Serum trace elements levels and clinical outcomes among Iranian COVID-19 patients.

OBJECTIVES: The relationship between immunity and trace elements levels is well known. We aimed to estimate the association of serum trace elements with severity and outcomes in the Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) patients. METHODS: In this single-centered, prospective, observational study, we enrolled 114 patients admitted to severe intensive care units (ICUs) and corresponding 112 sex and aged-matched non-ICU ward patients. Demographic data, clinical characteristics, and outcomes were all collected. We analyzed serum levels of zinc (Zn), copper (Cu), selenium (Se), and manganese (Mn) in both severity groups. RESULTS: The serum levels of Cu, Se, and Mn in both groups were within the normal range while Zn serum levels were lower than normal values. Based on these findings, Zn, Cu, Se, and Mn serum levels were not associated with disease severity (P > 0.05), while we found Zn serum levels were strongly associated with patient outcomes (P = 0.005). Our results indicated lower Mn serum levels were associated with age more than 55 years (P= 0.006). Our results were not in favor of a causal relationship between serum trace elements levels and disease severity. CONCLUSION: We found Zn level to be a strong indicator for patients' outcomes that can be considered for monitoring patient prognosis. Nutritional measures or supplementation can help reduce poor outcomes caused by low Zn levels in Iranian COVID-19 patients.

Evaluating the effect of Edaravone on clinical outcome of patients with severe COVID-19 admitted to ICU: a randomized clinical trial.

Cytokine storm is the most prominent hallmark in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) that stimulates the free radical storm, both of which induce an overactive immune response during viral infection. We hypothesized that owning to its radical-scavenging and anti-inflammatory properties, Edaravone could reduce multi-organ injury, clinical complications, and mortality in severe COVID-19 cases. This single-center randomized clinical trial was accompanied in the intensive care units (ICUs) of the teaching hospital of Tabriz University of Medical Sciences to evaluate the effect of Edaravone on the outcome of patients with severe COVID-19. Thirty-eight patients admitted to ICU were included and randomized into two control and intervention arms. Patients in the intervention group received 30 mg Edaravone by slow intravenous infusion for three days in addition to receiving national therapy. The primary outcome was the need for intubation, the intubation length, and mortality rate. Secondary endpoints were clinical improvement. Edaravone administration improved the primary outcomes; it decreased the need for endotracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation [10.52% (n = 2) versus 42.1% (n = 8); p = 0.03] and intubation length [3 (1-7) versus 28 (4-28), p = 0.04] compared to control group. Baseline characteristics and laboratory tests were similar between the studied groups. No marked differences were observed in secondary endpoints (p > 0.05). Administration of Edaravone could decrease the need for mechanical ventilation and length of intubation in severe COVID-19 patients admitted to ICU.

Scores based on neutrophil percentage and lactate dehydrogenase with or without oxygen saturation predict hospital mortality risk in severe COVID-19 patients.

BACKGROUND: Risk scores are needed to predict the risk of death in severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients in the context of rapid disease progression. METHODS: Using data from China (training dataset, n = 96), prediction models were developed by logistic regression and then risk scores were established. Leave-one-out cross validation was used for internal validation and data from Iran (test dataset, n = 43) was used for external validation. RESULTS: A NSL model (area under the curve (AUC) 0.932) and a NL model (AUC 0.903) were developed based on neutrophil percentage and lactate dehydrogenase with and without oxygen saturation (SaO2) using the training dataset. AUCs of the NSL and NL models in the test dataset were 0.910 and 0.871, respectively. The risk scoring systems corresponding to these two models were established. The AUCs of the NSL and NL scores in the training dataset were 0.928 and 0.901, respectively. At the optimal cut-off value of NSL score, the sensitivity and specificity were 94% and 82%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of NL score were 94% and 75%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: These scores may be used to predict the risk of death in severe COVID-19 patients and the NL score could be used in regions where patients' SaO2 cannot be tested.

Comparison of losartan and amlodipine effects on the outcomes of patient with COVID-19 and primary hypertension: A randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Controversy exists regarding the drug selection in hypertension (HTN) management in patients with COVID-19. This study aimed to compare the effects of losartan and amlodipine in patients with primary HTN and COVID-19. METHODS: In this randomised clinical trial, hospitalised patients with COVID-19 and primary HTN were enrolled in the study. One arm received losartan, 25 mg, twice a day and the other arm received amlodipine, 5 mg per day for 2 weeks. The main outcomes were compare 30-day mortality rate and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: The mean age of patients treated with losartan (N = 41) and amlodipine (N = 39) was 67.3 ± 14.8 and 60.1 ± 17.3 years, respectively (P value = .068). The length of hospital stay in losartan and amlodipine groups was 4.57 ± 2.59 and 7.30 ± 8.70 days, respectively (P value = .085). Also, the length of ICU admission in losartan and amlodipine group was 7.13 ± 5.99 and 7.15 ± 9.95 days, respectively (P value = .994). The 30-day mortality was two and five patients in losartan and amlodipine groups, respectively (P value = .241). CONCLUSIONS: There was no priority in losartan or amlodipine administration in COVID-19 patients with primary HTN in decreasing mortality rate, hospital and ICU length stay. Further studies need to clarify the first-line anti-HTN medications in COVID-19.

Dyspneic and non-dyspneic (silent) hypoxemia in COVID-19: Possible neurological mechanism.

SARS-CoV-2 mainly invades respiratory epithelial cells by adhesion to angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE-2) and thus, infected patients may develop mild to severe inflammatory responses and acute lung injury. Afferent impulses that result from the stimulation of pulmonary mechano-chemoreceptors, peripheral and central chemoreceptors by inflammatory cytokines are conducted to the brainstem. Integration and processing of these input signals occur within the central nervous system, especially in the limbic system and sensorimotor cortex, and importantly feedback regulation exists between O2, CO2, and blood pH. Despite the intensity of hypoxemia in COVID-19, the intensity of dyspnea sensation is inappropriate to the degree of hypoxemia in some patients (silent hypoxemia). We hypothesize that SARS-CoV-2 may cause neuronal damage in the corticolimbic network and subsequently alter the perception of dyspnea and the control of respiration. SARS-CoV-2 neuronal infection may change the secretion of numerous endogenous neuropeptides or neurotransmitters that distribute through large areas of the nervous system to produce cellular and perceptual effects. SARS-CoV-2 mainly enter to CNS via direct (neuronal and hematologic route) and indirect route. We theorize that SARS-CoV-2 infection-induced neuronal cell damage and may change the balance of endogenous neuropeptides or neurotransmitters that distribute through large areas of the nervous system to produce cellular and perceptual effects. Thus, SARS-CoV-2-associated neuronal damage may influence the control of respiration by interacting in neuromodulation. This would open up possible lines of study for the progress in the central mechanism of COVID-19-induced hypoxia. Future research is desirable to confirm or disprove such a hypothesis.