ABSTRACT
IntroductionAsplenic patients are at high risk of potentially fatal invasive infections, such as sepsis, meningitis, and pneumonia. It has been shown that infection from influenza viruses can precede or increase the risk of bacterial infection and of serious complications of the underlying disease. International and national guidelines recommend annual influenza vaccination in asplenic subjects. Following the Covid-19 pandemic, the major government and medical-scientific institutions in the US and in Europe have been planning how to contain infection during the 2020-2021 influenza season. Extending influenza vaccination is the safest and most effective way to reduce the circulation of influenza virus and to promote the correct diagnosis and management of suspected cases of SARS-CoV-2. Influenza vaccination also reduces complications associated with the underlying disease and visits to Emergency Units. Our study aims to evaluate influenza vaccination in a large population of asplenic patients and explore the main causes for non-vaccination to identify critical areas for improvement in the vaccination programme in these at-risk patients for the 2020-2021 influenza season.MethodsThe Italian Network of Asplenia (INA) is made up of 88 doctors working in 50 clinical centers in 27 cities and 16 of the 20 regions of Italy. It aims to build a large, prospective cohort of asplenic patients throughout Italy through which to study the interaction between asplenia and its associated underlying conditions, collecting precise, accurate data also in cases of rarer diseases. The study also aims to improve the quality of healthcare for this at-risk population. The number of patients enrolled in the Network who had had at least one dose of influenza vaccine at the time of diagnosis of asplenia was retrieved from the INA database. All participating centers were asked to answer a questionnaire to report the main obstacles for influenza vaccination.ResultsAt 1st August 2020, 1,670 patients had been enrolled in the INA (783 females;887 males). All underlying causes of asplenia are shown in Table 1. Only 466 (28%) patients had had at least one influenza vaccination, while 1,204 (72%) had never been vaccinated since diagnosis of asplenia. Thirty-five (70%) of the 50 centers answered the questionnaire. Main causes of non-vaccination were physicians' ambivalence concerning vaccination and patients' inadequate awareness or logistical problems.ConclusionsThese data show very low seasonal influenza vaccination cover even though asplenic patients are considered at-risk of complications associated with infection from influenza viruses. Since the 2020-2021 influenza season could see influenza viruses in circulation with SARS-CoV-2, influenza vaccination must be expanded as widely as possible, in particular to subjects of all ages at high risk. These results reveal important areas of concern in the management of asplenic patients and the need to improve the quality of information to physicians and patients alike. The INA co-ordinating center will launch a campaign to provide information and organize ad hoc meetings to widen influenza vaccination coverage in asplenic patients and reduce the pressure on the national health service during the next influenza season.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Multiple investigators have described an increased incidence of thromboembolic events in SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals. Data concerning hemostatic complications in children hospitalized for COVID-19/multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) are scant. OBJECTIVES: To share our experience in managing SARS-CoV-2-associated pro-coagulant state in hospitalized children. METHODS: D-dimer values were recorded at diagnosis in children hospitalized for SARS-CoV-2-related manifestations. In moderately to critically ill patients and MIS-C cases, coagulation and inflammatory markers were checked at multiple time points and median results were compared. Pro-thrombotic risk factors were appraised for each child and thromboprophylaxis was started in selected cases. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients were prospectively enrolled. D-dimer values did not discriminate COVID-19 of differing severity, whereas were markedly different between the COVID-19 and the MIS-C cohorts. In both cohorts, D-dimer and C-reactive protein levels increased upon clinical worsening but were not accompanied by decreased fibrinogen or platelet values, with all parameters returning to normal upon disease resolution. Six patients had multiple thrombotic risk factors and were started on pharmacological thromboprophylaxis. No deaths or thrombotic or bleeding complications occurred. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 pediatric patients show mildly altered coagulation and inflammatory parameters; on the other hand, MIS-C cases showed laboratory signs of an inflammatory driven pro-coagulant status. Universal anticoagulant prophylaxis in hospitalized children with SARS-CoV-2-related manifestations is not warranted, but may be offered to patients with other pro-thrombotic risk factors in the context of a multi-modal therapeutic approach.