Post-Acute COVID-19 Joint Pain and New Onset of Rheumatic Musculoskeletal Diseases: A Systematic Review.

As the number of reports of post-acute COVID-19 musculoskeletal manifestations is rapidly rising, it is important to summarize the current available literature in order to shed light on this new and not fully understood phenomenon. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review to provide an updated picture of post-acute COVID-19 musculoskeletal manifestations of potential rheumatological interest, with a particular focus on joint pain, new onset of rheumatic musculoskeletal diseases and presence of autoantibodies related to inflammatory arthritis such as rheumatoid factor and anti-citrullinated protein antibodies. We included 54 original papers in our systematic review. The prevalence of arthralgia was found to range from 2% to 65% within a time frame varying from 4 weeks to 12 months after acute SARS-CoV-2 infection. Inflammatory arthritis was also reported with various clinical phenotypes such as symmetrical polyarthritis with RA-like pattern similar to other prototypical viral arthritis, polymyalgia-like symptoms, or acute monoarthritis and oligoarthritis of large joints resembling reactive arthritis. Moreover, high figures of post-COVID-19 patients fulfilling the classification criteria for fibromyalgia were found, ranging from 31% to 40%. Finally, the available literature about prevalence of rheumatoid factor and anti-citrullinated protein antibodies was largely inconsistent. In conclusion, manifestations of rheumatological interest such as joint pain, new-onset inflammatory arthritis and fibromyalgia are frequently reported after COVID-19, highlighting the potential role of SARS-CoV-2 as a trigger for the development of autoimmune conditions and rheumatic musculoskeletal diseases.

Influence of Coaching on Effectiveness, Participation, and Safety of an Exercise Program for Postmenopausal Women with Osteoporosis: A Randomized Trial.

Purpose: We compared two different strategies providing professional coaching to administer an exercise program for women with postmenopausal osteoporosis (POP): individual training (IT) at home with trainer's supervision provided by telephone contacts at regular time-intervals or group training (GT) with trainer's live supervision. Our working hypothesis was that IT is a valid alternative to GT when GT is not feasible. Patients and Methods: This was a single-blind, randomized study. We recruited 52 women with POP, without significant comorbidity, and no participation in any structured exercise program within the previous 6 months. They were assigned randomly to IT or GT groups (n = 26 each). Distribution of age (IT: 68±4, GT: 67±8 years) and body mass index (IT: 23.0±2.5, GT: 21.4±5.1) was similar between groups. Each group performed the exercise program in two 1-hour sessions per week for 18 months. Primary outcome measure was Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL), as measured by the Short Osteoporosis Quality of Life Questionnaire. Secondary outcome measures focused on domains acknowledged to influence HRQoL (disability, fear of falling, weekly physical activity, physical function) or the effectiveness of the exercise program (retention, adherence, and safety). Significance level was set at p < 0.05. Results: No significant differences were observed between IT and GT groups for any domain. Retention, adherence, and safety were also similar. HRQoL, disability and fear of falling did not change between baseline and follow-up for either group. However, for both groups, physical function (knee flexion, shoulder mobility) and functional capacity (6-minute walking test) improved. Weekly physical activity levels increased from moderate range at baseline to intense at final assessment for both groups. Conclusion: IT and GT supervised exercise programs for women with POP provide similar effectiveness, participation and safety. Hence, both modalities should be considered for future translation in clinical practice of exercise recommendations for POP.

Use of High-Dose Nebulized Colistimethate in Patients with Colistin-Only Susceptible Acinetobacter baumannii VAP: Clinical, Pharmacokinetic and Microbiome Features.

(1) Background: Colistin-only susceptible (COS) Acinetobacter baumannii (AB) ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) represents a clinical challenge in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) due to the negligible lung diffusion of this molecule and the low-grade evidence on efficacy of its nebulization. (2) Methods: We conducted a prospective observational study on 134 ICU patients with COS-AB VAP to describe the 'real life' clinical use of high-dose (5 MIU q8) aerosolized colistin, using a vibrating mesh nebulizer. Lung pharmacokinetics and microbiome features were investigated. (3) Results: Patients were enrolled during the COVID-19 pandemic with the ICU presenting a SAPS II of 42 [32-57]. At VAP diagnosis, the median PaO2/FiO2 was 120 [100-164], 40.3% were in septic shock, and 24.6% had secondary bacteremia. The twenty-eight day mortality was 50.7% with 60.4% and 40.3% rates of clinical cure and microbiological eradication, respectively. We did not observe any drug-related adverse events. Epithelial lining fluid colistin concentrations were far above the CRAB minimal-inhibitory concentration and the duration of nebulized therapy was an independent predictor of microbiological eradication (12 [9.75-14] vs. 7 [4-13] days, OR (95% CI): 1.069 (1.003-1.138), p = 0.039). (4) Conclusions: High-dose and prolonged colistin nebulization, using a vibrating mesh, was a safe adjunctive therapeutic strategy for COS-AB VAP. Its right place and efficacy in this setting warrant investigation in interventional studies.

Fibromyalgia: a new facet of the post-COVID-19 syndrome spectrum? Results from a web-based survey.

OBJECTIVE: Postacute COVID-19 syndrome (PACS) is an emerging entity characterised by a large array of manifestations, including musculoskeletal complaints, fatigue and cognitive or sleep disturbances. Since similar symptoms are present also in patients with fibromyalgia (FM), we decided to perform a web-based cross-sectional survey aimed at investigating the prevalence and predictors of FM in patients who recovered from COVID-19. METHODS: Data were anonymously collected between 5 and 18 April 2021. The collection form consisted of 28 questions gathering demographic information, features and duration of acute COVID-19, comorbid diseases, and other individual's attributes such as height and weight. The American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Survey Criteria and the Italian version of the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire completed the survey. RESULTS: A final sample of 616 individuals (77.4% women) filled the form 6±3 months after the COVID-19 diagnosis. Of these, 189 (30.7%) satisfied the ACR survey criteria for FM (56.6% women). A multivariate logistic regression model including demographic and clinical factors showed that male gender (OR: 9.95, 95% CI 6.02 to 16.43, p<0.0001) and obesity (OR: 41.20, 95% CI 18.00 to 98.88, p<0.0001) were the strongest predictors of being classified as having post-COVID-19 FM. Hospital admission rate was significantly higher in men (15.8% vs 9.2%, p=0.001) and obese (19.2 vs 10.8%, p=0.016) respondents. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that clinical features of FM are common in patients who recovered from COVID-19 and that obesity and male gender affect the risk of developing post-COVID-19 FM.

Levels and Factors Associated with Resilience in Italian Healthcare Professionals during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Web-Based Survey.

BACKGROUND: Resilience is defined as the capacity to cope successfully with change or adversity. The aims of our study were to investigate levels of resilience in Italian healthcare professionals (HCPs) during the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and to identify potential predictors of resilience. METHODS: We performed a web-based survey of HCPs (n = 1009) working in Italian hospitals during the COVID-19 pandemic. The survey contained a 14-item resilience scale (RS14) and questionnaires to evaluate depression and anxiety symptoms. Non-HCP individuals (n = 375) from the general population were used for comparison. RESULTS: HCPs showed significantly lower resilience compared to the control group (p = 0.001). No significant differences were observed after stratification for geographical area, work setting, role, or suspected/confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19. In a linear regression analysis, RS14 was inversely correlated with depression (R2 = 0.227, p < 0.001) and anxiety (R2 = 0.117, p < 0.001) and directly correlated with age (R2 = 0.012, p < 0.001) but not with body mass index (BMI, R2 = 0.002, p = 0.213). In male HCPs, higher depression score (odds ratio (OR) 1.147, p < 0.001) or BMI (OR 1.136, p = 0.011) significantly predicted having low resilience. In female HCPs, higher depression score (OR 1.111, p < 0.0001) and working in a COVID-19 free setting (OR 2.308, p = 0.002) significantly predicted having low resilience. HCPs satisfied with personal protective equipment had higher levels of resilience (p < 0.010). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that resilience was lower in Italian HCPs than in the general population after the first COVID-19 wave. Specific factors can be identified, and targeted interventions may have an important role to foster resilience of HCPs.

Living with arthritis: a "training camp" for coping with stressful events? A survey on resilience of arthritis patients following the COVID-19 pandemic.

Resilience is defined as "the capacity of individuals to cope successfully with significant change or adversity". The challenge posed by the COVID-19 pandemic may potentially represent an overwhelmingly stressful event for patients with chronic diseases. Aim of our study was to investigate the levels of resilience in individuals with inflammatory arthritis living in Emilia Romagna, the third hardest-hit Italian region during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. To this purpose, we developed a survey consisting of four different sections assessing demographic characteristics, the 14-item resilience scale (RS14) and questionnaires evaluating depression and anxiety. Consecutive patients with inflammatory arthritis were recruited over a short time frame immediately after the end of national lockdown and compared with control individuals from the general population. One hundred twenty-two patients and 173 controls were included. Levels of resilience, as measured by RS14 score, were significantly higher in patients with inflammatory arthritis (82.6 ± 14.0 vs 79.0 ± 12.8, p = 0.018). After stratification for gender, the difference in RS14 score was maintained in women (p = 0.045), but not in men (p = 0.252). High resilience, defined as having a RS14 score > 90, was significantly more prevalent in patients than in controls (30% vs 16%, p = 0.009). In arthritis patients, no significant differences in RS14 were observed after stratification for specific diagnosis, age, or disease duration and activity. Our findings suggest that patients with inflammatory arthritis may be more resilient than the general population towards unexpected stressful events such as the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Key Points • Living with inflammatory arthritis may foster resilience. • After COVID-19, patients with inflammatory arthritis were more resilient than the general population.

Approaching coronavirus disease 2019: Mechanisms of action of repurposed drugs with potential activity against SARS-CoV-2.

On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the severe acute respiratory syndrome caused by coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) a global pandemic. As of July 2020, SARS-CoV-2 has infected more than 14 million people and provoked more than 590,000 deaths, worldwide. From the beginning, a variety of pharmacological treatments has been empirically used to cope with the life-threatening complications associated with Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Thus far, only a couple of them and not consistently across reports have been shown to further decrease mortality, respect to what can be achieved with supportive care. In most cases, and due to the urgency imposed by the number and severity of the patients' clinical conditions, the choice of treatment has been limited to repurposed drugs, approved for other indications, or investigational agents used for other viral infections often rendered available on a compassionate-use basis. The rationale for drug selection was mainly, though not exclusively, based either i) on the activity against other coronaviruses or RNA viruses in order to potentially hamper viral entry and replication in the epithelial cells of the airways, and/or ii) on the ability to modulate the excessive inflammatory reaction deriving from dysregulated host immune responses against the SARS-CoV-2. In several months, an exceptionally large number of clinical trials have been designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of anti-COVID-19 therapies in different clinical settings (treatment or pre- and post-exposure prophylaxis) and levels of disease severity, but only few of them have been completed so far. This review focuses on the molecular mechanisms of action that have provided the scientific rationale for the empirical use and evaluation in clinical trials of structurally different and often functionally unrelated drugs during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.