Evaluation of the frequency and intensity of COVID-19 in patients with ankylosing spondylitis under anti-TNF therapy.

BACKGROUND: Dear Editor, After the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic affected the whole world, rheumatologists began to think about how COVID-19 will progress in patients with inflammatory conditions. High cytokine levels play a role in the pathophysiology of COVID-19 infection. Tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) is a proinflammatory cytokine known to have a key role in the pathogenesis of chronic immune-mediated diseases. AntiTNF therapy may cause an increase in active tuberculosis, other granulomatous diseases, and serious infections [1]. According to many studies, rheumatological diseases have not been identified as a risk factor for severe COVID-19 infection [2]. Should significantly increased cytokine levels during COVID-19 infection make us consider anticytokine therapies that may be used in the treatment of patients with COVID-19 a risk? We aimed to explore whether the frequency of COVID-19 infection increased, the effect of comorbidities on the frequency of infection, and whether the severity of the disease and need for intensive care support increased in patients who used anti-TNF agents. We performed a retrospective case-control study between March and December 2020 in Sakarya University Training and Research Hospital. Retrospectively, we evaluated whether there was a difference in the frequency and severity of COVID-19 in our patients diagnosed with ankylosing spondylitis (AS), 77 of whom were using anti-TNF and 49 of whom didn't use anti-TNF. Hospitalization and intensive care unit (ICU) requirements were evaluated as endpoints. In the anti-TNF group, patients used adalimumab, etanercept, certolizumab, infliximab, and golimumab. Patients were questioned at an outpatient clinic in person or by phone. Seventy-seven patients with AS using anti-TNF agents (58 males, 19 females) and 49 patients with AS (38 males, 11 females) not using anti-TNF agents were included in the study (p = 0.943). Mean age of patients using antiTNF agents was 41.53 ± 10.38, and mean age of patients not using anti-TNF agents was 42.94 ± 10.86 (p = 0.468). Thirty-three (42.9%) patients were smokers in the antiTNF group, while 23 (46.9%) patients were smokers in the group not using TNFi (p = 0.791). There was 12 pack-year smoking in the anti-TNF group, and 14 pack-year smoking in not using TNFi (p = 0.623). The frequency of diabetes mellitus (DM), hypertension (HT), amiloidosis, familial mediterranean fever (FMF), coronary artery disease (CAD), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) was similar in both groups (p = 0.403, p = 0.999, p = 0.521, p = 0.999, p = 0.999, respectively). Six patients using TNFi and 3 patients not using TNFi recovered from COVID-19 infection. However, this result was not statistically significant (p = 0.999). One patient using anti-TNF was hospitalized but with no need for admission to the ICU (p = 0.999). All 9 patients recovering from COVID-19 were male (p = 0.113). There were 2 (22.2%) smokers in the SARS-CoV-2 positive group and 54 (46.2%) smokers in SARS-CoV-2 negative group (p = 0.297). There was 37.5 pack-year smoking in SARS-CoV-2 positive group, and 12 pack-year smoking in SARS-CoV-2 negative group (p = 0.151). Nobody has comorbidities (DM, HT, amiloidosis, FMF, CAD, COPD) in SARS-CoV-2 positive group. There were patients with DM (5.1%), HT (15.4%), amiloidosis (1.7%), FMF (1.7%), CAD (0.9%) and COPD (0.9%) in SARS-CoV-2 negative group (p = 0.999, p = 0.356, p = 0.999, p = 0.999, p = 0.999, p = 0.999, respectively). Having comorbidities was not detected to be associated with frequency of COVID-19. 31 (40.3%) patients were using adalimumab, 25 (32.5%) patients were using etanercept, 13 patients were using (16.9%) certolizumab, 6 (7.8%) patients were using golimumab, and 2 patients (2.6%) were using infliximab in TNF group. Six patients using anti-TNF (2 adalimumab, 1 etanercept, 1 golimumab,2 infliximab) and 3 nonuser patients recovered from COVID-19 (p = 0.999). No statistically significant difference was found between SARS-CoV-2 positive and negative patients in terms of the types of anti TNF they used. Patients were called in March 2020, and they were advised to terminate their anti-TNF therapy, when the COVID-19 pandemic began. Among those who used antiTNF, 2 (33.3%) people who had COVID-19 and 38 (53.5%) people who did not have COVID-19 interrupted treatment (p = 0.419). Anti-TNF users who did not have COVID-19 stopped taking the treatment for an average of 3 months (min 2-max 4 months) starting from March 2020, and the patients who had COVID-19 (p = 0.102) stopped taking the treatment for 1.5 months (min 1-max 2 months). Duration of interrupting TNFi was not significant for the risk of COVID-19. Comorbidities, older age, and the presence of active disease have been associated with worse outcomes in previous studies [3]. In our study, the anti-TNF using and the nonuser groups were similar according to age, sex, and comorbidities. Although comorbidities in COVID-19 are associated with severe disease in the literature, we did not find a significant difference in our study. This result is probably related to our insufficient number of patients. As a result, we found that the use of anti-TNF did not increase the frequency and severity of COVID-19. In a recently published multicenter study, it was stated that the use of biological DMARDs in patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases was not significantly associated with a worse outcome of COVID-19. But unlike our study, having no comorbidities was associated with a decreased risk of a worse outcome [4]. There are currently studies investigating the therapeutic utility of infliximab and adalimumab in hospitalized COVID-19 patients [5]. The results of these studies are very important. The usability of TNFi in treatment and at which stage of the disease anti-TNF agents can be used are wondered. We will see the course of the disease all over the world after the administration of the COVID-19 vaccines, but we still need more information about effective and safe treatment. RESULTS: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest. DISCUSSION: The authors did not receive support from any organization for this work.

Management of solitary cecum diverticulitis - Single-Center Experience.

<b> Objective: </b> Cecal diverticulitis may be encountered as a real etiological factor in 1/300 appendectomies. Differential diagnosis of acute appendicitis and cecal diverticulitis is crucial because of the different treatment methods. Our aim is to reveal the importance of distinguishing acute appendicitis from cecal diverticulitis. <p> <b>Methods: </b> The data of patients who were admitted to the hospital between 2015 and 2019 with the complaint of abdominal pain and then finally diagnosed with colon diverticular disease, colon diverticulitis, or acute appendicitis, analyzed retrospectively. <p><b>Results: </b> A total of 19 cecum diverticulitis patients were detected during surgery for acute appendicitis or during clinical and radiological evaluation. 1247 appendectomies were evaluated; the final diagnosis was observed as cecal diverticulitis in 5 patients (0,4%). One hundred nineteen patients diagnosed with colonic diverticulitis at admission were evaluated, while 105 (88,2%) of them had left-sided diverticulitis, 14 (11,7%) of them had solitary cecal diverticulitis. All of the solitary cecal diverticulitis patients were treated conservatively, except one patient who has Hinchey 3 diverticulitis.<p><b> Conclusion: </b> Differential diagnosis of cecum diverticulitis with acute appendicitis is important because cecum diverticulitis can be managed as conservatively in most cases. In order to prevent unnecessary surgical interventions, this importance has increased, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic period.

Novel coronavirus seropositivity and related factors among healthcare workers at a university hospital during the prevaccination period: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to investigate the specific risk factors for the transmission of novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) among healthcare workers in different campuses of a university hospital and to reveal the risk factors for antibody positivity. METHODS: In this retrospective cross-sectional study, 2988 (82%) of 3620 healthcare workers in a university hospital participated. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) antibody was investigated using serum from healthcare workers who underwent COVID-19 antibody testing. The antibody test results of the participants were evaluated based on their work campus, their profession and their workplace. The statistical significance level was p < 0.05 in all analyses. RESULTS: Of the participants in this study, 108 (3.6%) were antibody positive, and 2880 (96.4%) were negative. Antibody positivity rates were greater in nurses compared with other healthcare workers (p < 0.001). Regarding workplace, antibody positivity was greater in those working in intensive care compared to those working in other locations (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare workers are at the highest risk of being infected with COVID-19. Those who have a higher risk of infection among healthcare workers and those working in high-risk areas should be vaccinated early and use personal protective equipment during the pandemic. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Retrospective permission was obtained from both the local ethics committee and the Turkish Ministry of Health for this study (IRB No:71522473/050.01.04/370, Date: 05.20.2020).

Effect of COVID-19 on platelet count and its indices

SUMMARY BACKGROUND Easily accessible, inexpensive, and widely used laboratory tests that demonstrate the severity of COVID-19 are important. Therefore, in this study, we aimed to investigate the relationship between mortality in COVID-19 and platelet count, Mean Platelet Volume (MPV), and platelet distribution width. METHODS In total, 215 COVID-19 patients were included in this study. The patients were divided into two groups. Patients with room air oxygen saturation &lt;90% were considered as severe COVID-19, and patients with &#8805;90% were considered moderate COVID-19. Patient medical records and the electronic patient data monitoring system were examined retrospectively. Analyses were performed using the SPSS statistical software. A p-value &lt;0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS The patients'mean age was 64,32 ± 16,07 years. According to oxygen saturation, 81 patients had moderate and 134 had severe COVID-19. Our findings revealed that oxygen saturation at admission and the MPV difference between the first and third days of hospitalization were significant parameters in COVID-19 patients for predicting mortality. While mortality was 8.4 times higher in patients who had oxygen saturation under 90 % at hospital admission, 1 unit increase in MPV increased mortality 1.76 times. CONCLUSION In addition to the lung capacity of patients, the mean platelet volume may be used as an auxiliary test in predicting the mortality in COVID-19 patients. RESUMO OBJETIVO Testes laboratoriais de fácil acesso, baixo custo e amplamente utilizados capazes de demonstrar a gravidade da COVID-19 são importantes. Portanto, neste estudo, o nosso objetivo foi investigar a relação entre a mortalidade na COVID-19 e a contagem de plaquetas, volume plaquetário médio (VMP) e largura de distribuição de plaquetas. MÉTODOS No total, 215 pacientes com COVID-19 foram incluídos no estudo. Os pacientes foram divididos em dois grupos. Pacientes com saturação de oxigênio &lt;90% em ar ambiente foram considerados casos graves de COVID-19 e pacientes com valores &#8805;90% foram considerados casos moderados. Os registros médicos dos pacientes e o sistema eletrônico de monitoramento de dados de pacientes foram analisados retrospectivamente. As análises foram realizadas utilizando o software estatístico SPSS. Um valor de p &lt;0,05 foi considerado significativo. RESULTADOS A média de idade dos pacientes foi de 64,32 ± 16,07 anos. Com base na saturação de oxigênio, 81 pacientes eram casos moderados e 134 tinham COVID-19 grave. Nosso estudo revelou que a saturação de oxigênio no momento da internação e a diferença nos valores de VPM entre o primeiro e terceiro dia de internação foram parâmetros significativos para predizer mortalidade de pacientes com COVID-19. A mortalidade foi 8,4 vezes maior nos pacientes com saturação abaixo de 90% no momento da internação, mas um aumento de apenas 1 unidade no valor de VPM aumentou a mortalidade 1,76 vezes. CONCLUSÃO Além da capacidade pulmonar dos pacientes, o volume plaquetário médio pode ser utilizado como um teste auxiliar para prever a mortalidade de pacientes com COVID-19.

Effect of COVID-19 on platelet count and its indices.

BACKGROUND: Easily accessible, inexpensive, and widely used laboratory tests that demonstrate the severity of COVID-19 are important. Therefore, in this study, we aimed to investigate the relationship between mortality in COVID-19 and platelet count, Mean Platelet Volume (MPV), and platelet distribution width. METHODS: In total, 215 COVID-19 patients were included in this study. The patients were divided into two groups. Patients with room air oxygen saturation < 90% were considered as severe COVID-19, and patients with ≥90% were considered moderate COVID-19. Patient medical records and the electronic patient data monitoring system were examined retrospectively. Analyses were performed using the SPSS statistical software. A p-value <0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: The patients' mean age was 64,32 ± 16,07 years. According to oxygen saturation, 81 patients had moderate and 134 had severe COVID-19. Our findings revealed that oxygen saturation at admission and the MPV difference between the first and third days of hospitalization were significant parameters in COVID-19 patients for predicting mortality. While mortality was 8.4 times higher in patients who had oxygen saturation under 90 % at hospital admission, 1 unit increase in MPV increased mortality 1.76 times. CONCLUSION: In addition to the lung capacity of patients, the mean platelet volume may be used as an auxiliary test in predicting the mortality in COVID-19 patients.