Clinical courses of 24,563 hospitalized COVID-19 patients during the first 12 months of the pandemic in the Central City of Iran.

This study was designed and implemented to analyze and establish documents related to the above cases in the first to third COVID-19 epidemic waves for the use of researchers and doctors during and after the epidemic. The current case series study was conducted on 24,563 thousand hospitalized COVID-19 patients by examining their clinical characteristics within a one-year period from the beginning of the pandemic on 02.22.2020 to 02.14.2021, which included the first to the third waves, based on gender and severity of COVID-19. The mean age of the participants was 56 ± 20.71, and 51.8% were male. Out of a total of 24,563 thousand hospitalized COVID-19 patients until February 2021, there were 2185 mortalities (9.8%) and 2559 cases of severe COVID-19 (13.1%). The median length of hospitalization from the time of admission to discharge or death in the hospital (IQR: 13-41) was estimated to be 21 days. The rate of hospital mortality was higher in severe (37.8%) than in non-severe (4.8%) cases of COVID-19, While the risk of severe cases increased significantly in the third (HR = 1.65, 95% CI: 1.46-1.87, P < 0.001) and early fourth waves (HR = 2.145, 95% CI: 1.7-2.71, P < 0.001). Also, the risk of contracting severe COVID-19 increased significantly in patients aged ≥ 65 years old (HR = 2.1, 95% CI 1.1.93-2.72, P < 0.001). As shown by the results, the rates of hospital mortality (9.3% vs. 8.5%) and severe cases of COVID-19 (13.6% vs. 12.5%) were higher among men than women (P < 0.01). In our study, the mortality rate and severity of COVID-19 were within the scope of global studies. Men experienced higher severity and mortality than women. The was a significantly higher prevalence of old age and underlying diseases in individuals with severe COVID-19. Our data also showed that patients with a previous history of COVID-19 had a more severe experience of COVID-19, while most of these patients were also significantly older and had an underlying disease.

Investigation of plasma exchange and hemoperfusion effects and complications for the treatment of patients with severe COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) disease: A systematic scoping review.

Some previous studies suggested that the plasma exchange (PE) and hemoperfusion (HP) played a cardinal role in the treatment of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases by diminishing the cytokine storm. This study aimed to assess the effects of PE and HP on cytokine storms in patients with severe COVID-19 through a systematic scoping review. Four Electronic databases (Medline [accessed from PubMed], Scopus, Science Direct, and Cochrane library) were searched systematically on February 2, 2021, using MESH terms and related keywords in the English language. Considering the titles and abstracts, unrelated studies were excluded. The full texts of the remained studies were evaluated by authors, independently. Then, their findings were assessed and reported. A total of 755 articles were obtained within the first step of searching, and 518 remained after removing the duplications. Through the title and abstract screening, 438 were removed. Of the rest, 59 papers were excluded. Finally, after reading the full text of the remained articles, 21 were included in data extraction. Most of the previously reported evidence were case reports and case series. Findings were summarized in two categories. The first category encompassed nine studies regarding HP and continuous renal replacement therapy, and the second category included twelve studies about PE. The results revealed that HP and PE within the cytokine storm phase would be beneficial with a high probability in the treatment of severely ill COVID-19 patients. Highlights Some studies showed that plasma exchange (PE) and hemoperfusion (HP) played an important role in the treatment of patients with severe COVID-19 disease. The results of this systematic scoping review revealed that HP and PE within the cytokine storm phase would be beneficial with a high probability in the treatment of severely ill COVID-19 patients.

A complementary critical appraisal on systematic reviews regarding the most efficient therapeutic strategies for the current COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic.

BACKGROUND: This critical appraisal aims to clarify which systematic reviews on COVID-19 treatment are based on high-value evidence. Hereby, the most profitable medicines can be suggested. METHODS: The mesh terms of "COVID-19 drug treatment" (Supplementary Concept) and "COVID-19 drug treatment" were sequentially utilized as search strategies in Medline and Science direct on October 18, 2020. Searches were confined to systematic reviews/meta-analyses. The Cochrane database was searched on November 1, 2020 with "COVID." With adding up four articles from other resources, 84 systematic reviews were considered for initial screening. Finally, 22 articles fulfilled the criteria and were assessed using PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS: Increasing number of clinical trials from the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic has revealed that hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine are not only profitable but also deleterious. Lopinavir/ritonavir failed to maintain their initial efficacy in improving clinical symptoms and mortality rate. Steroids and tocilizumab were suggested in patients with intensely severe symptoms. Steroids reduced mechanical ventilation and death in severely ill patients. Plasma or immunoglobulins effects are absolutely controversial. Favorable impressions of remdesivir have been relied on for the early onset of this drug. Hypotension and abnormal liver function tests were realized as its side effects. Favipiravir has resulted in a higher viral clearance than remdesivir. However, this claim needs to be proved with subsequent clinical trials. CONCLUSIONS: Currently, remdesivir and favipiravir are advantageous drugs that should be administered in the early phases. Their side effects are not well known and need to be found in the following research projects. Steroids and tocilizumab have been considered beneficial in the cytokine storm phase.

Early experiences of establishing telemedicine in the radiotherapy physics department at the time of the COVID-19 outbreak: When less staff is more effective

Background It is a unique challenge to provide radiation oncology care to cancer patients at the time of the COVID-19 outbreak without increasing the risk of staff and patients’ infection. In this paper, the impact of the remote access implementation strategy on the number of patients admitted for treatment and the physical presence time of the physicists in the department of medical physics of a radiotherapy center at the time of COVID-19 outbreak were evaluated. Method Remote PCTm software has been applied for physicists and oncologists to have access from their homes or offices to computer and medical systems of the center, such as a treatment planning system (TPS) and Record and Verify (R&V) system. Most of the tasks in the medical physics department, such as image registration, contouring, plan optimization, plan evaluation, and plan verification were performed via remote access. Results One-month studies after the implementation of this strategy showed that there was no notable change in the number of patients treated per month (less than 4% decrease compared to the average number of patients treated per month in the last year). The strategy significantly reduced the time required for the physical presence of medical physicists in the department (75%). Conclusions The use of teleworking can reduce the physical presence and unnecessary involvement in the radiotherapy department. This may ultimately decrease the risk of contamination of staff and indirectly the risk of contamination of patients.