Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
Exp Gerontol ; 170: 111998, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2086199


PURPOSE: While the definitive diagnosis of COVID-19 relies on PCR confirmation of the virus, the sensitivity of this technique is limited. The clinicians had to go on with the clinical diagnosis of COVID-19 in selected cases. We aimed to compare PCR-positive and PCR-negative patients diagnosed as COVID-19 with a specific focus on older adults. METHODS: We studied 601 hospitalized adults. The demographics, co-morbidities, triage clinical, laboratory characteristics, and outcomes were noted. Differences between the PCR (+) and (-) cases were analyzed. An additional specific analysis focusing on older adults (≥65 years) (n = 184) was performed. RESULTS: The PCR confirmation was present in 359 (59.7 %). There was not any difference in terms of age, sex, travel/contact history, hospitalization duration, ICU need, the time between first symptom/hospitalization to ICU need, ICU days, or survival between PCR-positive and negative cases in the total study group and older adults subgroup. The only symptoms that were different in prevalence between PCR-confirmed and unconfirmed cases were fever (73.3 % vs. 64 %, p = 0.02) and fatigue/myalgia (91.1 % vs. 79.3 %, p = 0.001). Bilateral diffuse pneumonia was also more prevalent in PCR-confirmed cases (20 % vs. 13.3 %, p = 0.03). In older adults, the PCR (-) cases had more prevalent dyspnea (72.2 % vs. 51.4 %, p = 0.004), less prevalent fatigue/myalgia (70.9 % vs. 88.6 %, p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: The PCR (+) and (-) cases displayed very similar disease phenotypes, courses, and outcomes with few differences between each other. The presence of some worse laboratory findings may indicate a worse immune protective response in PCR (-) cases.

COVID-19 , Pneumonia , Humans , COVID-19/diagnosis , SARS-CoV-2 , Myalgia , Hospitalization , Polymerase Chain Reaction , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Fatigue
Diving Hyperb Med ; 52(1): 35-43, 2022 Mar 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1754200


INTRODUCTION: It is now known that COVID-19 has long term effects that may not correlate with clinical severity of disease. The known pulmonary and cardiovascular changes as well as thrombotic tendency could predispose to diving accidents. We aimed to investigate COVID-19 related changes that may cause disqualification from diving among divers who recovered from the disease. METHODS: Occupational and recreational divers who applied for fitness to dive (FTD) assessment after COVID-19 infection were included. Routine FTD assessments were performed. Details of COVID-19 history were evaluated. Lung computed tomography (CT) scans were advised if not previously performed or if there were COVID-19 related changes in previous scans. Divers with pathological findings were restrained from diving and followed prospectively. RESULTS: Forty-three divers were analysed. Thirteen divers were restrained from diving, all due to persistent COVID-19 related changes in lung CT. The prevalence of CT with at least one lung lesion was 68.2% at the time of diagnosis, 73.3% in the first three months after diagnosis and 19.2% later. The most common CT findings were glass ground opacities and fibrotic changes. Demographic characteristics and COVID-19 history of divers deemed 'unfit' were similar to those deemed 'fit'. CONCLUSIONS: Divers who recover from COVID-19 should undergo FTD assessments before resuming diving. A chest CT performed at least three months after diagnosis may be suggested.

COVID-19 , Diving , Accidents , COVID-19/epidemiology , Diving/adverse effects , Exercise , Humans , Prevalence
Pharmaceutics ; 13(11)2021 Oct 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1480917


In COVID-19-induced acute respiratory distress syndrome, the lungs are incapable of filling with sufficient air, leading to hypoxemia that results in high mortality among hospitalized patients. In clinical trials, low-molecular-weight heparin was administered via a specially designed soft-mist inhaler device in an investigator initiated, single-center, open-label, phase-IIb clinical trial. Patients with evidently worse clinical presentations were classed as the "Device Group"; 40 patients were given low-molecular-weight heparin via a soft mist inhaler at a dose of 4000 IU per administration, twice a day. The Control Group, also made up of 40 patients, received the standard therapy. The predetermined severity of hypoxemia and the peripheral oxygen saturation of patients were measured on the 1st and 10th days of treatment. The improvement was particularly striking in cases of severe hypoxemia. In the 10-day treatment, low-molecular-weight heparin was shown to significantly improve breathing capability when delivered via a soft-mist inhaler.