Spontaneous Loculated Pneumomediastinum in a COVID-19-Infected Patient.

While we are still learning about COVID-19 affecting people, older persons and persons with underlying diseases such as high blood pressure, heart disease, and diabetes mellitus (DM) appear to develop serious illness and more complications often than others. In this report, we presented a patient with spontaneous pneumomediastinum after COVID-19. The patient was a 61-year-old man with a history of DM, hypertension, and heart failure, who has been infected with COVID-19. The patient was diagnosed with COVID-19 based on RT-PCR analysis of nasopharyngeal samples, and chest X-ray showed patchy infiltration upper and lower lobes bilaterally. By day 4, imaging was repeated, performed due to exacerbation of pleuritic chest pain, decreased O2 saturation (80%), and coughing that revealed multiple ground-glass opacities bilaterally, and interlobular septal thickening with emphysema in most of the left upper lobe and a small part of right upper lobe which led to severe spontaneous left pneumomediastinum and parenchymal consolidation was also observed. The combination of a chest tube, antibiotics (vancomycin 1 gr/bid and meropenem 1 g/bid), and antiviral (hydroxychloroquine 200 mg/bid and atazanavir 300 mg/daily) was prescribed, and continued treatment with antiviral and appropriate care for pneumomediastinum was successful. Spontaneous pneumomediastinum in the context of COVID-19 should be considered as a prognostic factor in favor of worsening diseases.

Comparing efficacy and safety of tocilizumab and methylprednisolone in the treatment of patients with severe COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to compare the efficacy and safety of methylprednisolone and tocilizumab in the treatment of patients with severe COVID-19. METHODS: During a prospective cohort study, hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19 received intravenous methylprednisolone (250-500 mg daily up to three doses), weight-based tocilizumab (maximum 800 mg, one or two doses as daily interval) or dexamethasone (8 mg daily). The primary outcome was time to onset of clinical response. Secondary outcomes were improvement rate of oxygen saturation and CRP, need for ICU admission, duration of hospitalization and 28-day mortality. During study, adverse events of the treatments were recorded. RESULTS: Although the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.090), clinical response occurred faster in the tocilizumab group than other groups (10 vs. 16 days). Clinical response was detected in 74.19%, 81.25%, and 60% of patients in the methylprednisolone, tocilizumab, and dexamethasone groups respectively (p = 0.238). Based on the Cox regression analysis and considering dexamethasone as the reference group, HR (95% CI) of clinical response was 1.08 (0.65-1.79) and 1.46 (0.89-2.39) in the methylprednisolone and tocilizumab groups respectively. Improvement rate of oxygen saturation and CRP was not significantly different between the groups (p = 0.791 and p = 0.372 respectively). Also need for ICU admission and 28-day mortality was comparable between the groups (p = 0.176 and p = 0.143 respectively). Compared with methylprednisolone, tocilizumab caused more sleep disturbances (p = 0.019). Other adverse events were comparable among patients in the groups. CONCLUSION: When or where access to tocilizumab is a problem, methylprednisolone may be considered as an alternative for the treatment of patients with severe COVID-19.

Inflawell® improves neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and shortens hospitalization in patients with moderate COVID-19, in a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial.

AIMS: COVID-19 is a significant global threat to public health. Despite the availability of vaccines and anti-viral drugs, there is an urgent need for alternative treatments to help prevent and/or manage COVID-19 symptoms and the underlying dysregulated immune response. We hypothesized that administration of Inflawell® syrup, a Boswellia extract formulation enriched for boswellic acids (BAs), can reduce the excessive or persistent inflammation and thereby prevent disease progression. BAs are medicinally activated triterpenoids found in the resins of Boswellia spp., and possess an immense therapeutic potential due to their anti-inflammatory and immunoregulatory activities. We investigated the effect of Inflawell® syrup, on moderate COVID-19 patients along with the current standard of care treatment. METHODS: A randomized placebo-controlled double-blind clinical trial was conducted, following definitive confirmation of COVID-19. Forty-seven hospitalized patients with moderate COVID-19 were enrolled and received either the Inflawell® syrup or placebo. Clinical symptoms and markers of inflammation were evaluated at baseline and completion of the trial. RESULTS: Our clinical trial revealed an increase in the percentage of oxygen saturation level in patients that received the BAs compared to placebo (P < 0.0001). In addition, the average duration of hospitalization was significantly shorter in the BAs group compared with the placebo group (P < 0.04). Concomitantly, some improvement in the clinical symptoms including cough, dyspnea, myalgia, headache, and olfactory and gustatory dysfunction were detected in the BAs group. Hematologic findings showed a significant decrease in the percentage of neutrophils (P < 0.006) and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) levels (P < 0.003), associated with a significant increase in the percentage of lymphocytes in the BAs group compared with the placebo (P < 0.002). Additionally, a significant decrease in CRP, LDH, IL - 6 and TNF - α levels was detected in the BAs group. Following the intervention, fewer patients in the BAs group were PCR-positive for COVID-19 compared to placebo, though not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Overall, the treatment with Inflawell® resulted in shorter hospital stay, alleviation of COVID-19 clinical symptoms and decline in the level of pro-inflammatory cytokines. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial has been registered in  https://www.irct.ir  with unique identifier: IRCT20170315033086N10 ( https://en.irct.ir/trial/51631 ). IRCT is a primary registry in the WHO registry network ( https://www.who.int/clinical-trials-registry-platform/network/primary-registries ).

Efficacy of a multiple-indication antiviral herbal drug (Saliravira®) for COVID-19 outpatients: A pre-clinical and randomized clinical trial study.

BACKGROUND: The scientific researches on COVID-19 pandemic topics are headed to an explosion of scientific literature. Despite these global efforts, the efficient treatment of patients is an in-progress challenge. Based on a meta-study of published shreds of evidence about compounds and their botanic sources in the last six decades, a novel multiple-indication herbal compound (Saliravira®) has been developed. Based on the antiviral, anti-inflammatory, and immune-enhancing properties of its ingredients, we hypothesized that Saliravira® has the potential to act as an antiviral agent, accelerate treatment, and reduce undesirable effects of COVID-19. METHODS: In this randomized, controlled, open-label clinical trial, COVID-19 outpatients were included by RT-PCR test or diagnosis of physicians according to the symptoms. Participants were randomly divided into intervention and control groups to receive Saliravira® package plus routine treatments of COVID-19 or routine treatments of COVID-19 alone, respectively. Saliravira® package includes tablets, nasal-sinuses spray, oral-pharynx spray, and inhaler drops. The treatment was for 10 days and followed up till 23 days after admission. RESULTS: On the 8th day, the "mean reduction rates" of viral load of the patients in the intervention group was 50% lower compared to the control group with a p-value < 0.05. The improvement of 10 out of 14 COVID-19 symptoms in the intervention group was significantly accelerated. The mean treatment duration of patients in the intervention group was 4.9 days less than the control group. In addition, no patients in the intervention group were hospitalized compared to 28% of the control group needed to be hospitalized.

Comparing efficacy and safety of different doses of dexamethasone in the treatment of COVID-19: a three-arm randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Corticosteroids are commonly used in the treatment of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The goals of the present study were to compare the efficacy and safety of different doses of dexamethasone in the treatment of patients with a diagnosis of moderate to severe COVID-19. METHODS: Hospitalized patients with a diagnosis of moderate to severe COVID-19 were assigned to intravenous low-dose (8 mg once daily), intermediate-dose (8 mg twice daily) or high-dose (8 mg thrice daily) dexamethasone for up to 10 days or until hospital discharge. Clinical response, 60-day survival and adverse effects were the main outcomes of the study. RESULTS: In the competing risk survival analysis, patients in the low-dose group had a higher clinical response than the high-dose group when considering death as a competing risk (HR = 2.03, 95% CI: 1.23-3.33, p = 0.03). Also, the survival was significantly longer in the low-dose group than the high-dose group (HR = 0.36, 95% CI = 0.15-0.83, p = 0.02). Leukocytosis and hyperglycemia were the most common side effects of dexamethasone. Although the incidence was not significantly different between the groups, some adverse effects were numerically higher in the intermediate-dose and high-dose groups than in the low-dose group. CONCLUSIONS: Higher doses of dexamethasone not only failed to improve efficacy but also resulted in an increase in the number of adverse events and worsen survival in hospitalized patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 compared to the low-dose dexamethasone. (IRCT20100228003449N31).

Predictors of the chest CT score in COVID-19 patients: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Since the COVID-19 outbreak, pulmonary involvement was one of the most significant concerns in assessing patients. In the current study, we evaluated patient's signs, symptoms, and laboratory data on the first visit to predict the severity of pulmonary involvement and their outcome regarding their initial findings. METHODS: All referred patients to the COVID-19 clinic of a tertiary referral university hospital were evaluated from April to August 2020. Four hundred seventy-eight COVID-19 patients with positive real-time reverse-transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) or highly suggestive symptoms with computed tomography (CT) imaging results with typical findings of COVID-19 were enrolled in the study. The clinical features, initial laboratory, CT findings, and short-term outcomes (ICU admission, mortality, length of hospitalization, and recovery time) were recorded. In addition, the severity of pulmonary involvement was assessed using a semi-quantitative scoring system (0-25). RESULTS: Among 478 participants in this study, 353 (73.6%) were admitted to the hospital, and 42 (8.7%) patients were admitted to the ICU. Myalgia (60.4%), fever (59.4%), and dyspnea (57.9%) were the most common symptoms of participants at the first visit. A review of chest CT scans showed that Ground Glass Opacity (GGO) (58.5%) and consolidation (20.7%) were the most patterns of lung lesions. Among initial clinical and laboratory findings, anosmia (P = 0.01), respiratory rate (RR) with a cut point of 25 (P = 0.001), C-reactive protein (CRP) with a cut point of 90 (P = 0.002), white Blood Cell (WBC) with a cut point of 10,000 (P = 0.009), and SpO2 with a cut point of 93 (P = 0.04) was associated with higher chest CT score. Lung involvement and consolidation lesions on chest CT scans were also associated with a more extended hospitalization and recovery period. CONCLUSIONS: Initial assessment of COVID-19 patients, including symptoms, vital signs, and routine laboratory tests, can predict the severity of lung involvement and unfavorable outcomes.

Efficacy and safety of sofosbuvir/ ledipasvir in treatment of patients with COVID-19; A randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: There is no study regarding the use of SOF/LDP in treatment of COVID-19.  Objectives: In this study, the efficacy and safety of SOF/LDP were assessed in treatment of patients with mild to moderate COVID-19. METHODS: Among an open-label randomized clinical trial, 82 patients with mild to moderated COVID-19 were assigned to receive either SOF/LDP 400/100 mg daily plus the standard of care (SOF/LDP group, n=42) or the standard of care alone (control group, n=40) for 10 days. Time to clinical response, rate of clinical response, duration of hospital and ICU stay and 14-day mortality were assessed. RESULTS: Clinical response occurred in 91.46% of patients. Although rates of clinical response were comparable between the groups but it occurred faster in the SOF/LDP group than the control group (2 vs. 4 days respectively, P= 0.02). Supportive cares were provided in the medical wards for most patients but 17.07% of patients were transferred to ICU during the hospitalization course. However, durations of hospital and ICU stay were comparable between the groups.  14--day mortality rate was 7.14% and 7.5% in the SOF/ LDP and control groups respectively. No adverse effects leading to drug discontinuation occurred. Gastrointestinal events (nausea, vomiting and diarrhea) were the most common side effects (15.85%). CONCLUSION: Added to the standard of care, SOF/LDP accelerated time to the clinical response. However, rate of clinical response, duration of hospital and ICU stay and 14-day mortality were not different. No significant adverse event was detected.  More randomized clinical trials with larger sample sizes are needed to confirm the efficacy and safety of SOF/LDP in the treatment of COVID-19.

CT-scan findings of COVID-19 pneumonia based on the time elapsed from the beginning of symptoms to the CT imaging evaluation: a descriptive study in Iran.

Background. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was initially detected in Wuhan city, China. Chest CT features of COVID-19 pneumonia have been investigated mostly in China, and there is very little information available on the radiological findings occurring in other populations. In this study, we aimed to describe the characteristics of chest CT findings in confirmed cases of COVID-19 pneumonia in an Iranian population, based on a time classification.Methods. Eighty-nine patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, confirmed by a real-time RT-PCR test, who were admitted to non-ICU wards and underwent a chest CT scan were retrospectively enrolled. Descriptive evaluation of radiologic findings was performed using a classification based on the time interval between the initiation of the symptoms and chest CT-scan.Results. The median age of patients was 58.0 years, and the median time interval from the onset of symptoms to CT scan evaluation was 7 days. Most patients had bilateral (94.4%) and multifocal (91.0%) lung involvement with peripheral distribution (60.7%). Also, most patients showed involvement of all five lobes (77.5%). Ground-glass opacities (GGO) (84.3%) and mixed GGO with consolidation (80.9%) were the most common identified patterns. We also found that as the time interval between symptoms and CT scan evaluation increased, the predominant pattern changed from GGO to mixed pattern and then to elongated-containing and band-like-opacities-containing pattern; on the other hand, the percentage of lung involvement increased.Conclusions. Bilateral multifocal GGO, and mixed GGO with consolidation were the most common patterns of COVID-19 pneumonia in our study. However, these patterns might change according to the time interval from symptoms.

Safety and effectiveness of azithromycin in patients with COVID-19: An open-label randomised trial.

As no specific pharmacological treatment has been validated for use in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), we aimed to assess the effectiveness of azithromycin (AZM) in these patients at a referral centre in Iran. An open-label, randomised controlled trial was conducted on patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19. A total of 55 patients in the control group receiving hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) were compared with 56 patients in the case group who in addition to the same regimen also received AZM. Patients with prior cardiac disease were excluded from the study. Furthermore, patients from the case group were assessed for cardiac arrythmia risk based on the American College of Cardiology (ACC) risk assessment for use of AZM and HCQ. The main outcome measures were vital signs, SpO2 levels, duration of hospitalisation, need for and length of intensive care unit admission, mortality rate and results of 30-day follow-up after discharge. Initially, there was no significant difference between the general conditions and vital signs of the two groups. The SpO2 levels at discharge were significantly higher, the respiratory rate was lower and the duration of admission was shorter in the case group. There was no significant difference in the mortality rate between the two groups. Patients who received AZM in addition to HCQ and LPV/r had a better general condition. HCQ+AZM combination may be beneficial for individuals who are known to have a very low underlying risk for cardiac arrhythmia based on the ACC criteria.