ABSTRACT
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in Iran is part of the worldwide pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The present study aimed to demonstrate the clinical characteristics of patients affected by COVID-19, in our tertiary teaching hospital. Medical records and compiled data of 668 patients with suspected COVID-19 were obtained retrospectively between January to April 2020. The present study outcomes included demographic features of infected patients, underlying diseases and conditions, the relationship between the results of reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) or CT-scan with the manifestations of the disease, mortality rate, and age distribution of fatalities among men and women. The median age of hospitalized patients was 63 years old (from 18 to 94). The patients' chief complaints in the admission time were cough, dyspnea, fever, and gastrointestinal problems, respectively. Hospitalized patients' common comorbidities were hypertension (HTN), and cardiovascular disease (CVD) (24%), diabetes mellitus (DM) (21.5%), asthma, or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (6%), or other underlying diseases (15.5%). One-third of patients had no comorbidity according to the data of medical records. In hospitalized patients, 169 (84.5%) had positive RT-PCR, and 156 (78%) had positive chest CT findings. The mortality rate of males was higher than females (66.3% vs. 33.3%) and in patients with positive RT-PCR compared to patients with positive chest CT-scan findings. The majority of deaths had a history of DM or HTN/CVD in their medical records. The chief complaint of patients was cough. DM and HTN or CVD were the common underlying disease related to death in hospitalized cases. Besides, the hospitalization and mortality rate in males was higher than in females. About 87% of dead hospitalized cases had positive RT-PCR results, and this rate was 82% for chest CT results.
ABSTRACT
Background and Aim: This umbrella review presents comprehensive data on the evidence of the association between cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT) and COVID-19 vaccinations. Materials and Methods: We searched related databases to access issue-related systematic reviews both with meta‐analyses and without it that studied the connotation between COVID-19 vaccination and CVT in any language on March 1, 2022. Two reviewers independently extracted the data using the JBI Form for Data Extraction in Systematic Reviews and Research Syntheses. Results: The primary search resulted in 886 titles, and finally, 48 full texts were selected, and of these, 12 qualitative systematic reviews or quantitative meta-analyses were eligible for the umbrella review. No study was excluded based on using the JBI checklist for critical appraisal. The results revealed that cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST) from the COVID-19 vaccine could occur in any age group, in both sexes, and with all types of vaccine. However, young females were the predominantly affected cases. Although more common in adenovirus vaccine types, vaccines consisting of mRNA are not free from side effects. Headache was the most typical clinical symptom. Thrombocytopenia, PF4 IgG Assay, and d-Dimer evaluation were positive in many reported studies. Conclusion: The results showed that CVST from the COVID-19 vaccine can happen without age limitation for both sexes and all vaccine types. Although CVST is a life-threatening condition, early diagnosis and, most importantly, its management can be life-saving for patients. The overall balance of risk and benefit in favor of vaccination is positive in all of the included studies in the current umbrella review © 2023, This is an original open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-noncommercial 4.0 International License which permits copy and redistribution of the material just in noncommercial usage with proper citation
ABSTRACT
Background. This systematic review evaluated the studies conducted on Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS) due to COVID-19 vaccination to clarify any possible connections and the type of vaccines causing GBS. Methods. A comprehensive search was performed on July 2021 through MEDLINE (via PubMed), Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases to detect published and unpublished papers. Our PICO was all COVID-19 vaccinated individuals as the population, COVID-19 vaccines as the intervention, and patients experiencing GBS following COVID-19 vaccination as the outcome. Critical appraisal instruments from the Joanna Briggs Institute case series or case report were used to evaluate the quality of included studies. Results. In the present systematic review, 12 case reports and case series including 21 patients were assessed. More than half of the patients were male, and the mean age of male patients was lower than females. In terms of vaccine type, the most common kind of vaccine injected was Oxford/AstraZeneca, and all the cases except one patient had received only one dose of the vaccine. Regarding the interval between receiving the vaccine and the onset of GBS symptoms, the mean duration was 14 days. The lowest mean time interval between receiving the vaccine and the onset of symptoms of GBS was related to the unnamed vector-based COVID-19 vaccine, and the highest was associated with Oxford/AstraZeneca. Conclusion. Through this systematic review of case reports, we neither attempt to establish nor rule out a causal link between the COVID-19 vaccine and GBS, because such a link requires extensive case-control studies. However, we must highlight any events that may occur following the injection of existing vaccines. Practical Implications. The most common symptoms seen in patients experiencing GBS after vaccination included progressive bilateral lower limb weakness, paresthesia, numbness of limbs, generalized body aches, and back pain.
ABSTRACT
Background. This systematic review evaluated the studies conducted on Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) due to COVID-19 vaccination to clarify any possible connections and the type of vaccines causing GBS. Methods. A comprehensive search was performed on July 2021 through MEDLINE (via PubMed), Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases to detect published and unpublished papers. Our PICO was all COVID-19 vaccinated individuals as the population, COVID-19 vaccines as the intervention, and patients experiencing GBS following COVID-19 vaccination as the outcome. Critical appraisal instruments from the Joanna Briggs Institute case series or case report were used to evaluate the quality of included studies. Results. In the present systematic review, 12 case reports and case series including 21 patients were assessed. More than half of the patients were male, and the mean age of male patients was lower than females. In terms of vaccine type, the most common kind of vaccine injected was Oxford/AstraZeneca, and all the cases except one patient had received only one dose of the vaccine. Regarding the interval between receiving the vaccine and the onset of GBS symptoms, the mean duration was 14 days. The lowest mean time interval between receiving the vaccine and the onset of symptoms of GBS was related to the unnamed vector-based COVID-19 vaccine, and the highest was associated with Oxford/AstraZeneca. Conclusion. Through this systematic review of case reports, we neither attempt to establish nor rule out a causal link between the COVID-19 vaccine and GBS, because such a link requires extensive case-control studies. However, we must highlight any events that may occur following the injection of existing vaccines. Practical Implications. The most common symptoms seen in patients experiencing GBS after vaccination included progressive bilateral lower limb weakness, paresthesia, numbness of limbs, generalized body aches, and back pain. © 2022 The Authors.
ABSTRACT
This study was conducted to evaluate the effect of HYSSOP (composed of Hyssopus officinalis L., Echium amoenum Fisch & C. A. Mey and Glycyrrhiza glabra L.) and POLIUM (contained Teucrium polium L., Cuscuta epithymum Murr and Cichorium intybus L.) combined distilled herbal medicines compared to placebo in the prevention of COVID-19. This is a double-blind parallel placebo-controlled field trial conducted on 751 asymptomatic individuals whose one of the family members recently had a positive RT-PCR test for COVID-19. They were divided into three groups including POLIUM, HYSSOP and placebo using random blocks with a 1:1:1 allocation ratio. Participants received daily 5 cc (under 12 years) or 10 cc (over 12 years) of allocated oral medications for 20 days. The primary outcome was the frequency of positive RT-PCR test among participants who became symptomatic. The mean age of participants was 36.6. Nineteen participants get infected by COVID-19 during the intervention;fifteen of them belonged to the placebo and four to the POLIUM group. Fisher's exact test indicated significant differences between HYSSOP and placebo (p<0.001) as well as POLIUM and placebo (p=0.009) groups in terms of COVID-19 confirmed by PCR tests. Cox regression model adjusted for confounders illustrated that the hazard of getting infection by COVID-19 in POLIUM and HYSSOP groups decreased by 66% (OR (95% CI): 0.34 (0.12 to 0.94);p=0.038) and 93% (OR (95% CI): 0.07 (0.01to 0.56);p=0.012) respectively, compared to placebo. Oral administration of HYSSOP and POLIUM with the other supportive health care could decrease the risk of getting COVID-19.
ABSTRACT
In the outbreak of infectious diseases, non-pharmacological intervention might be the only available protection tools. The aim of this systematic review is to investigate whether it is or is not necessary to wear masks in new corona virus (COVID-19) outbreaks in the community. On February, 28, 2020, related databases were searched with the following keywords: “COVID-19“;“COVID 19“;2019-nCoV;2019-CoV;coronavirus;mask* and facemask. We updated the search in March 13, 2020. A total of 982 relevant reports were identified after removing duplicates. Of these, 71 references were screened based on titles and abstracts. After excluding unrelated studies, 36 studies were included in the full-text review and were assessed for eligibility. Finally, 3 articles met our inclusion criteria. In three wards of hospital with more exposure to infected patients, wearing the N95 respirator while using regular disinfectants and hand hygiene, was a better way to prevent COVID-19 transmission from patients to nurses and physicians when compared to non-users of masks. Another study on family members with a history of travelling to Wuhan, showed that those who had worn a surgical mask only during the hospital visit, were infected. However, the 7 years old child of the family who wore a surgical mask, was not found to be infected by COVID-19. Finally, none of eleven healthcare workers who had unprotected exposure with confirmed cases were infected. Due to the newness of the COVID-19 virus, no clinical trials have been found regarding the use of the masks in the prevention of the disease, and the level of evidence were low. © 2020. All rights reserved.