Imaging profile after treatment with Tocilizumab in COVID-19: a case series.

INTRODUCTION- COVID-19 is a pandemic disease, mainly affecting the respiratory tract, triggering an inflammatory cascade complicated by multiorgan failure up to death. Among the tested medications for this disease, tocilizumab appears to act directly on the inflammatory cascade, improving COVID-19 outcomes. For this reason, we have tested the efficacy of tocilizumab on lung damage using chest computed tomography (CT). CASE Presentation: The study was conducted on twenty-one hospitalised COVID-19 patients between March-June 2020. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to the therapies administered (TCZ group= treatment with tocilizumab and NTZ group= other therapies). At admission, TCZ group presented worse laboratory test values, respiratory profile (PaO2/FiO2 ratio: 145.37±38.16 mmHg vs 257.9±95.3 mmHg of NTZ group, P<0.01) and radiological signs (multifocal opacity at chest-X-ray: 88% vs 23% of NTZ group, P<0.01). After performing chest CT at the clinical recovery, the scans of the 2 groups were compared and we observed that some features (e.g., ground glass opacity, consolidation and parenchymal bands) were less marked in the TCZ group. CONCLUSION- In our study, patients treated with tocilizumab presented a worse overall clinical and radiological profile at admission, but the control CT showed a similar imaging profile to patients treated with standard therapy. Based on this evidence, we may suggest that tocilizumab plays an important role in COVID-19 patients reducing lung inflammation.

Real life experience of molnupiravir as a treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection in vaccinated and unvaccinated patients: a letter on its effectiveness at preventing hospitalization.

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has prompted clinicians to develop an early and effective treatment of viral infections. To date, vaccines, monoclonal antibodies, and antivirals are the cornerstone of therapy for SARS-CoV-2. AIFA approved the prescription of molnupiravir on 30/12/2021. Molnupiravir is a prodrug that causes the accumulation of errors in the viral genome. METHODS: We prescribed molnupiravir to a total of 74 patients in a range between 26 and 96 years old and followed-up them for 30 days. 10 patients affected by idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) were treated. RESULTS: The follow-up showed that all of the treated patients presented a regression of symptoms. No patients were hospitalized and/or showed sequelae after the infection by SARS-CoV-2, even though the examined population was older and with more co-morbidities than other patients treated with different antivirals. CONCLUSION: Molnupiravir is safe and well-tolerated by patients with high-risk of progression to severe COVID. No patients were hospitalized or showed sequelae, including all patients affected by IPF.

Lung Ultrasound in the Diagnosis of COVID-19 Pneumonia: Not Always and Not Only What Is COVID-19 "Glitters".

Background: In the current coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, lung ultrasound (LUS) has been extensively employed to evaluate lung involvement and proposed as a useful screening tool for early diagnosis in the emergency department (ED), prehospitalization triage, and treatment monitoring of COVID-19 pneumonia. However, the actual effectiveness of LUS in characterizing lung involvement in COVID-19 is still unclear. Our aim was to evaluate LUS diagnostic performance in assessing or ruling out COVID-19 pneumonia when compared with chest CT (gold standard) in a population of SARS-CoV-2-infected patients. Methods: A total of 260 consecutive RT-PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2-infected patients were included in the study. All the patients underwent both chest CT scan and concurrent LUS at admission, within the first 6-12 h of hospital stay. Results: Chest CT scan was considered positive when showing a "typical" or "indeterminate" pattern for COVID-19, according to the RSNA classification system. Disease prevalence for COVID-19 pneumonia was 90.77%. LUS demonstrated a sensitivity of 56.78% in detecting lung alteration. The concordance rate for the assessment of abnormalities by both methods increased in the case of peripheral distribution and middle-lower lung location of lesions and in cases of more severe lung involvement. A total of nine patients had a "false-positive" LUS examination. Alternative diagnosis included chronic heart disease (six cases), bronchiectasis (two cases), and subpleural emphysema (one case). LUS specificity was 62.50%. Collateral findings indicative of overlapping conditions at chest CT were recorded also in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and appeared distributed with increasing frequency passing from the group with mild disease (17 cases) to that with severe disease (40 cases). Conclusions: LUS does not seem to be an adequate tool for screening purposes in the ED, due to the risk of missing some lesions and/or to underestimate the actual extent of the disease. Furthermore, the not specificity of LUS implies the possibility to erroneously classify pre-existing or overlapping conditions as COVID-19 pneumonia. It seems more safe to integrate a positive LUS examination with clinical, epidemiological, laboratory, and radiologic findings to suggest a "virosis." Viral testing confirmation is always required.

Real Time PCR and Culture-Based Virus Isolation Test in Clinically Recovered Patients: Is the Subject Still Infectious for SARS-CoV2?

BACKGROUND: The highly variable manifestation of the COVID-19 disease, from completely asymptomatic to fatal, is both a clinical and a public health issue. The criteria for discharge of hospitalized patients have been based so far on the negative result of Real-Time Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) tests, but the persistence of viral fragments may exceed that of the integral virus by weeks. The aim of our study was to verify the clearance of the virus at viral culture in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 that have clinically recovered but are still positive on nasopharyngeal swab. METHODS: The study was conducted in hospitalized patients with positive RT-PCR on nasopharyngeal swab. Patients included were from asymptomatic to severe cases and performed nasopharyngeal control swabbing on day 14 for asymptomatic patient or at least three days after remission of symptoms. RT-PCR positive specimens were sent to a biosafety level 3 laboratory for viral culture. RESULTS: We performed a combined analysis of RT-PCR and a highly sensitive in vitro culture from 84 samples of hospitalized patients. The average age was 46 ± 20.29, and 40.5% of the subjects had radiologically confirmed pneumonia, with average PaO2 of 72.35 ± 12.12and P/F ratio of 315 ± 83.15. Ct values for the N gene were lower in the first swab than in the control one (p < 0.001). The samples from 83 patients were negative at viral culture, and RT-PCR on the respective supernatants always confirmed the absence of viral growth. CONCLUSIONS: Our preliminary results demonstrate that patients clinically recovered for at least three days show the viral clearance at viral culture, and presumably they continued to not be contagious.