Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 12 de 12
Filter
1.
Open Forum Infectious Diseases ; 9(Supplement 2):S770-S771, 2022.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-2189959

ABSTRACT

Background. We studied immunological response against SARS-CoV-2 after two doses of vaccine in health care workers (HCW) at our Infectious Disease Unit Methods. We enrolled prospectively HCW without (group A) and with previous infection (group B). We collected peripheral blood at baseline (before the BNT162b2 vaccine), T1 (before the 2nd dose), T2 and T6 (after 1 and 6 months after of 2nd dose). The activation induced cell marker assay (AIM) was performed with CD4 and CD8 Spike peptide megapools (MPs). We evaluated the Stimulation Index (SI) as AIM+ stimulated cells/negative control (positive response SI >= 2). Quantitative antibodies (Abs) to Spike-1 protein (S) and to nucleocapside protein (N) were detected with an electrochemiluminescence immunoassay. We tested at T6 the responses to alpha, beta, gamma, delta and epsilon variants MPs.We used the linear mixed model with random intercept adjusted for age and sex to compare specific times to T0. To assess differences over time between groups the interaction with time was tested. Results. In group A 13/22 (59%) were female vs 5/7 (71%) group B, the mean age 40 vs 38 years, respectively. For CD4+ Spike the overall rate of change over time was significant at T1 (p=0.038) and at T2 (p< 0.001) vs T0 with a decreasing at T6 (p not significant) [Figure 1] with a trend of higher response in group A. In group B the CD8 + Spike reactivity increased at T1(p=0.037) and at T6 (p=0.005) vs T0. The interaction between SI and time was statistically significant at T1 (p=0.033);T2 (p= 0.046) and T6 (p=0.035) (mean values in group B higher than A). For overall population, the anti-S Abs significantly increased at T1 vs T0, T2 vs T0 and at T6 vs T0 [Figure 2A]. The group B at T6 retained a higher anti S response but the rate of change significantly differs between the two group (overall interaction: p< 0.001) [Figure 2B]. At T6 in both groups we found a high CD4+ T cells response to epsilon variant, even if not detected as circulant virus. Conclusion. The humoral response was persistent and increased in previous infected subjects. The CD4+T cells response after vaccination retained a response in uninfected subject, with an increasing trend and with a response to non-circulating variants. The vaccine could help the CD8+ T cells reactivity specific for Spike peptides.

2.
Open Forum Infectious Diseases ; 9(Supplement 2):S767, 2022.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-2189952

ABSTRACT

Background. Clinical trial demonstrated that SARS-CoV-2 vaccines have the ability of reduce mortality and morbidity due to COVID-19. The aim of this study is to describe the effect of vaccination in term of mortality, type of ventilation and ICU admission among patients hospitalized for COVID-19 from May to December 2021 in a Ligurian Hospital. Methods. This is a retrospective, single-center study conducted in San Martino Hospital (Genoa, Italy), including patients >= 18 years hospitalized for COVID-19 in Infectious Disease and Emergency Units from 1st May to 31st December 2021. We collected demographical data, multimorbidity and disability score, vaccination time ("vaccinated" all patients hospitalized >= 14 days after first dose or >= 7 days after second/ third dose), therapy for COVID-19, mortality at 7 and 30 days, ICU admission, ventilation type. Characteristics of vaccinated (group A) versus non vaccinated (group B) patients were compared using Chi-squared/Fisher's exact test for categorical variables and t-test /Kruskal-Wallis test for the continuous ones. Cox proportional hazards models for death at 30 days were performed as univariate analysis as well as adjusting for age, Cumulative Illness Rating Scale [CIRS], gender, Remdesivir, Monoclonal antibodies, Tocilizumab use. Results. Overall, 405 patients SARS-CoV-2 infected were enrolled. Data about timing of vaccination were available for 360 patients (89%). We compared clinical characteristics and outcomes of group A (32%) versus group B (68%). In group A patients were older (p< 0.001) and frailer (higher CIRS score and lower Barthel index, p< 0.001) than in group B. Among patients requiring oxygen, 76 (31.5%) in group B vs 26 (22.41%) in group A needed high flow ventilation (p=0.036);33 (13.52%) vs 3 (2.59%) respectively were admitted to ICU (Figure 1). Mortality at 30 days after hospitalization was higher in group A at univariate analysis [HR(95%CI) 1.44(0.82;2.53), p=0.208], lower at multivariate analysis [0.57(0.31;1.02), p=0.059]. Conclusion. The results of this study confirm that SARS-CoV-2 vaccination reduces rate of admission to ICU and 30 days mortality among patients hospitalized for COVID-19. In our cohort mortality among vaccinated patients remains high and we hypothesized this is due to high frailty of evaluated population.

3.
Applied Clinical Informatics ; 14(1):16-27, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2186472

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: It is 30 years since evidence-based medicine became a great support for individual clinical expertise in daily practice and scientific research. Electronic systems can be used to achieve the goal of collecting data from heterogeneous datasets and to support multicenter clinical trials. The Ligurian Infectious Diseases Network (LIDN) is a web-based platform for data collection and reuse originating from a regional effort and involving many professionals from different fields.

4.
Neurological Sciences ; 43(Supplement 1):S324, 2022.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-2174313

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Symptoms referable to central and peripheral nervous system involvement are often evident both during the acute phase of COVID-19 infection and during long-COVID. In this study, we evaluated a population of patients with prior COVID-19 infection who showed signs and symptoms consistent with neurological long-COVID. Method(s): We prospectively collected demographic and acute phase course data from patients with prior COVID-19 infection who showed symptoms related to neurological involvement in the long-COVID phase. Firstly, we performed a multivariate logistic linear regression analysis to investigate the impact of demographic and clinical data, the severity of the acute COVID-19 infection and hospitalization course, on the post-COVID neurological symptoms at three months follow-up. Secondly, we performed a k-means clustering analysis to investigate whether there was evidence of different subtypes of neurological long COVID-19. Result(s): Clustering analysis on the five most common neurological symptoms returned two well-separated and well-balanced clusters: long-COVID type 1 contains the subjects with memory disturbances, phycological impairment, headache, anosmia and ageusia, while long- COVID type 2 contains all the subjects with reported symptoms related to PNS involvement. The analysis of potential risk-factors among the demographic, clinical presentation, COVID 19 severity and hospitalization course variables showed that the number of comorbidities at onset, the BMI, the number of COVID-19 symptoms, the number of non-neurological complications and a more severe course of the acute infection were all, on average, higher for the cluster of subjects with reported symptoms related to PNS involvement. Discussion(s): With reference to what is reported in the literature, we researched the potential pathogenetic mechanisms of the symptoms reported by the patients. Memory disturbances, phycological impairment, headache, anosmia and ageusia seem to be related to the presence of SARS-CoV-2 per se and to a direct mechanism of damage, while the involvement of the PNS seems to require an additional damage, either by immune-mediated or iatrogenic mechanism. Conclusion(s): Neurological involvement during the acute phase of COVID- 19 is frequent and multifaceted and can lead to disabling disorders that persist for many months, the so-called long-COVID. Some neurological complications result from the direct action of the virus, whereas in other cases complications are related to long hospitalization.

6.
Environ Res ; 209: 112790, 2022 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1654410

ABSTRACT

SCIENTIFIC BACKGROUND: Environmental sampling of SARS-CoV-2 is a fundamental tool for evaluating the effectiveness of non-specific prophylaxis measures in counteracting virus spread. The purpose of our work was to evaluate the effectiveness of the different sampling methods in the hospital setting to assess their correlation with the structural, functional, and operational situation of the monitored departments and to define the dynamics of the spread of the virus in indoor environments. METHODS: The monitoring (air bubbling sampling, surface wipe test) was carried out at the San Martino Polyclinic Hospital (Genoa, Italy) in the period since April 2020 to June 2021. The presence of viral RNA in the collected samples was evaluated by qPCR. The infection capacity of the samples collected was also evaluated by an in vitro challenge test on cells sensitive to SARS-CoV-2 infection. RESULTS: The percentage of positivity with respect to the number of tests performed (sensitivity) were air bubbler 50%, wipe test 17%, and challenge test 11%. Only 20% of the samples tested positive in the wipe test and 43% of the samples tested positive in the bubbler sampling were also positive in the challenge test. All the positivity obtained was detected at a distance of less than 2 m and height of less than 1.5 from COVID-19 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Environmental contamination from SARS-CoV-2 detected at the San Martino Polyclinic Hospital is found lower than similar assessments performed in other hospitals both in Italy and abroad. Our study predicted that environmental monitoring of SARS-CoV-2 must be carried out in an integrated way by not using a single sampling method, as each individual test has a different biological significance and performance. However, the virus detected by wipe test only is often a degraded viral fragment and not an intact infecting virion.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/epidemiology , Environmental Monitoring , Hospitals , Humans , RNA, Viral
7.
New Microbiologica ; 44(4):245-247, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1615109

ABSTRACT

This retrospective study describes demographics and outcomes of adult patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection admitted to our ward during the first wave (from February 25 to May 30, 2020) and during the second wave (from August 5 to November 30, 2020). The primary study objective was to evaluate overall in-hospital mortality, which was 21.1% (60/285) vs 10.3% (27/261) (p=.0006). This study seems to corroborate and expand the concept that the second wave of COVID-19 was less deadly than the first. Despite some limitations, the clinical and managerial experience gained during the first wave trained us to handle and control the second one.

9.
Lancet Microbe ; 1(3):E108-E108, 2020.
Article in English | Web of Science | ID: covidwho-1085954
12.
Clin Microbiol Infect ; 26(7): 880-894, 2020 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-172186

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the causative agent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which has rapidly become epidemic in Italy and other European countries. The disease spectrum ranges from asymptomatic/mildly symptomatic presentations to acute respiratory failure. At the present time the absolute number of severe cases requiring ventilator support is reaching or even surpassing the intensive care unit bed capacity in the most affected regions and countries. OBJECTIVES: To narratively summarize the available literature on the management of COVID-19 in order to combine current evidence and frontline opinions and to provide balanced answers to pressing clinical questions. SOURCES: Inductive PubMed search for publications relevant to the topic. CONTENT: The available literature and the authors' frontline-based opinion are summarized in brief narrative answers to selected clinical questions, with a conclusive statement provided for each answer. IMPLICATIONS: Many off-label antiviral and anti-inflammatory drugs are currently being administered to patients with COVID-19. Physicians must be aware that, as they are not supported by high-level evidence, these treatments may often be ethically justifiable only in those worsening patients unlikely to improve only with supportive care, and who cannot be enrolled onto randomized clinical trials. Access to well-designed randomized controlled trials should be expanded as much as possible because it is the most secure way to change for the better our approach to COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
Anti-Inflammatory Agents/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Betacoronavirus/drug effects , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Off-Label Use/ethics , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Humans , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Italy/epidemiology , Lung Diseases/drug therapy , Lung Diseases/pathology , Lung Diseases/virology , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Respiration, Artificial/methods , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL