A Bilateral Diaphragmatic Paralysis Post-COVID-19 Infection: A Case Report and a Review of the Literature.

The diaphragm is the essential respiratory muscle, and damage can significantly impede a human's capacity for blood oxygenation. During inspiration, the diaphragm domes permit the pleural cavity to expand. Whenever this process is disrupted, it results in decreased thoracic expansion and, as a result, hypoventilation. The phrenic nerve innervates the diaphragmatic muscle via the cervical nerve roots C3, C4, and C5. Diaphragmatic paralysis is a multifactorial consequence caused by trauma, neurogenic diseases, infections, inflammatory responses, and chest operative surgery, with the last being the most prevalent causative factor. Here, we are describing the case of a 52-year-old male patient who has had ongoing dyspnea for months after contracting COVID-19 in December 2021, despite the remission of his previous COVID-19 pneumonia in 2020. An X-ray of the chest revealed no diaphragm elevation, whereas electromyography verified diaphragm impairment. On the conservative treatment plan, he reported persistent dyspnea following a period of pulmonary rehabilitation. To a lesser extent, it is advised to wait at least one year to see if there is any reinnervation, which could benefit his lung capacity. COVID-19 has been linked to many systematic diseases. As a result, COVID-19 will not be restricted to its inflammatory effect on the lungs. In other words, it is a multi-organ systematic syndrome. One of these effects is diaphragm paralysis, which should be considered a post-COVID-19 disease. However, there is a need for more literature to support physicians as guidelines for neurological conditions related to COVID-19 infection.

Intensive care units with low versus high volume of myocardial infarction: clinical outcomes, resource utilization, and quality metrics.

BACKGROUND: The volume-outcome relationship associated with intensive care unit (ICU) experience with managing acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remains inadequately understood. METHODS AND RESULTS: Within a multicenter clinical ICU database, we identified patients with a primary ICU admission diagnosis of AMI between 2008 and 2010 to evaluate whether annual AMI volume of an individual ICU is associated with mortality, length-of-stay, or quality indicators. Patients were categorized into those treated in ICUs with low-annual-AMI volume (≤50th percentile, <2 AMI patients/month, n=569 patients) versus high-annual-AMI volume (≥90th percentile, ≥8 AMI patients/month, n=17 553 patients). Poisson regression and generalized estimating equation with negative binomial regression were used to calculate the relative risk (95% CI) for mortality and length-of-stay, respectively, associated with admission to a low-AMI-volume ICU. When compared with high-AMI-volume, patients admitted to low-AMI-volume ICUs had substantially more medical comorbidities, higher in-hospital mortality (11% versus 4%, P<0.001), longer hospitalizations (6.9±7.0 versus 5.0±5.0 days, P<0.001), and fewer evidence-based therapies for AMI (reperfusion therapy, antiplatelets, ß-blockers, and statins). However, after adjustment for baseline patient characteristics, low-AMI-volume ICU was no longer an independent predictor of in-hospital mortality (relative risk 1.17 [0.87 to 1.56]) or hospital length-of-stay (relative risk 1.01 [0.94 to 1.08]). Similar findings were noted in secondary analyses of ICU mortality and ICU length-of-stay. CONCLUSIONS: Admission to an ICU with lower annual AMI volume is associated with higher in-hospital mortality, longer hospitalization, and lower use of evidence-based therapies for AMI. However, the relationship between low-AMI-volume and outcomes is no longer present after accounting for the higher-risk medical comorbidities and clinical characteristics of patients admitted to these ICUs.

Inferior vena cava filters: a concise review.

Venous thromboembolic disease is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Anticoagulation has been the mainstay of treatment and prevention. Unfortunately, anticoagulation frequently fails or is contraindicated. Use of inferior vena cava filters can be an effective alternative in these scenarios. Though inferior vena cava filters have been used for > 4 decades, the evidence behind their use is limited. Use of IVC filters is associated with both minor and major complications. More randomized prospective trials are needed to evaluate these devices. In this article, we review issues concerning the use of inferior vena cava filters.

Differences in treatment and in outcomes between idiopathic and secondary forms of organizing pneumonia.

Organizing pneumonia is a major reparative response of the lung tissue to an acute injury and is a pathological hallmark of an entity called bronchiolitis obliterans organizing pneumonia (BOOP). It can be idiopathic and called cryptogenic organizing pneumonia (COP) or be secondary to various conditions such as infections, drugs, connective tissue disorders, and radiation. Fifty-seven patients with pathologically confirmed BOOP were identified and were classified as having either COP or secondary BOOP on the basis of whether there was an identifiable cause. The two groups were compared for demographic, clinical, laboratory, radiological and treatment variables. Duration of treatment with corticosteroids was longer for patients with COP.