Reply letter to the editor concerning the article 'Safety of Sars-Cov-2 vaccines administration for adult patients with hereditary fructose intolerance'.

According to the current European medicines legislation, on the labeling is mandatory a warning contraindicating for hereditary fructose intolerance (HFI) patients medicines with oral or parenteral fructose and sorbitol, and oral sucrose, invert sugar, isomaltitol, lactitol and maltitol, but parenteral sucrose is not mentioned. Intravenous administration of sucrose does not increase blood glucose concentrations, because sucrose is poorly oxidized to CO2 and mainly excreted in the urine as a disaccharide; absence of enzimatic activity outside the gut explains why there is not a warning for parenteral sucrose presentations. For this reason, parenteral drugs with sucrose are allowed in HFI patients. Nevertheless, due to interindividual variability and the fact that not all parenterally administered sucrose is recovered in urine, HFI patients need to be closely monitored after parenteral administration of sucrose-containing drugs, especially when the amount exceeds the maximum permissible thresholds.

Systemic thrombosis in a large cohort of COVID-19 patients despite thromboprophylaxis: A retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Incidence of thrombotic events associated to Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is difficult to assess and reported rates differ significantly. Optimal thromboprophylaxis is unclear. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to analyze the characteristics of patients with a confirmed thrombotic complication including inflammatory and hemostatic parameters, compare patients affected by arterial vs venous events and examine differences between survivors and non-survivors. We reviewed compliance with thromboprophylaxis and explored how the implementation of a severity-adjusted protocol could have influenced outcome. METHODS: Single-cohort retrospective study of COVID-19 patients admitted, from March 3 to May 3 2020, to the Infanta Leonor University Hospital in Madrid, epicenter of the Spanish outbreak. RESULTS: Among 1127 patients, 80 thrombotic events were diagnosed in 69 patients (6.1% of the entire cohort). Forty-three patients (62%) suffered venous thromboembolism, 18 (26%) arterial episodes and 6 (9%) concurrent venous and arterial thrombosis. Most patients (90%) with a confirmed thrombotic complication where under low-molecular-weight heparin treatment. Overt disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) was rare. Initial ISTH DIC score and pre-event CRP were significantly higher among non-survivors. In multivariate analysis, arterial localization was an independent predictor of mortality (OR = 18, 95% CI: 2.4-142, p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Despite quasi-universal thromboprophylaxis, COVID-19 lead to a myriad of arterial and venous thrombotic events. Considering the subgroup of patients with thrombotic episodes, arterial events appeared earlier in the course of disease and conferred very poor prognosis, and an ISTH DIC score ≥ 3 at presentation was identified as a potential predictor of mortality. Severity-adjusted thromboprophylaxis seemed to decrease the number of events and could have influenced mortality. Randomized controlled trials are eagerly awaited.