Causes of Polyserositis: A Systematic Review.

At present, polyserositis (PS) remains a challenging entity, which resides both in the fact that there is confusion regarding the terminology, and that it is still understudied. We aimed to identify the etiologies of PS, reported in adult patients. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of the literature on PubMed(MEDLINE) database, using the following (MESH) terms: pleurisy/etiology, pleural effusion/etiology, pericarditis/etiology, pericardial effusion/etiology, pericardial effusion chronic, ascites/etiology, ascitic fluid/etiology, polyserositis, serositis, and serositides. RESULTS: A total of 1979 articles were identified, dating from 1973 onwards. After screening the articles, we included 114 patients from 23 articles (one case series including 92 patients and 22 case reports) in the final report. The most common diagnosis was neoplasia (30; 26.3%), followed by autoimmune diseases (19, 16.7%) and infections (16, 12.3%). Still, in 35 cases, the etiology of PS remained unkown. CONCLUSION: PS is a challenging and understudied entity, which is associated with a wide range of diagnoses. However, prospective studies should be developed in order to have a clear understanding regarding its etiologies and their prevalences.

Antibiotic Prescription and In-Hospital Mortality in COVID-19: A Prospective Multicentre Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, empiric antibiotics (ATBs) have been prescribed on a large scale in both in- and outpatients. We aimed to assess the impact of antibiotic treatment on the outcomes of hospitalised patients with moderate and severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: We conducted a prospective multicentre cohort study in six clinical hospitals, between January 2021 and May 2021. RESULTS: We included 553 hospitalised COVID-19 patients, of whom 58% (311/553) were prescribed antibiotics, while bacteriological tests were performed in 57% (178/311) of them. Death was the outcome in 48 patients-39 from the ATBs group and 9 from the non-ATBs group. The patients who received antibiotics during hospitalisation had a higher mortality (RR = 3.37, CI 95%: 1.7-6.8), and this association was stronger in the subgroup of patients without reasons for antimicrobial treatment (RR = 6.1, CI 95%: 1.9-19.1), while in the subgroup with reasons for antimicrobial therapy the association was not statistically significant (OR = 2.33, CI 95%: 0.76-7.17). After adjusting for the confounders, receiving antibiotics remained associated with a higher mortality only in the subgroup of patients without criteria for antibiotic prescription (OR = 10.3, CI 95%: 2-52). CONCLUSIONS: In our study, antibiotic treatment did not decrease the risk of death in the patients with mild and severe COVID-19, but was associated with a higher risk of death in the subgroup of patients without reasons for it.

In-Hospital Antibiotic Use for COVID-19: Facts and Rationales Assessed through a Mixed-Methods Study.

It is well known that during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, antibiotics were overprescribed. However, less is known regarding the arguments that have led to this overuse. Our aim was to understand the factors associated with in-hospital antibiotic prescription for COVID-19, and the rationale behind it. We chose a convergent design for this mixed-methods study. Quantitative data was prospectively obtained from 533 adult patients admitted in six hospitals (services of internal medicine, infectious diseases and pneumology). Fifty-six percent of the patients received antibiotics. The qualitative data was obtained from interviewing 14 physicians active in the same departments in which the enrolled patients were hospitalized. Thematic analysis was used for the qualitative approach. Our study revealed that doctors based their decisions to prescribe antibiotics on a complex interplay of factors regarding the simultaneous appearance of consolidation on the chest computer tomography together with a worsening of clinical conditions suggestive of bacterial infection and/or an increase in inflammatory markers. Besides these features which might suggest bacterial co-/suprainfection, doctors also prescribed antibiotics in situations of uncertainty, in patients with severe disease, or with multiple associated comorbidities.

COVID-19 pandemic preparedness period through healthcare workers' eyes: A qualitative study from a Romanian healthcare facility.

INTRODUCTION: Healthcare providers represent a limited resource, and their mental health is crucial for patient care and for ensuring containment of the pandemics. We aimed to explore how healthcare workers experienced the preparedness period of COVID-19 pandemic, in order to ascertain the perceived weaknesses and strengths. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with 17 participants encompassing senior physicians, residents, and nurses. They were audio-recorded, and the transcription was verbatim. We used thematic analysis. RESULTS: We identified four themes, with subsequent subthemes: dealing with the unknown, human versus doctors, sense of helplessness, and a bridge to heaven, which explore how healthcare workers experienced the lack of knowledge, their feeling of losing control, and how they managed their internal fights. The disappointment provoked by the authorities and their colleagues was further evaluated. We identified factors involved in their well-being. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 pandemic represented and will still pose a challenge for healthcare workers (HCWs) from all over the world. They felt unprepared for such a crisis. Further measures should be implemented in every hospital to maintain HCWs awareness and to prevent physical imbalance. Appropriate standards of care should be further stated by the authorities so that the healthcare providers may find easier a balance between their safety and their patients' needs. Conducting qualitative research involving HCWs during pandemic times may help in informing more significant policy decisions.

Comparative role of hematological indices for the assessment of in-hospital outcome of heart failure patients.

Background. The mutual relation between heart failure (HF) and inflammation is reflected in blood cell homeostasis. Neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), monocyte-lymphocyte ratio (MLR) and platelet-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) were linked to HF severity and prognosis. Aims. Our objective was to compare the three ratios for predicting in-hospital outcome of HF patients, in order to establish which is best suited for clinical practice. Methods. Consecutive HF patients admitted to a Cardiology Department from a tertiary hospital were retrospectively evaluated for inclusion. Readmissions and pathologies modifying the hematological indices were excluded. Extended length of hospital stay (LOS) was considered over 7 d. In-hospital all-cause mortality was evaluated. Results: The hematological indices in heart failure (HI-HF) cohort included 1299 patients with a mean age of 72.35 ± 10.45 years, 51.96% women. 2.85% died during hospitalization. 22.17% had extended LOS. In Cox regression for in-hospital mortality alongside parameters from the OPTIMIZE-HF proposed model, all three ratios were independent predictors of mortality. In Cox regression including NT-proBNP, dyspnea at rest, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), age and systolic blood pressure, only MLR was an independent predictor of in-hospital mortality (HR 1.68, 95% CI 1.22 - 2.32, p = .002). In multivariable logistic regression, all three ratios independently predicted extended LOS. MLR > 0.48 associated the highest probability (OR 1.76, 95% CI 1.25 - 2.46, p = .001). Conclusions. Hematological indices could be cost-effective and easily available auxiliary biomarkers for in-hospital prognosis of HF patients. We propose MLR > 0.48 as the strongest predictor of in-hospital mortality and prolonged hospitalization.

Anticoagulant protein S in COVID-19: low activity, and associated with outcome.

Introduction. COVID-19 disease was associated with both thrombo-embolic events and in-situ thrombi formation in small vessels. Antiphospholipidic antibodies were found in some studies.Aim. Assessment of protein S activity in patients with COVID-19 as a cause of this prothrombotic state, and of the association of protein S activity with worse outcome.Methods. All patients admitted for COVID-19 disease in a university hospital between 15th of May and 15th of July 2020 were prospectively enrolled into this cohort study. Patients treated with antivitamin K anticoagulants and with liver disease were excluded. All patients had protein S activity determined at admission. The main outcome was survival, while secondary outcomes were clinical severity and lung damage.Results. 91 patients were included, of which 21 (23.3%) died. Protein S activity was decreased in 65% of the patients. Death was associated with lower activity of protein S (median 42% vs. 58%, p < 0.001), and the association remained after adjustment for age, inflammation markers and ALAT. There was a dose-response relationship between protein S activity and clinical severity (Kendall_tau coefficient = -0.320, p < 0.001; Jonckheere-Terpstra for trend: p < 0.001) or pulmonary damage on CT scan (Kendall_tau coefficient = -0.290, p < 0.001; Jonckheere-Terpstra for trend: p < 0.001). High neutrophil count was also independently associated with death (p = 0.002).Conclusion. Protein S activity was lower in COVID-19 patients, and its level was associated with survival and disease severity, suggesting that it may have a role in the thrombotic manifestations of the disease.