Prone position reduces the risk of patients with mild or moderate COVID-19 progressing to severe or even critical cases: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: To investigate whether prone position can reduce the risk of patients with mild or moderate COVID-19 who progress to severe or critical illness. METHODS: The prone position group was treated in prone position on the day of admission in addition to conventional treatment. Indicators such as saturation of pulse oximetry (SpO2), heart rate, blood pressure, respiratory rate, and prone position-related adverse events were recorded before prone ventilation, 5 min after prone position and 30 min after prone position. Meanwhile, the cases of severe and critical patients, the percentage of transformation and the final clinical outcome of this group were analyzed. Conversion rates and mortality were calculated for patients with mild or moderate COVID-19 retrieved from the database who received only conventional care without combined prone positioning as control group. RESULTS: (1) A total of 34 patients were included in prone position group. There were significant differences in SpO2 between the first 4 days after admission and the day of discharge (F = 3.17, P < 0.001). (2) The main complications were back and neck muscle soreness (55.9%), followed by abdominal distension (8.9%). (3) In control group, a total of 4873 cases of mild and moderate patients were included from 19 literatures, with an average deterioration rate of 22.7% and mortality rate of 1.7%. (4) In prone position group, there were no severe or critical transformation cases and also no death cases. The prone position group had a significantly lower deterioration rate when compared with the control group (χ2 = 9.962, P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Prone position improves SpO2 in patients with mild or moderate COVID-19. It can also reduce the percentage of mild or moderate patients progressing to severe or critical patients. The application of prone position is a simple, feasible, safe and effective treatment method in such patients.

Clinical efficacy of intravesical gemcitabine combined with ubenimex in patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder carcinoma after transurethral resection of bladder tumor

Objectives: To evaluate the clinical value of intravesical gemcitabine combined with immunotherapy in patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder carcinoma (NMIBC) after transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT). Methods: Eighty patients with non-muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma treated in Baoding No.1 Hospital from November 2016 to November 2019 were randomly divided into two groups, with 40 patients in each group. Both groups underwent TURBT. After surgery, the research group was treated with intravesical chemotherapy using gemcitabine combined with ubenimex, while the control group was given 40 mg pirarubicin by intravesical instillation. Postoperative condition was evaluated by cystoscopy every three months in both groups. The recurrence six months, one year and two years after treatment, the incidence of lower urinary tract symptoms such as dysuria, hematuria and frequent urination, general adverse drug reactions such as rashes, liver function damage and gastrointestinal reaction, as well as the changes in CD3+, CD4+, CD8+ and CD4+/CD8+ T lymphocyte subsets before and after treatment were comparatively analyzed between the two groups. Results: The recurrence rate showed no statistical significance between the two groups 6 months after treatment (p=0.17), but significant differences one year (p=0.04) and two years (p=0.03) after treatment, which were significantly lower in the research group than the control group. The incidence of adverse drug reactions was 22.5% in the research group and 7.5% in the control group, without significant difference (p=0.36). The incidence of lower urinary tract symptoms was 32.5% and 55%, respectively, in the research group and the control group. The incidence of lower urinary tract symptoms in the research group was significantly lower compared with the control group, with a statistically significant difference (p=0.04). After treatment, CD3+, CD4+ and CD4+/CD8+ levels in the research group increased significantly than those in the control group, with statistically significant differences (CD3+, p=0.01;CD4+, p=0.00;CD4+/CD8+, p=0.00). Conclusions: For NMIBC patients receiving bladder-preserving surgery, intravesical gemcitabine combined with immunotherapy can reduce the recurrence rate, relieve lower urinary tract symptoms, increase the tolerance of patients to intravesical chemotherapy and significantly improve the function of T lymphocytes, without obvious increase in adverse drug reactions. Therefore, it is safe and effective, and has certain clinical value.