The liver in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection.

BACKGROUND: The ongoing outbreak of COVID-19 is associated with higher levels of morbidity and mortality among patients with comorbidities, including the metabolic syndrome. Liver impairment has been reported in up to 54% of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The impact of COVID-19 on a preexisting chronic liver disease is an actively studied area of research. The contribution of our study is towards determining the predictors of severity and the outcome of liver injury among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 infection, including patients with a preexisting liver disease and COVID-19. METHODS: This single center retrospective cohort study included all patients ≥18 years, admitted in Sheba Medical Center with confirmed COVID-19 infection. Demographic, clinical and laboratory data were obtained using the MDClone platform and rechecked after data decryption using electronic health records. RESULTS: Of 382 patients with COVID-19, 66.4% had increased liver biochemistry. Mild increase was observed in 76.7%. The higher level of fibrosis-4 (FIB-4) at admission was independently associated with higher mortality rate. Preexisting liver disease was detected in 15.4% patients. Most common etiology was nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (78.7%). The mortality of hospitalized patients with preexisting liver disease was 16.7% compared to 6.8% in patients without preexisting liver disease (RR = 2.792, P = 0.01). In multivariate analysis, liver disease adjusted to age and BMI was associated with mortality with high statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with preexisting chronic liver disease were at a higher risk of mortality. The FIB-4 level at admission was associated with worse prognosis. These findings should be reevaluated in a larger cohort of patients.

Complications of retained pacemaker hardware in heart transplant recipients: case series and review of the literature.

Heart transplantation (HT) in patients with prior cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) is becoming more common, in parallel with the increased use of CIEDs for patients with advanced heart failure. Complete removal of CIED components during HT is not always feasible, and it is thus surprising that the literature addressing the implications of retained CIED components is limited. Indeed, there are neither guidelines nor consensus regarding the need for removal of these CIED fragments. This issue is nonetheless becoming important in light of the increase in the percentage of HT candidates having CIEDs, on the one hand, and newer therapeutic immunosuppressive protocols with higher bacterial infection potential, on the other. Thus, with the aim to study the implications of retained CIED fragments as a step towards establishing a therapeutic approach for the unique population of HT recipients with CIED remnants, we present here a case series of HT patients with retained CIED fragments who developed complications of infections together with a review of the available literature.

Post-cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices: Inflammation of the Pocket. Should We Be More Aggressive?

BACKGROUND: Pacemaker pocket early post-implantation inflammation (EPII) is defined as clinical signs of local erythema without any systemic signs of infection occurring early after implantation. Data on the best treatment regimen for apparent superficial EPII is scarce. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the prognostic value of medical treatment, rather than extraction surgery, in patients with EPII. METHODS: Data from 6013 consecutive patients who underwent cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation or replacement from 2007-2015 were retrospectively analyzed; 40 (0.7%) presented with EPII. Our goal was the absence of major complications and to avoidance of extraction. RESULTS: Patients with EPII were initially treated medically. Nineteen (47%) (group A) recovered with antibiotic treatment only. In the other 21 patients (53%) (group B), CIED extraction was performed. Group B had more major complications compared to group A (15 [71%] vs. 0 [0%], P < 0.001). The only significant difference in baseline characteristics was history of non-initial procedure. While 86% of group B patients had a previous non-initial procedure, only 53% of group A patients underwent previous replacement (P < 0.05). In multivariate analysis, previous non-initial procedure was the only predictor for need of extraction at 1 year, hazard ratio 3.5, 95% confidence interval 1.001-11.73, P < 0.05. CONCLUSIONS: Conservative treatment in patients with EPII after non-initial procedure can lead to serious adverse events resulting in the need for extraction. Close follow-up and aggressive treatment should be considered early in the therapeutic course.

Characterization of a previously unrecognized clinical phenomenon: Delayed shock after cardiac implantable electronic device extraction.

BACKGROUND: Transvenous lead extraction remains a challenging procedure with inherent risk and associated complications. OBJECTIVE: We sought to characterize and evaluate predictors of delayed shock after transvenous lead extraction with no intraprocedural complications. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data of 217 consecutive patients who underwent extraction between 2010 and 2015. The primary end point was sudden onset of shock more than 4 hours after the completion of the procedure. Shock was defined as at least 30 minutes of persistent hypotension, necessitating vasopressors. Patients with mechanical or hemorrhagic shock were excluded. RESULTS: Seventeen patients (9%) developed delayed shock during the first 24 hours. Reasons for shock were sepsis (47%) or no apparent cause (53%). In multivariate analysis, patients with delayed shock had significantly lower glomerular filtration rate (median estimated glomerular filtration rate 53 mL/min vs 73 mL/min; P = .001), had more signs of systemic infection before extraction (fever, bacteremia, and leukocytosis; P < .05), and had more lead/tip remnants (29% vs 3%; P < .001). Patients presenting with delayed shock had significantly higher mortality rates at 1-year follow-up (10 [59%] vs 40 [23%], respectively; P < .01). Multivariate analysis adjusted for 1-year mortality risk was 114% higher (hazard ratio 2.14; 95% confidence interval 1.02-4.47; P < .05) in patients presenting with delayed shock. CONCLUSION: We describe a previously unrecognized clinical phenomenon of delayed shock developing after extraction. Patients with predictors of this condition at baseline should be identified and followed up closely. Even with prompt treatment, long-term mortality rates remain high.

Missed opportunities for earlier diagnosis of HIV in patients who presented with advanced HIV disease: a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify and characterise missed opportunities for earlier HIV diagnosis in patients diagnosed with advanced HIV. DESIGN: A retrospective observational cohort study. SETTING: A central tertiary medical centre in Israel. MEASURES: The proportion of patients with advanced HIV, the proportion of missed opportunities to diagnose them earlier, and the rate of clinical indicator diseases (CIDs) in those patients. RESULTS: Between 2010 and 2015, 356 patients were diagnosed with HIV, 118 (33.4%) were diagnosed late, 57 (16%) with advanced HIV disease. Old age (OR=1.45 (95% CI 1.16 to 1.74)) and being heterosexual (OR=2.65 (95% CI 1.21 to 5.78)) were significant risk factors for being diagnosed late. All patients with advanced disease had at least one CID that did not lead to an HIV test in the 5 years prior to AIDS diagnosis. The median time between CID and AIDS diagnosis was 24 months (IQR 10-30). 60% of CIDs were missed by a general practitioner and 40% by a specialist. CONCLUSIONS: Missed opportunities to early diagnosis of HIV occur in primary and secondary care. Lack of national guidelines, lack of knowledge regarding CIDs and communication barriers with patients may contribute to a late diagnosis of HIV.

Long-term follow-up of high-pressure injection injuries to the hand.

BACKGROUND: High-pressure injection injury is an injury caused by accidental injection of substances by industrial equipment. This injury may have devastating sequelae. The goal of this study was to assess the long-term outcome of high-pressure injection injury to the hand. METHODS: In this historical prospective study, patients who had previously sustained high-pressure injection injury were examined. Assessment included measurement of grip and pinch strength, range of motion, two-point discrimination, and use of a questionnaire regarding present complaints and return to the work force. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients were examined. Follow-up length was on average 8.5 years. The injured hand was most often (43 percent) the right dominant hand, the index in 65 percent, the thumb in 25 percent, and other locations in 10 percent. Only 43 percent of patients returned to their previous employment. Patient complaints were, in descending frequency, cold intolerance, hypersensitivity, paresthesias, constant pain, and impairment of activities of daily living. Metacarpophalangeal range of motion was decreased on average by 8.1 percent (p = 0.019), proximal interphalangeal joint range of motion was decreased by 23.9 percent (p = 0.001), and distal interphalangeal range of motion was decreased by 29.7 percent (p= 0.018). Maximum grip was decreased compared with the expected grip by 12 percent (p = 0.023). Pinch was decreased by 35 percent (p < 0.001). Two-point discrimination was increased by 49 percent (p < 0.007). CONCLUSION: This study confirms the fact that high-pressure injection injury to the hand is a significant problem. Virtually all patients suffer sequelae of this injury. The injury has significant repercussions for future function and reintegration into the work force.