Ovarian Vein Thrombosis: A Sequela of COVID-Associated Coagulopathy.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) causes endothelial damage, blood stasis, and an overall state of hypercoagulability. This makes COVID a huge risk factor for venous thromboembolism (VTE) and arterial thromboembolism (ATE). Twenty percent of COVID-19 patients suffer from coagulation abnormalities like pulmonary embolism, myocardial infarction, stroke, deep vein thrombosis, etc. Ovarian vein thrombosis (OVT) has been previously linked to post-partum period, pregnancy, hypercoagulable state, or malignancy. We analyzed PubMed and Google Scholar databases for research and publications regarding OVT in patients with COVID-19. The search yielded nine case reports. These case reports were found to implicate COVID-associated coagulopathy (CAC) as an additional risk factor for ovarian vein thrombosis (OVT). OVT most commonly presents with abdominal pain and fever, making it difficult to diagnose, owing to the similarity in presentation with multiple other pathologies. OVT can be diagnosed radiologically with ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan, or CT scan with IV contrast. CT has been used as the modality of choice for diagnosing OVT. Although rare, OVT can cause life-endangering complications by extension of thrombus into systemic veins or pulmonary artery embolization. Therefore, early diagnosis and treatment are vital. There is no official guideline for the treatment of OVT post-COVID. However, the literature supports the use of apixaban or enoxaparin/acenocoumarol.

Golden opportunity for intervention? Identifying vitamin D deficiency in patients with substance use disorders in hospital.

SETTING: Based at a busy city hospital, the alcohol care team is a drug and alcohol specialist service, taking referrals for a wide range of patients with substance use disorders (SUD). OBJECTIVES: Patients with SUD are at high risk of vitamin D deficiency; this relates to frequent fractures and proximal myopathy. The coronavirus pandemic brought vitamin D into focus. Local guidelines advise that patients at high risk of vitamin D deficiency are offered replacement. There were no local data on vitamin D deficiency prevalence or any mention of patients with SUD in local vitamin D guidelines. The main aim of this project was to offer vitamin D checks and replacement to all appropriate patients. RESULTS: We collected data on 207 patients, [pilot study (n=50) and two subsequent samples (n=95 and n=62)]. Our pilot study showed that no patients were offered vitamin D testing or replacement. We then offered vitamin D checks to 95 patients. Most had low vitamin D (30 patients were vitamin D deficient and 26 were vitamin D insufficient). We provided vitamin D replacement and follow-up advice. Quality improvement was demonstrated 6 months later. We collected data on a further 62 patients who were all on our current or recent caseload. Following exclusions, nearly half (48%) of patients had had a vitamin D check. Almost all of these (95%) had low vitamin D (60% being classified as deficient). CONCLUSIONS: Patients had not been offered vitamin D replacement despite often having multiple risk factors for vitamin D deficiency. Vitamin D checks (and subsequent replacement) rose in frequency since the outset of this project. Local guidelines should add SUD as a risk factor for vitamin D deficiency. Hospital admission provides a rich opportunity to offer this simple intervention to patients who are often poorly engaged with community services.

COVID-19 Infection in Reproductive Age Group Females: Experience of a Tertiary Care Urban Teaching Hospital.

Background: The objective of this study was to find out the effect, course of disease and management of the COVID-19 infection in pregnant women and compare it with non-pregnant population. Method: This is a retrospective study done at Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel Institute of Medical Science and Research (SVPIMSR), Smt. NHL MMC, Ahmedabad, from April 1, 2020, to September 30, 2020. All COVID-19-positive patients were divided into two groups: group A was comprised of pregnant/postpartum and group B of non-pregnant patients. Result: A total of 709 women (Group A-205, Group B-504) were included in the study, In group A 90% of patients were asymptomatic, while in group B 48% asymptomatic patients. Group A had 5.9% and group B had 13.1% patients having comorbidities. In group A, smaller number of patients had raised inflammatory markers as compared to group B. Only 4% patients of group A showed significant changes on chest X-ray as compared to 16% in group B. Only 2.9% patients of group A required intensive care unit admission as compared to 10.31% patients of group B. Mean hospital stay of group A was 10.6 days, and that of group B was 12.1 days. Conclusion: In pregnancy, due to the physiological alterations in cardiovascular, respiratory and immune system, the pregnant women are vulnerable to infections. Although pregnancy is immunocompromised state, the severity of Coivd-19 disease is milder as compared to non-pregnant COVID-19-positive patients.

External validation of the 4C mortality score among COVID-19 patients admitted to hospital in Ontario, Canada: a retrospective study.

Risk prediction scores are important tools to support clinical decision-making for patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19). The objective of this paper was to validate the 4C mortality score, originally developed in the United Kingdom, for a Canadian population, and to examine its performance over time. We conducted an external validation study within a registry of COVID-19 positive hospital admissions in the Kitchener-Waterloo and Hamilton regions of southern Ontario between March 4, 2020 and June 13, 2021. We examined the validity of the 4C score to prognosticate in-hospital mortality using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) with 95% confidence intervals calculated via bootstrapping. The study included 959 individuals, of whom 224 (23.4%) died in-hospital. Median age was 72 years and 524 individuals (55%) were male. The AUC of the 4C score was 0.77, 95% confidence interval 0.79-0.87. Overall mortality rates across the pre-defined risk groups were 0% (Low), 8.0% (Intermediate), 27.2% (High), and 54.2% (Very High). Wave 1, 2 and 3 values of the AUC were 0.81 (0.76, 0.86), 0.74 (0.69, 0.80), and 0.76 (0.69, 0.83) respectively. The 4C score is a valid tool to prognosticate mortality from COVID-19 in Canadian hospitals and can be used to prioritize care and resources for patients at greatest risk of death.