ABSTRACT
"Despite being one of the best understood cardiac arrhythmias, the clinical meaning of atrial flutter varies according to the specific context, and its optimal treatment may be limited by both the suboptimal response to rate/rhythm control drugs and by the complexity of the underlying substrate. In this article, we present a state-of-the-art overview of mechanisms, prognostic impact, and medical/interventional management options for atrial flutter in several specific patient populations, including heart failure, cardiomyopathies, muscular dystrophies, posttransplant patients, patients with respiratory disorders, athletes, and subjects with preexcitation, aiming to stimulate further research in this challenging field and facilitate appropriate patient care."
Subject(s)
Atrial Fibrillation , Atrial Flutter , Cardiomyopathies , Catheter Ablation , Atrial Fibrillation/surgery , HumansABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Since the beginning of the severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic an important tool for patients with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been the computed tomography (CT) scan, but not always available in some settings The aim was to find a cut-off that can predict worsening in patients with COVID-19 assessed with a computed tomography (CT) scan and to find laboratory, clinical or demographic parameters that may correlate with a higher CT score. METHODS: We performed a multi-center, observational, retrospective study involving seventeen COVID-19 Units in southern Italy, including all 321 adult patients hospitalized with a diagnosis of COVID-19 who underwent at admission a CT evaluated using Pan score. RESULTS: Considering the clinical outcome and Pan score, the best cut-off point to discriminate a severe outcome was 12.5. High lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) serum value and low PaO2/FiO2 ratio (P/F) resulted independently associated with a high CT score. The Area Under Curve (AUC) analysis showed that the best cut-off point for LDH was 367.5 U/L and for P/F 164.5. Moreover, the patients with LDH> 367.5 U/L and P/F < 164.5 showed more frequently a severe CT score than those with LDH< 367.5 U/L and P/F> 164.5, 83.4%, vs 20%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A direct correlation was observed between CT score value and outcome of COVID-19, such as CT score and high LDH levels and low P/F ratio at admission. Clinical or laboratory tools that predict the outcome at admission to hospital are useful to avoiding the overload of hospital facilities.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Adult , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , L-Lactate Dehydrogenase , Retrospective Studies , Tomography, X-Ray ComputedABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is one of the most severe complications of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Non-Invasive Respiratory Support (NRS) as Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) and/or Non-Invasive Ventilation (NIV) has been proven as effective in the management of SARS-CoV-2-related ARDS. However, the most appropriate timing for start NRS is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a prospective pilot study including all consecutive patients who developed moderate SARS-CoV-2-related ARDS during hospitalization. Patients were randomly divided into two intervention groups according to ARDS severity (assessed by PaO2/FiO2-P/F) at NRS beginning: group A started CPAP/NIV when P/F was ≤ 200 and group B started CPAP/NIV when P/F was ≤ 150. Eligible patients who did not give their consent to CPAP/NIV until the severe stage of ARDS and started non-invasive treatment when P/F ≤ 100 (group C) was added. The considered outcomes were in-hospital mortality, oro-tracheal intubation (OTI) and days of hospitalization. RESULTS: Among 146 eligible patients, 29 underwent CPAP/NIV when P/F was ≤ 200 (Group A), 68 when P/F was ≤ 150 (Group B) and 31 patients agreed to non-invasive treatment only when P/F was ≤ 100 (Group C). Starting NRS at P/F level between 151 and 200 did not results in significant differences in the outcomes as compared to treatment starting with P/F ranging 101-150. Conversely, patients undergone CPAP/NIV in a moderate stage (P/F 101-200) had a significantly lower in-hospital mortality rate (13.4 vs. 29.0%, p = 0.044) and hospitalization length (14 vs. 15 days, p = 0.038) than those in the severe stage (P/F ≤ 100). Age and need for continuous ventilation were independent predictors of CPAP/NIV failure. CONCLUSIONS: Starting CPAP/NIV in patients with SARS-CoV-2-related ARDS in moderate stage (100 > P/F ≤ 200) is associated to a reduction of both in-hospital mortality and hospitalization length compared to the severe stage (P/F ≤ 100). Starting CPAP/NIV with a P/F > 150 does not appear to be of clinical utility.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Pilot Projects , Prospective Studies , COVID-19/therapy , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/diagnosis , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: the influenza and SARS-CoV-2 viruses share a common respiratory symptomatology and transmission mode. COVID-19 and influenza R0 overlapped in the first epidemic wave. In autumn 2021-winter 2022, the influenza epidemic had a delayed onset compared to pre-COVID-19 years and lower incidence rates than in the pre-pandemic period. The SARS-CoV-2 and influenza vaccination campaign overlapped in 2021-2022. OBJECTIVES: to evaluate in the SARS-CoV-2 vaccinated cohort the effect of different timing of influenza vaccination on hospitalisations for COVID-19 and overall mortality. DESIGN: prospective cohort study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: subjects aged 65 years or older who were administered the first booster dose of SARS-COV-2 vaccine between 01.10.2021 and 01.03.2022. Based on the date of influenza vaccination, subjects were divided into the following 4 different mutually exclusive groups: 1. two vaccinations in the same vaccination session; 2. influenza vaccination following SARS-CoV-2 vaccination; 3. influenza vaccination preceding SARS-CoV-2 vaccination; 4. no influenza vaccination. Using Cox regression models, hazard ratio (HR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) of hospitalisation and death were estimated for the influenza-vaccinated subjects compared to influenza-unvaccinated subjects. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: ordinary hospital admissions for COVID-19 and general mortality. RESULTS: the cohort included 618,964 subjects: 16.3% received two vaccinations in the same vaccination session, 8.5% received the influenza vaccination after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, 33.9% received it before and 41.1% did not receive an influenza vaccination. Those vaccinated against both SARS-CoV-2 and influenza had a combined HR of 0.73 (0.62-0.86) of hospitalisation for COVID-19 and 0.55 (0.49-0.62) of overall mortality compared to those vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 only. CONCLUSIONS: influenza vaccination combined with SARS-CoV-2 vaccination increases the protective effect against hospitalisations and overall mortality compared to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination alone. Both organisational and communication actions aimed to promote and encourage vaccination are required.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza Vaccines , Influenza, Human , Humans , COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Prospective Studies , Italy/epidemiology , Vaccination , Influenza, Human/epidemiology , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Hospitalization , Risk AssessmentABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: In February 2021, the spread of a new variant of SARS-CoV-2 in the Lombardy Region, Italy caused concerns about school-aged children as a source of contagion, leading local authorities to adopt an extraordinary school closure measure. This generated a debate about the usefulness of such an intervention in light of the trade-off between its related benefits and costs (e.g. delays in educational attainment, impact on children and families' psycho-physical well-being). This article analyses the epidemiological impact of the school closure intervention in the Milan metropolitan area. METHODS: Data from the Agency for Health Protection of the Metropolitan City of Milan allowed analysing the trend of contagion in different age classes before and after the intervention, adopting an interrupted times series design, providing a quasi-experimental counterfactual scenario. Segmented Poisson regression models of daily incident cases were performed separately for the 3-11-year-old, the 12-19-year-old, and the 20+-year-old age groups, examining the change in the contagion curves after the intervention, adjusting for time-varying confounders. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Cox regression were used to assess the equality of survival curves in the three age groups before and after the intervention. RESULTS: Net of time-varying confounders, the intervention produced a daily reduction of the risk of contagion by 4% in those aged 3-11 and 12-19 (IRR = 0·96) and by 3% in those aged 20 or more (IRR = 0·97). More importantly, there were differences in the temporal order of contagion decrease between the age groups, with the epidemic curve lowering first in the school-aged children directly affected by the intervention, and only subsequently in the adult population, which presumably indirectly benefitted from the reduction of contagion among children. CONCLUSION: Though it was not possible to completely discern the effect of school closures from concurrent policy measures, a substantial decrease in the contagion curves was clearly detected after the intervention. The extent to which the slowdown of infections counterbalanced the social costs of the policy remains unclear.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza, Human , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Child , Child, Preschool , Humans , Influenza, Human/epidemiology , Pandemics/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Schools , Young AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The pandemic may undermine the equity of access to and utilisation of health services for conditions other than COVID-19. The objective of the study is to evaluate the indirect impact of COVID-19 and lockdown measures on sociodemographic inequalities in healthcare utilisation in seven Italian areas. METHODS: In this multicentre retrospective study, we evaluated whether COVID-19 modified the association between educational level or deprivation and indicators of hospital utilisation and quality of care. We also assessed variations in gradients by sex and age class. We estimated age-standardised rates and prevalence and their relative per cent changes comparing pandemic (2020) and pre-pandemic (2018-2019) periods, and the Relative Index of Inequalities (RIIs) fitting multivariable Poisson models with an interaction between socioeconomic position and period. RESULTS: Compared with 2018-2019, hospital utilisation and, to a lesser extent, timeliness of procedures indicators fell during the first months of 2020. Larger declines were registered among women, the elderly and the low educated resulting in a shrinkage (or widening if RII <1) of the educational gradients for most of the indicators. Timeliness of procedures indicators did not show any educational gradient neither before nor during the pandemic. Inequalities by deprivation were nuanced and did not substantially change in 2020. CONCLUSIONS: The socially patterned reduction of hospital utilisation may lead to a potential exacerbation of health inequalities among groups who were already vulnerable before the pandemic. The healthcare service can contribute to contrast health disparities worsened by COVID-19 through more efficient communication and locally appropriate interventions.
ABSTRACT
Human coronaviruses have neuroinvasive and neurotropic abilities that might explain psychiatric outcomes in affected patients. We hypothesized that delirium might be the sole clinical manifestation or even the prodrome of a psychiatric episode consistent with the mental history of a few infected patients with a preexisting diagnosed cognitive impairment. We examined three patients with preexisting mild cognitive impairment and delirium at admission for suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection. We diagnosed delirium using DSM-5 and Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) and measured consciousness level by the Glasgow Coma Scale. All the patients had no history of fever, respiratory complications, anosmia or ageusia, meningitis, and negative cerebrospinal fluid analysis for SARS-CoV-2. Our first patient had no psychiatric history, the second reported only a depressive episode, and the third had a history of bipolar disorder dated back to 40 years before. In the first patient, delirium resolved 2 days following the admission. The other two patients recovered in 4 and 14 days, and delirium appeared as the prodrome of a new psychiatric episode resembling past events. Clinicians should monitor the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 presence in the brain might clinically manifest in the form of delirium and acute psychiatric sequelae, even without other systemic symptoms. Psychiatric history and preexisting mild cognitive impairment are to be considered as predisposing factors for COVID-19 sequelae in delirium patients.
ABSTRACT
[Figure: see text].
Subject(s)
Arrhythmias, Cardiac/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Global Health/trends , Aged , Arrhythmias, Cardiac/mortality , Arrhythmias, Cardiac/physiopathology , Arrhythmias, Cardiac/therapy , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/therapy , Cardiac Electrophysiology/trends , Comorbidity , Electrophysiologic Techniques, Cardiac/trends , Female , Health Care Surveys , Healthcare Disparities , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/trends , Prevalence , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Time FactorsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: In Italy, the first diagnosis of COVID-19 was confirmed on 20 February 2020 in the Lombardy region. Given the rapid spread of the infection in the population, it was suggested that in Europe, and specifically in Italy, the virus had already been present in the last months of 2019. In this paper, we aim to evaluate the hypothesis on the early presence of the virus in Italy by analysing data on trends of access to emergency departments (EDs) of subjects with a diagnosis of pneumonia during the 2015-2020 period. DESIGN: Time series cohort study. SETTING: We collected data on visits due to pneumonia between 1 October 2015 and 31 May 2020 in all EDs of the Agency for Health Protection of Milan (ATS of Milan). Trend in the winter of 2019-2020 was compared with those in the previous 4 years in order to identify unexpected signals potentially associated with the occurrence of the pandemic. Aggregated data were analysed using a Poisson regression model adjusted for seasonality and influenza outbreaks. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURESâ¯: Daily pneumonia-related visits in EDs. RESULTSâ¯: In the studied period, we observed 105 651 pneumonia-related ED visits. Compared with the expected, a lower occurrence was observed in January 2020, while an excess of pneumonia visits started in the province of Lodi on 21 February 2020, and almost 10 days later was observed in the remaining territory of the ATS of Milan. Overall, the peak in excess was found on 17 March 2020 (369 excess visits compared with previous years, 95% CI 353 to 383) and ended in May 2020, the administrative end of the Italian lockdown. CONCLUSIONSâ¯: An early warning system based on routinely collected administrative data could be a feasible and low-cost strategy to monitor the actual situation of the virus spread both at local and national levels.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Epidemiological Monitoring , Pneumonia/diagnosis , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Cohort Studies , Communicable Disease Control , Female , Humans , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Pneumonia/epidemiology , Young AdultABSTRACT
[Figure: see text].
Subject(s)
Arrhythmias, Cardiac/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , Global Health/trends , Aged , Arrhythmias, Cardiac/mortality , Arrhythmias, Cardiac/physiopathology , Arrhythmias, Cardiac/therapy , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/therapy , Cardiac Electrophysiology/trends , Comorbidity , Electrophysiologic Techniques, Cardiac/trends , Female , Health Care Surveys , Healthcare Disparities , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/trends , Prevalence , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Time FactorsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIM: The aim of the present study was to assess the diagnostic performance of an LFA compared with an ELISA test in a cohort of HWs operating in a COVID-19 unit of a teaching hospital in southern Italy. METHODS: We performed an observational, prospective, interventional study including 65 COVID-19 unit personnel. On a total of 196 serum samples (at least 2 serum samples for each HW), LFA and ELISA tests for SARS-COV-2 IgG and IgM were performed. Also, 32 serum samples of SARS-CoV-2 RNA positive patients at least 21 days before sampling, and 30 serum samples of patients obtained up to November 2019, before COVID-19 outbreak in China, were used as positive and negative controls, respectively. FINDINGS: Of the 65 HWs enrolled, 6 were positive in LFA; overall, of the 196 serum samples, 20 were positive in LFA. All ELISA tests performed on serum samples collected from HWs were negative. The specificity of LFAs was 90.77% considering the 65 HWs and 89.80% considering all the 196 health workers serum samples analyzed. Considering the data on HWs, ELISA test for SARS-COV-2 antibodies showed a specificity of 100%, including all the 196 serum samples collected, and 100% including the 65 HWs. The ELISA and LFAs performed after 21 days last COVID-19 patient was discharged were all negative. CONCLUSION: LFAs compared to ELISA tests result in less specificity, considering COVID-19 negative personnel and patients. Thus, LFAs seem to be not adequate in the active surveillance of HWs.