Retrospective Evaluation of COVID-19 Infection and COVID-19 Vaccines in Heart Transplant Patients.

BACKGROUND: Patients who have performed solid organ transplantation in terms of COVID-19 infection are included in the high-risk group. In this study, it was aimed to evaluate the relationship between vaccination and retrospective evaluation of 32 patients who underwent a heart transplant in the clinic and tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction. METHODS: In this study, demographic characteristics of the cases, comorbidities, timing of heart transplantation, immunosuppressive treatments, symptoms of COVID-19 infection, lung imaging findings, follow-up (outpatient/inpatient), treatments, 1-month mortality, and vaccination histories against COVID-19 infection were evaluated. The data obtained from the study were analyzed with SPSS version 25.0. RESULTS: The 3 most common symptoms are cough (37.5%), myalgia (28.1%), and fever (21.8%). COVID-19 infection was severe in 6.2% of the patients, moderate in 37.5%, and mild in 56.2%. Hospitalization was required in 5 patients (15.6%, 1 in the intensive care unit), and the other patients were followed up as an outpatient. Severe COVID-19 infection was seen more in 33% of unvaccinated patients; 93.5% were vaccinated. Nineteen patients (68%) were vaccinated before COVID-19 infection. Our patients received the CoronoVac (Sinovac, China) vaccine. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 infection is more likely to be severe and mortal in patients with heart transplant recipients. It is also crucial to comply with preventive measures other than immunization in this group of patients. This study is the largest series investigating COVID-19 infection in heart transplant recipient patients in our country.

Comparison of a novel antigen detection test with reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction assay for laboratory diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Molecular diagnosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) in respiratory specimens is considered the gold standard method. This method is highly sensitive and specific but it has some limitations such as being expensive and requiring special laboratory equipment and skilled personnel. RapidFor™ Antigen Rapid Test Kit is a commercially available Ag-RDT which is produced in Turkey and designed to detect the nucleocapsid antigen of SARS-CoV-2 in nasopharyngeal swab samples. The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of this novel SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection considering the RT-PCR method as the gold standard. Four hundred forty-four nasopharyngeal swab samples which were collected from the patients who met clinical criteria of COVID-19 from ten centers in Turkey between September 2020 and February 2021 were included in the study. All the nasopharyngeal swab samples were tested for SARS-CoV-2 RNA using commercial RT-PCR kits (Bioeksen and A1 Lifesciences, Istanbul, Turkey) according to the manufacturer's instructions. Viral loads were assessed according to the cycle threshold (Ct) values. RapidFor™ SARS-CoV-2 antigen test (Vitrosens Biotechnology, Istanbul, Turkey) was used to investigate the presence of SARS-CoV-2 antigen in all samples following the manufacturer's instructions. Out of 444 nasopharyngeal swab samples tested, 346 (77.9%) were positive and 98 (22.1%) were negative for SARS-CoV-2 RNA by RTPCR. Overall sensitivity of the RapidFor™. Antigen Rapid Test Kit was 80.3% whereas specificity was found to be 87.8%. Positivity rate of rapid antigen test in samples with Ct values over 25 and below 30 was 82.7%, while it increased to 95.7% in samples 20 ≤ Ct < 25 and reached 100% in samples with Ct values below 20. RapidFor™ SARS-CoV-2 Ag test might be a good choice in the screening of symptomatic and asymptomatic patients and their contacts for taking isolation measures early, with advantages over RT-PCR as being rapid, easy and being applicable in every laboratory and even at point of care.

Antibiotic use and Influencing Factors Among Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19: A Multicenter Point-Prevalence Study from Turkey

Background: Broad-spectrum empirical antimicrobials are frequently prescribed for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) despite the lack of evidence for bacterial coinfection. Aims: We aimed to cross-sectionally determine the frequency of antibiotics use, type of antibiotics prescribed, and the factors influencing antibiotics use in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 confirmed by polymerase chain reaction. Study Design: The study was a national, multicenter, retrospective, and single-day point prevalence study. Methods: This was a national, multicenter, retrospective, and single-day point-prevalence study, conducted in the 24-h period between 00:00 and 24:00 on November 18, 2020, during the start of the second COVID-19 peak in Turkey. Results: A total of 1500 patients hospitalized with a diagnosis of COVID-19 were included in the study. The mean age ± standard deviation of the patients was 65.0 ± 15.5, and 56.2% (n = 843) of these patients were men. Of these hospitalized patients, 11.9% (n = 178) were undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation or ECMO. It was observed that 1118 (74.5%) patients were receiving antibiotics, of which 416 (37.2%) were prescribed a combination of antibiotics. In total, 71.2% of the patients had neither a clinical diagnosis nor microbiological evidence for prescribing antibiotics. In the multivariate logistic regression analysis, hospitalization in a state hospital (p < 0.001), requiring any supplemental oxygen (p = 0.005), presence of moderate/diffuse lung involvement (p < 0.001), C-reactive protein > 10 ULT coefficient (p < 0.001), lymphocyte count < 800 (p = 0.007), and clinical diagnosis and/or confirmation by culture (p < 0.001) were found to be independent factors associated with increased antibiotic use. Conclusion: The necessity of empirical antibiotics use in patients with COVID-19 should be reconsidered according to their clinical, imaging, and laboratory findings.

Favipiravir for the treatment of COVID-19 pneumonia: Can we predict the response to treatment?

INTRODUCTION: Early experience with favipiravir in the treatment of COVID-19 is promising, but no clinical data have been published in medical journals. This study aimed to review the experience with favipiravir treatment for COVID-19 pneumonia and to examine whether there are any predictors of treatment response. METHODOLOGY: Fifty-six patients with severe or progressive pneumonia associated with COVID-19 who were treated with favipiravir monotherapy for at least five days were included in this retrospective study. Treatment response was defined as clinical recovery without any need for admission into the intensive care unit and/or anti-cytokine therapy. The demographic, clinical, laboratory and radiographic features of the patients were compared between favipiravir-responders and non-responders. RESULTS: Of the 56 patients, 34 patients (60.7%) responded to treatment and recovered. There was no difference in the demographic, clinical, and radiographic findings between the responders and non-responders. The inflammatory biomarkers were also similar except for the CRP levels on the day favipiravir was started [74 (36-111) vs. 118.5 (46.5-203) mg/L, respectively, p = 0.043]. There was also a significant difference in the median time to defervescence [1 (1-2) vs. 3.5 (1.75-9.25) days, respectively]. Of clinical interest, 27 (79.4%) and 31 (91.2%) of the responders became afebrile within two and four days, respectively. The response rate was lower in patients who presented severe pneumonia associated with respiratory failure. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with non-severe pneumonia at admission and whose fever resolved within two days of treatment are more likely to improve with favipiravir.

[Friend or Foe? Evaluation of BCG Vaccine and Latent Tuberculosis Infection Effect in Patients Diagnosed with COVID-19 Infection]. / Dost mu Düsman mi? COVID-19 Enfeksiyonu Tanili Hastalarda BCG Asisi ve Latent Tüberküloz Enfeksiyonu Etkisinin Degerlendirilmesi.

While severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) continues to spread rapidly worldwide, some issues such as the uncertainty of the disease progress, whether intensive care will be needed, and risk classification are still important for clinicians. It is notable that in countries where latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) is common and participating in the national Bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) vaccination program, the case-fatality rates are relatively low throughout the world. In this study, it was aimed to evaluate the effects of the BCG vaccine and LTBI status on the course of the disease in patients diagnosed with coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) infection and to compare the LTBI rate with people with and without COVID-19 infection. The patients diagnosed with COVID-19 infection who were hospitalized during a period of seven months between May 1st to December 1st, 2020 were investigated by the QuantiFERON-TB Gold Plus (QFT-Plus) test in the blood samples for the presence of LTBI. For the comparison of the patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and people without COVID-19 infections in terms of LTBI rate retrospectively; all consecutive patients who were sent blood samples to the mycobacteriology laboratory for the QFT-Plus test between January 2016 and December 2019 were included in the study. Demographic, clinical, radiological, laboratory, and follow-up data of the patients were obtained from the electronic patient file. A total of 170 patients (n= 9 8 male [57.6%], n= 72 female [42.3%], mean age= 53.5 ± 15.8 years) were enrolled. Twenty-five patients' (25/170 [14.7%]) QFT-plus tests were positive. When the cases with positive QFT-Plus test (n= 25) and the cases with negative QFT-Plus test (n = 145) were compared in terms of disease severity respectively; it was determined that mild/moderate patients were 18/25 (72%) and 108/145 (74.5%), severe patients were 7/25 (28%) and 37/145 (25.5%) (p= 0.988). When these two groups were compared in terms of the clinical course respectively; the need for intensive care was 6/25 (24%) and 34/145 (23.4%) (p= 1.00), oxygen therapy requirement was 13/25 (52%) and 49/145 (33.8%) (p= 0.128), and death was 5/25 (20%) and 18/145 (12.4%) (p= 0.341). QFT-Plus positivity was 25/170 (14.7%) in patients diagnosed with COVID-19, while in control group it was 198/496 (39.9%) (OR= 0.259, 95% CI [0.164-0.411], p<0.001). When the values were evaluated quantitatively, in the COVID-19 patient group, QFT-Plus T1/T2 (IU/ml) interferon (IFN)-É£ was 0.87 ± 1.52/0.62 ± 1.53, while in the control group it was 1.52 ± 3.69/1.50 ± 3.33 (p= 0.032, p= 0.04). There was no significant difference in the parameters investigated between 82 (48.2%) patients with BCG vaccine and those 88 (51.8%) without BCG vaccine. Although it was not statistically significant in our study, increased oxygen therapy requirement and higher mortality rates in the QFT-Plus positive group were remarkable. The detection of statistically significantly lower LTBI rates and T1-T2/IFN-É£ values in the COVID-19 group supported that SARS-CoV-2 infection may suppress lymphocyte functions in patients and IFN-É£ response. We believe that the results of our study are remarkably valuable, but more clinical studies are needed to elucidate the relationship between BCG vaccine, LTBI, and COVID-19 infection.

The deep impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on medical students: An online cross-sectional study evaluating Turkish students' anxiety.

AIM: Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) changed the delivery of medical education in Turkey by moving to an emergency remote teaching system and led to many challenges for future doctors. In this study, we aimed to explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on medical students, to assess their anxiety level and their main anxiety sources related to this pandemic. METHODS: A Google Form was distributed to medical students using the virtual snowball sampling method. The form included the Beck Anxiety Inventory and additional 19 questions on sociodemographic characteristics, perceived level of knowledge about the epidemic, self-risk perceptions of COVID-19 and their anxiety levels about some other topics related to COVID-19. RESULTS: Overall, 3105 medical students with a mean age of 22.37 ± 2.46, took the survey. Amongst the participants, only 32% of the students defined their knowledge about the precautions that should be taken during an epidemic disease as acceptable. Students reported highest anxiety level for the continuing spread of COVID-19 in Turkey and transmitting coronavirus to another person. Clinically significant anxiety prevalence was 23.2%. Regression analysis revealed that factors that increased the risk of being anxious included being female, being other than a 5th-year student, thinking that being a medical student would increase the risk of coronavirus transmission or being uncertain about it, being exposed to a patient with COVID-19 or being uncertain about it, being anxious about the continuing spread of COVID-19 in Turkey, being anxious about acquiring COVID-19, being anxious for graduating and being on active duty, being anxious about a medical training interruption. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that anxiety is prevalent amongst Turkish medical students during the COVID-19 pandemic and they have a weak preparedness for a pandemic such as COVID-19. Based on our results, new strategies should be implemented for medical education and for alleviating students' anxiety levels.

Treatment of SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia with favipiravir: early results from the Ege University cohort, Turkey

Background/aim: The aim of this descriptive article is to share the experience in Ege University, Turkey with favipiravir in the treatment of severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. Materials and methods: This retrospective descriptive study included patients diagnosed with COVID-19 who presented with or developed severe pneumonia. Results: Forty patients who completed a full course (at least 5 days) of favipiravir were included in the study. At baseline, 30 (75%) patients required treatment for respiratory distress. Thirty-three patients (82.5%) were discharged from the hospital with full recovery, 6 patients (15%) died and 1 case (2.5%) was still at the intensive care unit (ICU) when this paper was written. Conclusion: This study provides relevant information for the treatment of COVID-19, suggesting that favipiravir was associated with significant clinical and laboratory improvements in the majority of the patients, is a safe drug with no serious side effects and would merit further investigation.

A Case of Sars-Cov-2 Infection in an HIV Patient

Coronavirus disease 2019, which emerged in Wuhan in China in early December 2019, gradually spread across the world and was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization on March, 12 2020. The disease shows a wide spectrum, ranging from asymptomatic course to severe acute respiratory syndrome. Although data on SARS-CoV-2 infection in HIV-infected cases are still limited, it is thought that the presence of comorbidities is important for mortality and morbidity in infected cases. In this report, it was aimed to evaluate SARS-CoV-2 infection in a patient diagnosed with HIV for six years with negative HIV-1 viral load and a CD4 lymphocyte count of 240 cells/mm(3).

COVID-19-related anxiety in people living with HIV: an online cross-sectional study

Background/aim: The emergence of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak has had an enormous emotional impact on some vulnerable groups, such as people living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) (PLHIV). This study was planned with the aim of assessing the anxiety levels of PLHIV and the sources of their anxiety. Materials and methods: A web-based questionnaire was sent to PLHIV using the virtual snowball sampling method. The questionnaire included questions about sociodemographic status, information about HIV infection, and the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI). Additionally, some opinions of the participants about COVID-19 were asked. Results: A total of 307 respondents, with a median age of 33 years, from 32 different cities, participated in the study. More than half of the respondents reported the belief that COVID-19 was not sufficiently well-known by the medical community and nearly 45% believed that they would have more complications if they contracted COVID-19. One-fourth of the participants had anxiety. Having a preexisting psychiatric disorder, perceiving that they were practicing insufficient preventive measures, not being sure about the presence of any individuals with COVID-19 in their environment, and living with a household member with a chronic disease were found to be the risk factors of PLHIV for having anxiety during this pandemic. The BAI scores were correlated with the patient-reported anxiety levels about the spread of COVID-19 in Turkey, acquiring COVID-19, transmitting COVID-19 to another person, and transmitting HIV to another person. Among the stated conditions, the most common concern was the spread of COVID-19 all over the country, while the least common was transmitting HIV to someone else. Conclusion: The results revealed that a significant proportion of the sample had anxiety, and the findings were essential for developing evidence-based strategies for decreasing the anxiety of PLHIV, especially for those who had risk factors and to provide them with better health care during this pandemic or other pandemic-like crises.