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










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33208083

ABSTRACT

In late 2019, SARS-COV-2 disease was firstly discovered in Wuhan, China and then it infected millions of people worldwide. Later, the World Health Organization (WHO) described COVID-19 as the first pandemic invading the world in the 21st century. The WHO has declared that the emerging infection will last long enough to force adjustments not only in people's lifestyles but also in the health care system. This amendment is expected to spread through many medical practices and specialties. A lot of diagnostic and therapeutic modalities have been proposed for COVID-19 management. The best strategy for the management of patients requires a multi-disciplinary team approach with correct decisions regarding the right timing of each modality of treatment. The participating multidisciplinary team for COVID-19 management includes six infectious diseases experts in Tanta University; one critical care management expert, an emergency medicine expert and two pharmacists in Tanta University. In this review, we reported our multi-disciplinary team experience with up to date literature guidance to propose a valid protocol for the management of COVID-19 patients in a limited resources setting.


Subject(s)
Academic Medical Centers/methods , COVID-19/prevention & control , Developing Countries , Disease Management , Health Resources , Patient Care Team , Academic Medical Centers/economics , COVID-19/economics , COVID-19/epidemiology , Developing Countries/economics , Egypt/epidemiology , Health Resources/economics , Humans , Patient Care Team/economics
2.
Am J Trop Med Hyg ; 103(4): 1635-1639, 2020 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32828135

ABSTRACT

RETRACTED ARTICLE: The COVID-19 pandemic is showing an exponential growth, mandating an urgent need to develop an effective treatment. Indeed, to date, a well-established therapy is still lacking. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) added to standard care in patients with COVID-19. This was a multicenter, randomized controlled trial conducted at three major university hospitals in Egypt. One hundred ninety-four patients with confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 were included in the study after signing informed consent. They were equally randomized into two arms: 97 patients administrated HCQ plus standard care (HCQ group) and 97 patients administered only standard care as a control arm (control group). The primary endpoints were recovery within 28 days, need for mechanical ventilation, or death. The two groups were matched for age and gender. There was no significant difference between them regarding any of the baseline characteristics or laboratory parameters. Four patients (4.1%) in the HCQ group and 5 (5.2%) patients in the control group needed mechanical ventilation (P = 0.75). The overall mortality did not differ between the two groups, as six patients (6.2%) died in the HCQ group and 5 (5.2%) died in the control group (P = 0.77). Univariate logistic regression analysis showed that HCQ treatment was not significantly associated with decreased mortality in COVID-19 patients. So, adding HCQ to standard care did not add significant benefit, did not decrease the need for ventilation, and did not reduce mortality rates in COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Betacoronavirus/pathogenicity , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Acetaminophen/therapeutic use , Adult , COVID-19 , Cephalosporins/therapeutic use , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/mortality , Coronavirus Infections/virology , Drug Administration Schedule , Drug Repositioning , Egypt , Female , Humans , Hydrocortisone/therapeutic use , Male , Middle Aged , Oseltamivir/therapeutic use , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/mortality , Pneumonia, Viral/virology , Respiration, Artificial , SARS-CoV-2 , Severity of Illness Index , Survival Analysis , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
3.
Anesth Essays Res ; 13(3): 528-534, 2019.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31602073

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Hypertensive therapy prevents vasospasm-related delayed ischemic neurologic deficit and infarcts. New alternatives would include vasopressin which has vasoconstrictive effects and positive influence on cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) and intracranial pressure (ICP). AIMS: The aim of this study is to demonstrate the value of vasopressin intravenous infusion (IVI) in decreasing ICP and preventing vasospasm following surgical clipping or endovascular coiling. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: A triple-blind prospective randomized controlled study. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Thirty patients, 25-60 years, both genders, had undergone surgical clipping or endovascular coiling for a cerebral aneurysm, World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies (WFNS) grade 1-3 (15 patients in each); Group I (Vasopressin): 0.1-0.4 unit/min and Group II (Norepinephrine): 5-20 ug/min with target systolic blood pressure 160-180 mmHg. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: SPSS version 25 software was used for analysis. RESULTS: Invasive mean arterial pressure (MAP) showed the insignificant difference between the two groups, but ICP showed a significant decrease in Group V from hour 24 to 168 hence calculated CPP showed a significant increase in Group V at most times from hour 36 to 168. Glasgow Coma Scale showed a significant decrease in Group N from hour 138 due to the occurrence of vasospasm. The incidence of vasospasm, mechanical ventilation, and 28-day mortality were significantly lower in Group V with 81% risk reduction of vasospasm and better survival. CONCLUSION: Vasopressin IVI improved ICP, MAP, CPP and patient outcomes safely by reducing the incidence of cerebral vasospasm, and 28-day mortality after clipping or coiling of the cerebral aneurysm.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...