Search

Introduction: Given the redistribution of blood flow away from non-immediately vital territories during hemorrhagic shock, we investigate whether monitoring the oral mucosal PCO2 (POMCO2) as a surrogate of splanchnic circulation, could closely recognize the onset, assess severity, and identify reversal of hemorrhagic shock. Material and methods: The study was performed on six male pigs (38.4 ± 1.6 kg). POMCO2 was measured using a non-invasive sensor clipped to the cheek. Blood was removed over 120 min from the right atrium modeling spontaneous bleeding and reinfused in 20 min observing the animal for 180 min. Results: A total of 1485 ± 188 ml (i.e., 64.6 ± 9.5 % of the estimated blood volume) was removed inducing severe hemorrhagic shock. POMCO2 closely paralleled the blood volume change (R2 = 0.59, p

Introduction. Clinical evidence suggests that certain probiotics may help treat and prevent viral infections. To date, the effectiveness of probiotics in the alleviation of COVID-19 has not been established. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the role of probiotics in the prevention and treatment of COVID-19. Materials and methods. An extensive search of four electronic databases was performed which included Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed from November 2019 to June 2022. After reviewing the references list of related articles additional studies were identified. A multiple combination of keywords validated by MESH were used to search the databases. Study selection was performed according to an inclusion and exclusion criteria. Results. Twenty-three articles met the study inclusion criteria. Six articles were conducted in vitro while the remaining studies were conducted in the human population (in vivo). The type of probiotic was defined in eighteen studies. There were two studies that used supplements (vitamins, herbals, minerals, etc.) in addition to probiotics. The largest sample size was 445 850 participants which were from a study that used an application-based survey. The majority of studies found that probiotics had a positive effect on the COVID-19 disease. The benefits included early remission of COVID-19 symptoms and a shorter duration of sickness (10 studies), lower mortality rates (3 studies), and decreased hospitalization and length of stay (3 studies). Six in vitro studies found that probiotics were beneficial against SARS-CoV-2 through antiviral effects. There were only two studies that found probiotics to be ineffective or caused negative effects when consumed in COVID-19 patients. Conclusion. Available evidence supports the antiviral role of probiotics on prevention and treatment of COVID-19. The antiviral potential of Lactobacillus paracasei metabolite PlnE and PlnF against SARS-CoV-2 may explain the effectiveness of probiotics on COVID-19.

Introduction: Several clinical manifestations have been discovered for COVID-19 since the emergence of SARS-CoV-2, which can be classified into early, medium, and long-term complications. However, late complications can be present after recovery from acute COVID-19 illness. The present study aims to comprehensively review the available evidence of late complications related to COVID-19. Method: A search was conducted, using keywords, through electronic databases, which included Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and Embase up to August 29, 2022. Study selection was performed according to a strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist was followed, and studies were appraised using the National Institute of Health (NIH) quality assessment and risk of bias tool. Results: In total, 50 studies were included, and nine distinct COVID-19 late complication categories were identified. A review of these studies revealed that neurologic and psychiatric (n=41), respiratory (n=27), musculoskeletal and rheumatologic (n=22), cardiovascular (n=9), and hepatic and gastrointestinal (n=6) complications were the most prevalent complications of long COVID-19. Conclusion: Almost all human body systems are affected by late complications of COVID-19 with different severity and prevalence. Fatigue and some other neuropsychiatric symptoms are the most common late complications among long COVID-19 patients. Respiratory symptoms including dyspnea (during exercise), cough, and chest tightness were the next most prevalent long-term complications of COVID-19. Since these complications are persistent and late, being aware of the signs and symptoms is essential for the healthcare providers and patients.

Abstract Background and Aims Alteration in humans' gut microbiota was reported in patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus‐2 (SARS‐CoV‐2). The gut and upper respiratory tract (URT) microbiota harbor a dynamic and complex population of microorganisms and have strong interaction with host immune system homeostasis. However, our knowledge about microbiota and its association with SARS‐CoV‐2 is still limited. We aimed to systematically review the effects of gut microbiota on the SARS‐CoV‐2 infection and its severity and the impact that SARS‐CoV‐2 could have on the gut microbiota. Methods We searched the keywords in the online databases of Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, and Cochrane on December 31, 2021. After duplicate removal, we performed the screening process in two stages; title/abstract and then full‐text screening. The data of the eligible studies were extracted into a pre‐designed word table. This study adhered to the PRISMA checklist and Newcastle−Ottawa Scale Bias Assessment tool. Results Sixty‐three publications were included in this review. Our study shows that among COVID‐19 patients, particularly moderate to severe cases, the gut and lung microbiota was different compared to healthy individuals. In addition, the severity, and viral load of COVID‐19 disease would probably also be influenced by the gut, and lung microbiota's composition. Conclusion Our study concludes that there was a significant difference in the composition of the URT, and gut microbiota in COVID‐19 patients compared to the general healthy individuals, with an increase in opportunistic pathogens. Further, research is needed to investigate the probable bidirectional association of COVID‐19 and human microbiome.

Abstract Introduction Patients with chronic underlying diseases are more susceptible to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) complications. Recent studies showed people living with HIV (PLWH) are not at greater risk than the general population. Few studies have reviewed the impacts of COVID‐19 on PLWH. The purpose of this systematic review was to investigate the impact of COVID‐19 on patients infected with HIV. Methods We executed a systematic search using four databases of PubMed, Scopus, Science Direct, and Web of Science and screened the records in two steps based on their title/abstract and full text. This study follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) checklist to elevate the validity and reliability of its results. Results We reviewed 36 studies. The patients' age was above 20 years in all studies. In almost all studies, the inflammatory parameters were reported high. In most of the studies, all HIV patients completely recovered from the COVID 19 infection. Although CD4 count was not recorded in all studies, the minimum level was reported as 12 cells/µl. Conclusion Based on the current review, we concluded that HIV patients at advanced stages (3 or 4) of the disease, whose CD4 counts are low, may show less severe COVID‐19 infection symptoms. Similarly, Interference can reduce the severity of immune reactions and subsequent cytokine storms and consequently mitigate the symptoms. Therefore, in most of the studies, the majority of HIV patients showed no severe symptoms and completely recovered from COVID 19 infection.

Introduction: Rare serious complications have been documented after COVID-19 vaccination as clinical research proceeded and new target populations, such as children and ‎pregnant women, were included. In this study, we attempted to review the literature relevant to ‎pregnancy complications and maternal outcomes of COVID-19 immunization in pregnant women. ‎ Methods: We searched the databases of PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, and Web of Science on 31 August 2022. The records were downloaded and underwent a two-step screening; 1) title/abstract and then 2) full-text screening to identify the eligible studies. We included English original studies that evaluated the adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy. Information such as the type of ‎study, geographical location, type of vaccine injected, gestational age, maternal underlying diseases, and ‎complications following the vaccination were extracted into pre-designed tables. Results: According to the findings of included studies, in most of them vaccination had a positive impact and no negative effects were observed. Also, no medical history was reported in 11 articles, and pregnant women had no underlying diseases. Some serious adverse events were reported after ‎vaccination, including miscarriage, paresthesia, uterine contraction, vaginal bleeding, preterm birth, major ‎congenital anomalies, intrauterine growth restriction, and seizure. ‎ Conclusion: Because of limited data availability and the cross-sectional design of most studies, we could neither infer ‎causation between vaccines and incidence of adverse effects nor comment with certainty about any ‎possible adverse outcome of COVID-19 vaccines in vaccinated pregnant women. Consequently, more longitudinal and experimental studies are needed to define the exact adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant women.

Introduction: Controversies existed regarding the duration of COVID-19 vaccines’ protection and whether receiving the usual vaccine doses would be sufficient for long-term immunity. Therefore, we aimed to systematically review the studies regarding the COVID-19 vaccines’ protection three months after getting fully vaccinated and assess the need for vaccine booster doses. Methods: The relevant literature was searched using a combination of keywords on the online databases of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane on September 17th, 2021. The records were downloaded and the duplicates were removed. Then, the records were evaluated in a two-step process, consisting of title/abstract and full-text screening processes, and the eligible records were selected for the qualitative synthesis. We only included original studies that evaluated the efficacy and immunity of COVID-19 vaccines three months after full vaccination. This review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement to ensure the reliability of results. Results: Out of the 797 retrieved records, 12 studies were included, 10 on mRNA-based vaccines and two on inactivated vaccines. The majority of included studies observed acceptable antibody titers in most of the participants even after 6 months; however,it appeared that the titers could also decrease in a considerable portion of people. Due to the reduction in antibody titers and vaccine protection, several studies suggested administering the booster dose, especially for older patients and those with underlying conditions, such as patients with immunodeficiencies. Conclusion: Studies indicated that vaccine immunity decreases over time, making people more susceptible to contracting the disease. Besides, new variants are emerging, and the omicron variant is continuing to spread and escape from the immune system, indicating the importance of a booster dose.

Increases in body mass index (BMI) are reported to influence asthma response to treatment. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between BMI and response to treatment in a group of patients that were referred for asthma control. Effectiveness measurements in this analysis included percentage of changes in forced volume in 1 second (FEV1), forced volume capacity (FVC), FEV1/FVC, and forced expiratory flow between 25% and 75% of FVC (FEF25-75%). A total of 293 subjects with asthma of both genders and above 18 years of age were divided into the following BMI categories: 107 (36.5%) non-obese (BMI < 25), 186 (63.5%) overweight and obese (BMI ≥ 25). Percentage of change was defined as change in variable between baseline and end-of-treatment. Analyses of non-obese vs. overweight/obese asthmatics demonstrated non-significant differences in baseline FEV1 (1.62 ± 0.56 Lit vs. 1.63 ± 0.56 Lit L, P = 0.89); FVC (2.58 ± 0.73 Lit vs. 2.47 ± 0.82 Lit, P = 0.25); and FEF25-75% (1.04 ± 0.55 ml/sec vs. 1.05 ± 0.50 ml/sec, P = 0.47) respectively. Compared with non-obese subjects, in overweight/obese subjects with asthma were less responded to treatment. Percentage changes of FEV1, FVC, FEF25-75%, and FEV1/FVC in non-obese versus obese/overweight patients were: 79.57 ± 55.14 % vs. 62.13 ± 41.72%, P = 0.005; 47.71 ± 33.76% vs. 39.93 ± 28.30%, P = 0.036; 151.98 ± 127.82% vs. 123 ± 91.12%, P = 0.041; 20.54 ± 15.63% vs. 15.63 ± 11.32%, P = 0.005; respectively. Percentage changes of spirometric values to treatment in over weight/obese asthmatic patient were lesser in compared with non-obese subjects.