathological study of cutaneous signs of COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: To date, very few studies on clinical-histopathological correlations of cutaneous disorders associated with COVID-19 have been conducted. CASE PRESENTATION: The Case 1 was a 90-year-old man, who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 from a nasopharyngeal swab. Two days later, he was hospitalized and after eleven days transferred to Intensive Care Unit. A chest CT showed bilateral ground-glass opacities. Just that day, an erythematous maculo-papular rash appeared on trunk, shoulders and neck, becoming purpuric after few days. Histological evaluations revealed a chronic superficial dermatitis with purpuric aspects. The superficial and papillary dermis appeared edematous, with a perivascular lympho-granulocytic infiltrate and erythrocytic extravasation. At intraepithelial level, spongiosis and a granulocyte infiltrate were detected. Arterioles, capillaries and post-capillary venules showed endothelial swelling and appeared ectatic. The patient was treated with hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, lopinavir-ritonavir and tocilizumab. Regrettably, due to severe lung impairment, he died. The Case 2 was a 85-year-old man, admitted to Intensive Care Unit, where he was intubated. He had tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 from a nasopharyngeal swab two days before. A chest RX showed bilateral atypical pneumonia. After seven days, a cutaneous reddening involving trunk, upper limbs, neck and face developed, configuring a sub-erythroderma. Histological evaluations displayed edema in the papillary and superficial reticular dermis, and a perivascular lymphocytic infiltrate in the superficial dermis. The patient was treated with hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, lopinavir-ritonavir and tocilizumab. Sub-erythroderma as well as respiratory symptoms gradually improved until healing. CONCLUSIONS: The endothelial swelling detected in the Case 1 could be a morphological expression of SARS-CoV-2-induced endothelial dysfunction. We hypothesize that cutaneous damage could be initiated by endothelial dysfunction, caused by SARS-CoV-2 infection of endothelial cells or induced by immune system activation. The disruption of endothelial integrity could enhance microvascular permeability, extravasation of inflammatory cells and cytokines, with cutaneous injury. The Case 2 developed a sub-erythroderma associated with COVID-19, and a non-specific chronic dermatitis was detected at histological level. We speculate that a purpuric rash could represent the cutaneous sign of a more severe coagulopathy, as highlighted histologically by vascular abnormalities, while a sub-erythroderma could be expression of viral hematogenous spreading, inducing a non-specific chronic dermatitis.

End of life in the time of COVID-19 pandemic: take care of death.

.