Search

Background: An increased incidence of pneumomediastinum has been observed among patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia. The study aimed to identify risk factors for COVID-19-associated pneumomediastinum and investigate the impact of pneumomediastinum on clinical outcomes., Methods: In this multicentre retrospective case-control study, we included consecutive patients with COVID-19 pneumonia and pneumomediastinum hospitalized from March 2020 to July 2020 at ten centres; then, we identified a similarly sized control group of consecutive patients hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia and respiratory failure who did not develop pneumomediastinum during the same period. Clinical, laboratory, and radiological characteristics, as well as respiratory support and outcomes, were collected and compared between the two groups. Risk factors of pneumomediastinum were assessed by multivariable logistic analysis., Results: Overall 139 patients with pneumomediastinum and 153 without pneumomediastinum were analysed. Lung involvement ≥75 %, consolidations, body mass index (BMI) < 22 kg/m 2 , C-reactive protein (CRP) > 150 mg/L, D-dimer >3000 ng/mL FEUs, and smoking exposure >20 pack-year were all independently correlated with the occurrence of pneumomediastinum. Patients with pneumomediastinum had a longer hospital stay (mean ± SD 31.2 ± 20.2 days vs 19.6 ± 14.2, p < 0.001), higher intubation rate (73/139, 52.5 % vs 27/153, 17.6 %, p < 0.001), and in-hospital mortality (68/139, 48.9 % vs 36/153, 23.5 %, p < 0.001) compared to controls., Conclusions: Extensive lung parenchyma involvement, consolidations, low BMI, high inflammatory markers, and tobacco exposure are associated with a greater risk of pneumomediastinum in COVID-19 pneumonia. This complication significantly worsens the outcomes., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest All authors have no conflict of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) has been recently proposed as a modulator of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor expression, with potential effects on COVID-19., Aim and Study Design: We retrospectively evaluated the clinical course and outcome of subjects taking UDCA admitted to the hospital for COVID-19 compared with matched infected subjects. Differences regarding the severity and outcome of the disease between treated and non-treated subjects were assessed. The Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and log-rank test were used to evaluate the effect of UDCA on all-cause intra-hospital mortality., Results: Among 6444 subjects with confirmed COVID-19 admitted to the emergency department (ED) from 1 March 2020 to 31 December 2022, 109 subjects were taking UDCA. After matching 629 subjects were included in the study: 521 in the no UDCA group and 108 in the UDCA group. In our matched cohort, 144 subjects (22.9%) died, 118 (22.6%) in the no-UDCA group and 26 (24.1%) in the UDCA group. The Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no significant difference in survival between groups. In univariate regression analysis, the presence of pneumonia, National Early Warning Score (NEWS) score, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) were significant independent predictors of death. At multivariate Cox regression analysis, age, NEWS, pneumonia and CCI index were confirmed significant independent predictors of death. UDCA treatment was not a predictor of survival both in univariate and multivariate regressions., Conclusions: UDCA treatment does not appear to have significant effects on the outcome of COVID-19. Specially designed prospective studies are needed to evaluate efficacy in preventing infection and severe disease., (© 2023 The Authors. Liver International published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has several extrapulmonary symptoms. Gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms are among the most frequent clinical manifestations of COVID-19, with severe consequences reported in elderly patients. Furthermore, the impact of COVID-19 on patients with pre-existing digestive diseases still needs to be fully elucidated, particularly in the older population. This review aimed to investigate the impact of COVID-19 on the GI tract, liver, and pancreas in individuals with and without previous digestive diseases, with a particular focus on the elderly, highlighting the distinctive characteristics observed in this population. Finally, the effectiveness and adverse events of the anti-COVID-19 vaccination in patients with digestive disorders and the peculiarities found in the elderly are discussed., Competing Interests: Conflict-of-interest statement: All the authors report no relevant conflicts of interest for this article., (©The Author(s) 2023. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aim: Bronchiolitis represents the main cause of illness and hospitalization in infants and young children. The aim of this study was to compare the Pediatric Emergency Department (PED) admissions for bronchiolitis during the post-COVID (Coronavirus disease) period to those of previous seasons and to analyze their etiology during COVID and post-COVID period., Methods: We compared demographics, clinical and microbiological data of children admitted to PED with bronchiolitis between September 2021 and March 2022 (post-COVID period) to the previous seasons (COVID and pre-COVID period)., Results: During the post-COVID period the bronchiolitis season started earlier than usual, with a peak reached in November 2021; a gradual reduction was subsequently observed between December 2021 and January 2022. Our data showed a prevalence of High Priority code in children admitted to the PED with bronchiolitis during the post-COVID period (61.4%) compared the pre-COVID period (34.8%) (p=0.00). Also regarding the hospitalization of these patients, we found a major rate of hospitalization during this epidemic season (p=0.035). In addition, only 4 (1.5%) of the tested children resulted positive for SARS-CoV-2 and all of them were admitted to PED during the post-COVID period. The search for the other respiratory viruses showed during the current season a prevalence of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) (60.2%), followed by Human Rhinovirus (30.1%)., Conclusions: The post-COVID period was characterized by an early and short-term peak in acute bronchiolitis, with an increased rate of hospitalization. In addition, SARS-CoV-2 infection was rarely cause of bronchiolitis in children under 2 years old.

Introduction: Acute wheezing is a common clinical presentation of viral respiratory infections in children, which can also be caused by exposure to allergens and, rarely, by foreign body inhalation. Since the beginning of the COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) outbreak, several public health interventions have been adopted to reduce viral spread. The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown measures on Pediatric Emergency Department (ED) admission for acute wheezing., Materials and Methods: We compared demographics and clinical data of patients admitted to the ED for acute wheezing during the COVID-19 outbreak and in the 5 previous years through a retrospective cross-sectional study., Results: During the COVID-19 outbreak we observed an average drop of 83% in pediatric ED admission for acute wheezing, compared to the 5 previous years. In this period, 121 (80.7%) children presented with wheezing and 29 (19.3%) with bronchiolitis. The mean age of the sample was higher compared to the 5 previous years. We also noted an increased number of children presenting with higher acuity color codes during the COVID-19 period, while no differences emerged as for the hospitalizations. During the pandemic we recorded a decrease in the number of viral infections detected. Only two cases of wheezing associated with SARS-CoV-2 were identified., Conclusion: The COVID-19 outbreak and the national lockdown led to a drop of the number of admission to the ED for wheezing in children. This could be due to a reduction in the circulation of common respiratory viruses and partially to a reduced exposure to aeroallergens during the COVID-19 period. Future epidemiological surveillance studies will be needed to support these prelimianry findings., (© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background and Objectives : The COVID-19 pandemic has been shaking lives around the world for nearly two years. The discovery of highly effective vaccines has not been able to stop the transmission of the virus. SARS-CoV-2 shows completely different clinical manifestations. A large percentage (about 40%) of admitted patients require treatment in an intensive care unit (ICU). This study investigates the factors associated with admission of COVID-19 patients to the ICU and whether it is possible to obtain a score that can help the emergency physician to select the hospital ward. Materials and Methods : We retrospectively recorded 313 consecutive patients who were presented to the emergency department (ED) of our hospital and had a diagnosis of COVID-19 confirmed by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) on an oropharyngeal swab. We used multiple logistic regression to evaluate demographic, clinical, and laboratory data statistically associated with ICU admission. These variables were used to create a prognostic score for ICU admission. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and receiver-operating characteristic curve (ROC) of the score for predicting ICU admission during hospitalization were calculated. Results : Of the variables evaluated, only blood type A ( p = 0.003), PaO2/FiO2 ( p = 0.002), LDH ( p = 0.004), lactate ( p = 0.03), dyspnea ( p = 0.03) and SpO2 ( p = 0.0228) were significantly associated with ICU admission after adjusting for sex, age and comorbidity using multiple logistic regression analysis. We used these variables to create a prognostic score called GOL2DS (group A, PaO2/FiO2, LDH, lactate and dyspnea, and SpO2), which had high accuracy in predicting ICU admission (AUROC 0.830 [95% CI, 0.791-0.892). Conclusions : In our single-center experience, the GOL2DS score could be useful in identifying patients at high risk for ICU admission.

It has been proposed that vaccines may exert an unspecific protective effect against infectious agents, different than expected. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a pandemic infection with high mortality in older patients due to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The high number of vaccinations may be one of the reasons why children show a lower susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection and milder severity when compared to adults. We have designed a study aimed at investigating whether the influenza vaccine may reduce the susceptibility and severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection. We retrospectively enrolled 635 patients who accessed our Emergency Department from March 1st to June 30th, 2020, and were diagnosed with COVID-19 infection confirmed by an RT-PCR on an oropharyngeal swab. Clinical data, outcomes, and influenza vaccination status were collected from the electronic medical records of our Hospital. We also used data from the Italian Health Ministry to compare the prevalence of flu vaccination among the general population of the Lazio Region and our enrolled patients. We then compared clinical outcomes between vaccinated and non-vaccinated patients, by univariate and multivariate analysis. COVID-19-positive patients older than 65 years reported a lower prevalence of flu vaccination when compared to the general population residing in the Lazio (p = 0.004). After correction for gender, age, and comorbidities, we found a lower risk of death at 60 days in patients with flu vaccination than in not vaccinated patients (p = 0.001). Our study shows that flu vaccination could reduce the mortality of COVID-19. Prospective studies are needed to confirm this result., (© 2021. Società Italiana di Medicina Interna (SIMI).)

Objectives: To evaluate, in a cohort of adults aged ≥80 years, the overlapping effect of clinical severity, comorbidities, cognitive impairment, and frailty, for the in-hospital death risk stratification of COVID-19 older patients since emergency department (ED) admission., Design: Single-center prospective observational cohort study., Setting and Participants: The study was conducted in the ED of a teaching hospital that is a referral center for COVID-19 in central Italy. We enrolled all patients with aged ≥80 years old consecutively admitted to the ED between April 2020 and March 2021., Methods: Clinical variables assessed in the ED were evaluated for the association with all-cause in-hospital death. Evaluated parameters were severity of disease, frailty, comorbidities, cognitive impairment, delirium, and dependency in daily life activities. Cox regression analysis was used to identify independent risk factors for poor outcomes., Results: A total of 729 patients aged ≥80 years were enrolled [median age 85 years (interquartile range 82-89); 346 were males (47.3%)]. According to the Clinical Frailty Scale, 61 (8.4%) were classified as fit, 417 (57.2%) as vulnerable, and 251 (34.4%) as frail. Severe disease [hazard ratio (HR) 1.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.31-2.59], ≥3 comorbidities (HR 1.54, 95% CI 1.11-2.13), male sex (HR 1.46, 95% CI 1.14-1.87), and frailty (HR 6.93, 95% CI 1.69-28.27) for vulnerable and an overall HR of 12.55 (95% CI 2.96-53.21) for frail were independent risk factors for in-hospital death., Conclusions and Implications: The ED approach to older patients with COVID-19 should take into account the functional and clinical characteristics of patients being admitted. A sole evaluation based on the clinical severity and the presence of comorbidities does not reflect the complexity of this population. A comprehensive evaluation based on clinical severity, multimorbidity, and frailty could effectively predict the clinical risk of in-hospital death for patients with COVID-19 aged ≥80 years at the time of ED presentation., (Copyright © 2021 AMDA – The Society for Post-Acute and Long-Term Care Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aim: To assess the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak on pediatric emergency department (ED) visits for acute bronchiolitis during the epidemic season., Methods: A retrospective analytical cross-sectional study was performed in our hospital, analyzing medical charts of all children under 2 years of age with a diagnosis of acute bronchiolitis admitted to our ED in the last years. Demographics and clinical data of patients affected with acute bronchiolitis during the 2020-2021 season-COVID-19 outbreak-were compared to those of the 5 previous years., Results: We observed an average drop of 84% of the rate of acute bronchiolitis managed by pediatricians in ED in 2020-2021 compared with bronchiolitis seasons of 5 previous years. We also reported, during the COVID-19 outbreak, a higher number of children affected by acute bronchiolitis referred to ED as Emergency Consultations who required hospitalization. Regarding etiological agents, no differences in respiratory virus circulation, especially RSV, were observed in the two groups. The multivariate analysis showed no correlation between the diagnosis of RSV bronchiolitis and COVID-19 period or prematurity; lower age was associated with an increased likelihood of exhibiting RSV bronchiolitis (odds ratio 0.9; 95% confidence interval 0.86-0.95 p < .01)., Conclusion: Our data emphasize the reduction in the rate of admission to pediatric ED for acute bronchiolitis during the COVID-19 outbreak, regardless of changes in circulating respiratory viruses. Therefore we want to highlight the importance of nonpharmacological preventive hygiene measures that should be maintained even at the end of the COVID-19 outbreak., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Patients hospitalized with COVID-19 experienced an increased risk of venous thromboembolism., Aims: To evaluate the effect of chronic oral anticoagulation (OAC) therapy, both with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) or direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), on prognosis of COVID-19 older patients., Methods: Single-center prospective study conducted in the Emergency Department (ED) of a teaching hospital, referral center for COVID-19 in central Italy. We evaluated all the patients ≥ 65 years, consecutively admitted to our ED for confirmed COVID-19. We compared the clinical outcome of those who were on chronic OAC at ED admission with those who did not, using a propensity score matched paired cohort of controls. The primary study endpoint was all-cause in-hospital death. Patients were matched for age, sex, clinical comorbidities, and clinical severity at presentation (based on NEWS ≥ 6). Study parameters were assessed for association to all-cause in-hospital death by a multivariate Cox regression analysis to identify independent risk factor for survival., Results: Although overall mortality was slightly higher for anticoagulated patients compared to controls (63.3% vs 43.5%, p = 0.012), the multivariate adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for death was not significant (HR = 1.56 [0.78-3.12]; p = 0.208). Both DOACs (HR 1.46 [0.73-2.92]; p = 0.283) and VKAs (HR 1.14 [0.48-2.73]; p = 0.761) alone did not affect overall survival in our cohort., Conclusions: Among older patients hospitalized for COVID-19, chronic OAC therapy was not associated with a reduced risk of in-hospital death. Moreover, our data suggest similar outcome both for patients on VKAs or in patients on DOACs., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.)

Introduction: To date, mainly due to age-related vulnerability and to coexisting comorbidities, older patients often face a more severe COVID-19. This study aimed to identify at Emergency Department (ED) admission the predictors of in-hospital mortality and suitable scores for death risk stratification among COVID-19 patients ≥ 80 years old., Methods: Single-centre prospective study conducted in the ED of an university hospital, referral center for COVID-19 in central Italy. We included 239 consecutive patients ≥ 80 years old with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19. The primary study endpoint was all-cause in-hospital mortality. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was performed on significant variables at univariate analysis to identify independent risk factor for death. Overall performance in predicting mortality of WHO severity scale, APACHE II score, NEWS score, and CURB-65 was calculated., Results: Median age was 85 [82-89] and 112 were males (46.9%). Globally, 77 patients (32.2%) deceased. The presence of consolidations at chest x-ray and the hypoxemic respiratory failure were significant predictors of poor prognosis. Moreover, age ≥ 85 years, dependency in activities of daily living (ADL), and dementia were risk factors for death, even after adjusting for clinical covariates and disease severity. All the evaluated scores showed a fairly good predictive value in identifying patients who could experience a worse outcome., Conclusions: Among patients ≥ 80 years old hospitalized with COVID-19, not only a worse clinical and radiological presentation of the disease, but also the increasing age, dementia, and impairment in ADL were strong risk factors for in-hospital death, regardless of disease severity., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Since December 2019, new pneumonia of unknown aetiology broke out in Wuhan, Hubei province, China. Subsequently, a virus, later named as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was identified as the causative agent of the disease. Currently, the epidemic has spread all over the world. The most common manifestations of COVID-19 are fever, fatigue and dry cough. At the moment, the nuclide acid test is the gold standard method for the diagnosis of this infection., Methods: In the present paper, we report our experience with all patients who came to the Emergency Department from March 1 to April 1, 2020, with suggestive symptoms of COVID-19 infection. Patients: they all underwent a first oropharyngeal and nasopharyngeal swab in the emergency department and, if negative, a second one after at least 24 hours., Results: Our study shows how the results obtained at time zero are usually identical to the ones obtained after 24 hours. We thus suggest, in patients with high suspicion of COVID19 and a negative result at the first swab, to repeat the test after at least 48 hours, during which patients with symptoms of COVID-19 pneumonia disease should be kept in isolation to avoid the risk of contagion., Conclusions: these measures and in particular the early identifica-tion of cases with consequent isolation will allow the containment of the spread of the virus, representing one of the fundamental measures to guarantee and strengthen the control of the infection to reduce hospital admissions, the overload of national health service and health costs.

Aims: The main severe complications of SARS-CoV-2 infection are pneumonia and respiratory distress syndrome. Recent studies, however, reported that cardiac injury, as assessed by troponin levels, is associated with a worse outcome in these patients. No study hitherto assessed whether the simple standard electrocardiogram (ECG) may be helpful for risk stratification in these patients., Methods and Results: We studied 324 consecutive patients admitted to our Emergency Department with a confirmed diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Standard 12-lead ECG recorded on admission was assessed for cardiac rhythm and rate, atrioventricular and intraventricular conduction, abnormal Q/QS wave, ST segment and T wave changes, corrected QT interval, and tachyarrhythmias. At a mean follow-up of 31 ± 11 days, 44 deaths occurred (13.6%). Most ECG variables were significantly associated with mortality, including atrial fibrillation (P = 0.002), increasing heart rate (P = 0.002), presence of left bundle branch block (LBBB; P < 0.001), QRS duration (P <0 .001), a QRS duration of ≥110 ms (P < 0.001), ST segment depression (P < 0.001), abnormal Q/QS wave (P = 0.034), premature ventricular complexes (PVCs; P = 0.051), and presence of any ECG abnormality [hazard ratio (HR) 4.58; 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.40-8.76; P < 0.001]. At multivariable analysis, QRS duration (P = 0.002), QRS duration ≥110 ms (P = 0.03), LBBB (P = 0.014) and presence of any ECG abnormality (P = 0.04) maintained a significant independent association with mortality., Conclusion: Our data show that standard ECG can be helpful for an initial risk stratification of patients admitted for SARS-CoV-2 infectious disease., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2020. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background/objectives: Several scoring systems have been specifically developed for risk stratification in COVID-19 patients., Design: We compared, in a cohort of confirmed COVID-19 older patients, three specifically developed scores with a previously established early warning score. Main endpoint was all causes in-hospital death., Setting: This is a single-center, retrospective observational study, conducted in the Emergency Department (ED) of an urban teaching hospital, referral center for COVID-19., Participants: We reviewed the clinical records of the confirmed COVID-19 patients aged 60 years or more consecutively admitted to our ED over a 6-week period (March 1st to April 15th, 2020). A total of 210 patients, aged between 60 and 98 years were included in the study cohort., Measurements: International Severe Acute Respiratory Infection Consortium Clinical Characterization Protocol-Coronavirus Clinical Characterization Consortium (ISARIC-4C) score, COVID-GRAM Critical Illness Risk Score (COVID-GRAM), quick COVID-19 Severity Index (qCSI), National Early Warning Score (NEWS)., Results: Median age was 74 (67-82) and 133 (63.3%) were males. Globally, 42 patients (20.0%) deceased. All the score evaluated showed a fairly good predictive value with respect to in-hospital death. The ISARIC-4C score had the highest area under ROC curve (AUROC) 0.799 (0.738-0.851), followed by the COVID-GRAM 0.785 (0.723-0.838), NEWS 0.764 (0.700-0.819), and qCSI 0.749 (0.685-0.806). However, these differences were not statistical significant., Conclusion: Among the evaluated scores, the ISARIC-4C and the COVID-GRAM, calculated at ED admission, had the best performance, although the qCSI had similar efficacy by evaluating only three items. However, the NEWS, already widely validated in clinical practice, had a similar performance and could be appropriate for older patients with COVID-19., (© 2020 The American Geriatrics Society.)

Background: Among hypertensive patients, the association between treatment with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB) and the clinical severity of COVID-19, remains uncertain., Aims: To determine whether hypertensive patients hospitalised with COVID-19 are at risk of worse outcomes if on treatment with ACEI or ARB compared to other anti-hypertensive medications., Methods: This is a retrospective study conducted at a single academic medical centre (Fondazione Policlinico A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy) from 1 to 31 March 2020. We compared patients on treatment with an ACEI/ARB (ACEI/ARB group) to patients receiving other anti-hypertensive medications (No-ACEI/ARB group). The end-points of the study were the all-cause in-hospital death and the combination of in-hospital death or need for intensive care unit (ICU) admission., Results: The sample included 166 COVID-19 patients; median age was 74 years and 109 (66%) were men. Overall, 111 (67%) patients were taking an ACEI or ARB. Twenty-nine (17%) patients died during the hospital stay, and 51 (31%) met the combined end-point. After adjustment for comorbidities, age and degree of severity at the presentation, ACEI or ARB treatment was an independent predictor neither of in-hospital death nor of the combination of in-hospital death/need for ICU. No differences were documented between treatment with ACEI compared to ARB., Conclusions: Among hypertensive patients hospitalised for COVID-19, treatment with ACEI or ARB is not associated with an increased risk of in-hospital death., (© 2020 Royal Australasian College of Physicians.)

Objective: The pandemic from SARS-CoV-2 is having a profound impact on daily life of a large part of world population. Italy was the first Western country to impose a general lockdown to its citizens. Implications of these measures on several aspects of public health remain unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of the lockdown on surgical emergencies volumes and care in a large, tertiary referral center., Materials and Methods: Electronic medical records of all patients visited in our Emergency Department (ED) and admitted in a surgical ward from February 21st 2020 to May 3rd 2020 were collected, analyzed and compared with the same periods of 2019 and 2018 and a cross-sectional study was performed., Results: Number of surgical admissions dropped significantly in 2020 with respect to the same periods of 2019 and 2018, by almost 50%. The percentage distribution of admissions in different surgical wards did not change over the three years. Time from triage to operating room significantly reduced in 2020 respect to 2019 and 2018 (p<0.001)., Conclusions: The lockdown in Italy due to SARS-CoV-2 pandemic arguably represents the largest social experiment in modern times. Data provided by our study provide useful information to health authorities and policymakers about the effects of activity restriction on surgical accesses and changing epidemiology due to an exceptional external event.

OBJECTIVE: Fever is a frequent cause of admission to the Emergency Department (ED) worldwide. Although it can be caused by a wide range of conditions, the most effective treatment based on its etiology is still undetermined. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective, single-center, observational study enrolled adult patients who accessed the ED for fever. Physicians were free to administer paracetamol 1,000 mg (P), the combination paracetamol 500 mg/ibuprofen 150 mg (PI) or Ibuprofen 600 mg (I). The primary endpoint was both 1-degree and 1-point reduction in body temperature for all associated symptoms on the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) after 1 hour (T1). The secondary endpoint was the reduction of at least 2 points on the NRS after two hours (T2). Adverse events, the need for rescue therapy, and the response based on the underlying etiology (bacterial, viral, or immune/neoplastic) were also evaluated. RESULTS: 324 patients (170 males, mean age 71±6 years) were enrolled: 187 had bacterial, 80 viral, and 57 neoplastic/inflammatory fever. Fever was treated with Paracetamol 1,000 mg (P) in 189 patients and with Paracetamol/Ibuprofen 500/150 mg (PI) in 135 subjects, while none of the patients were primarily treated with I. Based on the fever etiology P was administered to 113 patients with bacterial fever (59.8%), 48 patients with viral fever (25.4%), and 28 subjects with neoplastic/inflammatory fever (14.8%). PI was administered to 74 patients with bacterial fever (54.8%), 32 patients with viral fever (23.7%), and 29 subjects with neoplastic/inflammatory fever (21.5%). The primary endpoint was achieved by 126 patients, 70 of them (37.0%) were treated with P and 56 (41.5%) with PI (p=0.418). The secondary endpoint was achieved by 295 patients, 171 (90.5%) of them treated with P and 124 (91.9%) treated with PI (p=0.669). No significant differences were found between groups treated with P and PI concerning rescue therapy (15 vs. 6 patients; p=0.893). Interestingly, PI was more effective than P in patients with bacterial fever at T1 (P 33.6% vs. PI 48.6%; p=0.040), while efficacy of P and PI was similar at T2 for all kind of fever. CONCLUSIONS: Paracetamol 1,000 mg represents the first choice for the treatment of fever in the ED, followed by Paracetamol/Ibuprofen 500/150 mg. Interestingly, Paracetamol/Ibuprofen combination resulted in being more effective in patients with bacterial fever one hour after its administration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective. since December 2019, new pneumonia of unknown aetiology broke out in Wuhan, Hubei province, China. Subsequently, a virus, later named as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was identified as the causative agent of the disease. Currently, the epidemic has spread all over the world. The most common manifestations of COVID-19 are fever, fatigue and dry cough. At the moment, the nuclide acid test is the gold standard method for the diagnosis of this infection. Methods. in the present paper, we report our experience with all patients who came to the Emergency Department from March 1 to April 1, 2020, with suggestive symptoms of COVID-19 infection. Patients: they all underwent a first oropharyngeal and nasopharyngeal swab in the emergency department and, if negative, a second one after at least 24 hours. Results. our study shows how the results obtained at time zero are usually identical to the ones obtained after 24 hours. We thus suggest, in patients with high suspicion of COVID19 and a negative result at the first swab, to repeat the test after at least 48 hours, during which patients with symptoms of COVID-19 pneumonia disease should be kept in isolation to avoid the risk of contagion. Conclusions. these measures and in particular the early identification of cases with consequent isolation will allow the containment of the spread of the virus, representing one of the fundamental measures to guarantee and strengthen the control of the infection to reduce hospital admissions, the overload of national health service and health costs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic mainly involves respiratory symptoms, though gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms are increasingly being recognized. In this context, the presence of comorbidities appears to be associated with adverse outcomes. However, the role of digestive manifestations is not yet well defined. The primary aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of GI symptoms and digestive comorbidities in a cohort of patients with COVID-19 compared to controls. The secondary aim was to determine the association of GI-symptoms and digestive comorbidities with clinical outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Inpatients with COVID-19 and controls with similar symptoms and/or radiological findings were enrolled. Symptoms at admission and throughout hospitalization were collected as they were comorbidities. The measured clinical outcomes were mortality, intensive care unit admission and cumulative endpoint. RESULTS: A total of 105 patients were included: 34 with COVID-19 and 71 controls. At admission, the prevalence of GI symptoms among COVID-19 patients was 8.8%. During hospitalization, the frequency of GI symptoms was higher in patients with COVID-19 than in controls (p=0.004). Among patients with COVID-19, the mortality and a cumulative endpoint rates of those with GI symptoms were both lower than for those without GI symptoms (p=0.016 and p=0.000, respectively). Finally, we found digestive comorbidities to be associated with a milder course of COVID-19 (p=0.039 for cumulative endpoint). CONCLUSIONS: Our results highlighted the non-negligible frequency of GI symptoms in patients with COVID-19, partly attributable to the therapies implemented. In addition, the presence of GI symptoms and digestive comorbidities is associated with better outcomes. Most likely, digestive comorbidities do not hinder the host's immune response against SARS-COV-2, and the occurrence of GI symptoms might be linked to a faster reduction of the viral load via the faecal route. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]