Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
1.
J Clin Med ; 11(10)2022 May 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1862830

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic increased the complexity of the clinical management and pharmacological treatment of patients presenting with an Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS). AIM: to explore the incidence and prognostic impact of in-hospital bleeding in patients presenting with ACS before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We evaluated in-hospital Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) major and minor bleeding among 2851 patients with ACS from 17 Italian centers during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic (i.e., March-April 2020) and in the same period in the previous two years. RESULTS: The incidence of in-hospital TIMI major and minor bleeding was similar before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. TIMI major or minor bleeding was associated with a significant threefold increase in all-cause mortality, with a similar prognostic impact before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: the incidence and clinical impact of in-hospital bleeding in ACS patients was similar before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. We confirmed a significant and sizable negative prognostic impact of in-hospital bleeding in ACS patients.

2.
Medicina (Kaunas) ; 58(4)2022 Apr 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1785810

ABSTRACT

Background and objectives: COVID-19 is associated with an aberrant inflammatory response that may trigger new-onset cardiac arrhythmias. The aim of this study was to assess the mortality risk in hospitalized COVID-19 patients according to IL-6 serum levels and new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) according to PaO2/FiO2 stratification. Materials and Methods: 175 COVID-19 patients (25 new-onset AF, 22 other types of AF and 128 no-AF) were included in this single-center, retrospective study; clinical and demographic data, vital signs, electrocardiograms and laboratory results were collected and analyzed. The primary outcome of the study was to evaluate the mortality rate in new-onset AF patients according to IL-6 serum levels and PaO2/FiO2 stratification. Results: The incidence of new-onset AF in the study population was 14.2%. Compared to the no-AF group, new-onset AF patients were older with a positive history of chronic kidney disease and heart failure, had higher IL-6, creatinine and urea serum levels whereas their platelet count was reduced. After PaO2/FiO2 stratification, 5-days mortality rate was higher in new-onset AF patients compared to patients with other types of AF and no-AF patients, and mortality risk increases 5.3 fold compared to no-AF (p = 0.0014) and 4.8 fold compared to other forms of AF (p = 0.03). Conclusions: New-onset AF is common in COVID-19 patients and is associated with increased IL-6 serum levels and early mortality. Further studies are needed to support the use of IL-6 as an early molecular target for COVID-19 patients to reduce their high rate of mortality.


Subject(s)
Atrial Fibrillation , COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Atrial Fibrillation/epidemiology , COVID-19/complications , Dyspnea , Female , Humans , Interleukin-6 , Male , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors
3.
European heart journal supplements : journal of the European Society of Cardiology ; 23(Suppl G), 2021.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-1602665

ABSTRACT

Aims Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic has dramatically changed the management and the prognosis of patients experiencing acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Several scientific societies have highlighted the need for dedicated paths to deliver better and faster care to improve outcomes. Nevertheless, data depicting the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on ACS in Italy are still poor. To perform a propensity weighted analysis on a multicentre Italian registry involving patients with ACS managed before vs. during COVID-19 pandemic, taking into account baseline patients characteristics, clinical presentation, procedural aspects, and in-hospital outcomes (death, bleeding, stent thrombosis, myocardial infarction, stroke/transient ischaemic attack, mechanical complication, and arrhythmic complication). Methods and results We included all consecutive patients who have suffered from ACS during two periods before (March/April 2018, March/April 2019) vs. the period of COVID-19 pandemic (March/April 2020). A generalized boosted non-parsimonious regression was used to estimate the propensity scores of having an ACS in 2020 (year of COVID-19) vs. 2018/2019 using an average treatment effect and balancing for all baseline confounders. We included 2851 patients admitted to hospital with ACS in 17 Italian centres: 1079 (37.8%) during 2018, 1056 (37.0%) in 2019, and 716 (25.1%) during the first COVID-19 wave of 2020. Seventy (2.5%) patients had a positive swab for SARS-CoV-2 at admission. During 2020 there were higher time-to-emergency-call (P = 0.028) and less diagnosis of unstable angina (P = 0.029) and MINOCA (P = 0.004);none of the admission symptoms differ significantly across the years (P > 0.05) except for fever that was more prevalent in 2020 (P < 0.001). Patients suffering from ACS had lower admission EF (P = 0.006). After PS weighting, multivariate Cox regression analysis showed age (P < 0.001), night admission (P = 0.017), cardiocirculatory arrest before cath-lab (P = 0.041), worst Killip class (P = 0.039), admission EF (P = 0.026), and need for left-ventricle mechanical support (P = 0.011) as independent predictors of in-hospital death. After propensity weighted analysis none of the in-hospital outcomes differed significantly across the years of investigation (all P > 0.05). Conclusions During COVID-19 pandemic in Italy the characteristics and management of ACS was slightly different than the past. However, the rates of ‘hard’, in-hospital outcomes (e.g. deaths) are almost similar to the past, suggesting appropriate care and well-organized emergency-paths for ACS.

4.
World Neurosurg ; 159: e466-e478, 2022 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1586256

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To determine factors associated with anxiety and depression among neurosurgeons after vaccination during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: An online survey was completed by neurosurgeons worldwide over 4 weeks. Depression in neurosurgeons was assessed by the 20-item self-reporting questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 534 responses were received and analyzed. Almost half of the respondents were from Asia (50.9%), followed by Europe (38.8%). The majority of the respondents were <40 years old (88%), and almost two thirds were trainees (62.2%). Half of the respondents worked in departments with <40 beds (50.7%), and the majority were practicing in the private sector (72.5%). Most of the respondents (85.8%) had COVID-19-positive colleagues in their department, and 64% had exposure to a COVID-19-positive colleague, family member, and/or patient. More than half of the respondents were exposed to infected patients and/or colleagues, and almost half (43.1%) underwent COVID-19 testing when exposed. Nearly half of the respondents underwent COVID-19 testing more than twice (52.4%). Of respondents, 83% had received at least the first dose of the vaccine. The odds of depression among vaccinated respondents were found to be significantly less than among unvaccinated respondents in the univariable model. CONCLUSIONS: Among health care workers, neurosurgeons are one of the groups indirectly affected by the pandemic. Adaptation to the new normal and advent of vaccines is speculated to control psychological distress among all groups of health care workers, including neurosurgeons. We found that odds of depression among vaccinated people were lower than among people who were not vaccinated.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19 Testing , COVID-19 Vaccines , Depression/epidemiology , Humans , Neurosurgeons , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires
5.
J Alzheimers Dis ; 83(4): 1563-1601, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1468319

ABSTRACT

Neurological disorders significantly impact the world's economy due to their often chronic and life-threatening nature afflicting individuals which, in turn, creates a global disease burden. The Group of Twenty (G20) member nations, which represent the largest economies globally, should come together to formulate a plan on how to overcome this burden. The Neuroscience-20 (N20) initiative of the Society for Brain Mapping and Therapeutics (SBMT) is at the vanguard of this global collaboration to comprehensively raise awareness about brain, spine, and mental disorders worldwide. This paper aims to provide a comprehensive review of the various brain initiatives worldwide and highlight the need for cooperation and recommend ways to bring down costs associated with the discovery and treatment of neurological disorders. Our systematic search revealed that the cost of neurological and psychiatric disorders to the world economy by 2030 is roughly $16T. The cost to the economy of the United States is $1.5T annually and growing given the impact of COVID-19. We also discovered there is a shortfall of effective collaboration between nations and a lack of resources in developing countries. Current statistical analyses on the cost of neurological disorders to the world economy strongly suggest that there is a great need for investment in neurotechnology and innovation or fast-tracking therapeutics and diagnostics to curb these costs. During the current COVID-19 pandemic, SBMT, through this paper, intends to showcase the importance of worldwide collaborations to reduce the population's economic and health burden, specifically regarding neurological/brain, spine, and mental disorders.


Subject(s)
Global Burden of Disease , International Cooperation , Mental Disorders , Nervous System Diseases , COVID-19/epidemiology , Global Burden of Disease/organization & administration , Global Burden of Disease/trends , Global Health/economics , Global Health/trends , Humans , Mental Disorders/economics , Mental Disorders/epidemiology , Mental Disorders/therapy , Nervous System Diseases/economics , Nervous System Diseases/epidemiology , Nervous System Diseases/therapy , Neurosciences/methods , Neurosciences/trends , SARS-CoV-2
7.
J Clin Med ; 10(15)2021 Jul 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1325715

ABSTRACT

During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, immunomodulatory therapies and hospital admission were suspected to increase the risk of infection. Nevertheless, patients with inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) treated with intravenous (i.v.) biologics had to move to hospitals for drug infusion. We investigated the impact of hospitalisation in patients with IBD. We conducted a survey including consecutive IBD patients initially in clinical and biochemical remission treated with biologics at the end of the first lockdown period. Patients underwent the normally scheduled clinical visits, performed at hospital for i.v.-treated patients or at home for patients treated with s.c. drugs. We administered to all patients the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) questionnaire and other 12 questions, specifically related to COVID-19 and its implications. A total of 189 IBD patients were recruited, 112 (59.3%) treated with i.v. drugs and 77 (40.7%) with s.c. ones. No relapses were recorded in either group (hospitalized vs. non-hospitalized, p = ns), as well as which, COVID-19 infections were not demonstrated in patients in contact with people with suspected symptoms or directly experiencing them. The total HADS score obtained by the sum of all items was also almost identical between groups (37.1 ± 2.8 vs. 37.2 ± 2.8; p = 0.98). In patients treated with i.v. drugs receiving a televisit (n = 17), the rate of satisfaction with telemedicine (58.8%) was significantly lower compared with those treated with s.c. drugs (94.8%; p < 0.0005). Our results suggest that hospitalisation during the COVID-19 outbreak does not increase the risk of COVID-19 infection as well as the risk of IBD relapse; moreover, the similar levels of anxiety in both groups could confirm that there is no need to convert patients from i.v. to s.c. therapy.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL