Bio‐secure bubble during the COVID‐19 pandemic to host the Asian Football Confederation (AFC) Champions League: A retrospective observational study

Background and Aims To describe the COVID‐19 positivity rate among football players, team staff, and local organizing committee members participated in the Asian Football Confederation (AFC) Champions League (West) tournament organized with the Bio‐secure bubble protocol in place. Methods A retrospective observational study was carried out to include a total of 2184 participants during the AFC‐West tournament in Qatar, which was a 3‐week event (September 14–October 3, 2020). This event was undertaken under the Bio‐secure bubble protocol, which was developed and implemented for sports events in Qatar during the pandemic. Within 72 h of departure and upon arrival in Qatar, all participants underwent reverse‐transcriptase polymerase chain reaction testing (RT‐PCR) to diagnose COVID‐19. The test was considered positive based on the cycle threshold (cT) value which was <30, whereas, reactive if cT value was ≥30 and <40, and negative (cT > 40). Results Of the 2184 participants (528 players, 388 team staff, and 1268 local staff), 916 international participants were tested for COVID‐19 PCR upon arrival at the Hamad International Airport, whereas the local staff (n = 1268) were tested 2 days before entering the bubble. The mean age of the players was 27.5 ± 9.8. Fifteen teams participated and as many as 60 matches were played over 3 weeks. Most participants tested negative (95.3%) and 3.9% tests were inconclusive. During the entire tournament, the positivity rate was 2.7% among all participants. Of the total positive cases, 0.8% were positive before entering the bubble system. The remaining (1.9%) tested positive during the tournament phase (19 players, 16 team officials, and 8 organizing committee staff). Conclusion Bio‐secure bubble protocol operated in a controlled environment presents a minimal risk of COVID‐19 infection for hosting international football events. This framework could be benchmarked to resume professional football competitions under unprecedented pandemic situations.

Bio-secure bubble during the COVID-19 pandemic to host the Asian Football Confederation (AFC) Champions League: A retrospective observational study.

Background and Aims: To describe the COVID-19 positivity rate among football players, team staff, and local organizing committee members participated in the Asian Football Confederation (AFC) Champions League (West) tournament organized with the Bio-secure bubble protocol in place. Methods: A retrospective observational study was carried out to include a total of 2184 participants during the AFC-West tournament in Qatar, which was a 3-week event (September 14-October 3, 2020). This event was undertaken under the Bio-secure bubble protocol, which was developed and implemented for sports events in Qatar during the pandemic. Within 72 h of departure and upon arrival in Qatar, all participants underwent reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction testing (RT-PCR) to diagnose COVID-19. The test was considered positive based on the cycle threshold (cT) value which was <30, whereas, reactive if cT value was ≥30 and <40, and negative (cT > 40). Results: Of the 2184 participants (528 players, 388 team staff, and 1268 local staff), 916 international participants were tested for COVID-19 PCR upon arrival at the Hamad International Airport, whereas the local staff (n = 1268) were tested 2 days before entering the bubble. The mean age of the players was 27.5 ± 9.8. Fifteen teams participated and as many as 60 matches were played over 3 weeks. Most participants tested negative (95.3%) and 3.9% tests were inconclusive. During the entire tournament, the positivity rate was 2.7% among all participants. Of the total positive cases, 0.8% were positive before entering the bubble system. The remaining (1.9%) tested positive during the tournament phase (19 players, 16 team officials, and 8 organizing committee staff). Conclusion: Bio-secure bubble protocol operated in a controlled environment presents a minimal risk of COVID-19 infection for hosting international football events. This framework could be benchmarked to resume professional football competitions under unprecedented pandemic situations.

A quick scoping review of the first year of vaccination against the COVID-19 pandemic: Do we need more shots or time?

BACKGROUND: The emergence of new severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 variants, along with the waning of vaccine-induced immunity, has increased breakthrough infections and urged booster jabs and debates. In the short term, the administration of booster doses has been reported to be safe and enhance severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2-specific neutralizing antibody levels. However, the effects of these doses on the pandemic trajectory and herd immunity are unclear. There is insufficient evidence that a third booster shot of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine maintains longer immunity and covers new viral variants. The lack of sufficient evidence, combined with the fact that millions of people have not yet received 1 or 2 jabs of the COVID-19 vaccine, has raised concerns regarding the call for booster vaccinations. METHODS: We conducted a quick scoping review to explore the literature on the need for a booster COVID-19 vaccination from January 1, 2021, to April 30, 2022. RESULTS: Sixty-one relevant publications were identified, of which 17 were related to waning immunity after 2 doses of the vaccine among the general population or healthcare workers, 19 were related to the third or booster dose of vaccination after the second dose among the general population or healthcare workers, and 25 were related to booster dose among immunocompromised patient. CONCLUSIONS: Initially, the need for a booster dose was equivocal; however, several studies demonstrated the benefit of the booster dose over time. Adequate scientific information is required regarding the administration of booster doses to the general population as well as the high-risk individuals.

A quick scoping review of the first year of vaccination against the COVID-19 pandemic: Do we need more shots or time?

Background: The emergence of new severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 variants, along with the waning of vaccine-induced immunity, has increased breakthrough infections and urged booster jabs and debates. In the short term, the administration of booster doses has been reported to be safe and enhance severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2–specific neutralizing antibody levels. However, the effects of these doses on the pandemic trajectory and herd immunity are unclear. There is insufficient evidence that a third booster shot of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine maintains longer immunity and covers new viral variants. The lack of sufficient evidence, combined with the fact that millions of people have not yet received 1 or 2 jabs of the COVID-19 vaccine, has raised concerns regarding the call for booster vaccinations. Methods: We conducted a quick scoping review to explore the literature on the need for a booster COVID-19 vaccination from January 1, 2021, to April 30, 2022. Results: Sixty-one relevant publications were identified, of which 17 were related to waning immunity after 2 doses of the vaccine among the general population or healthcare workers, 19 were related to the third or booster dose of vaccination after the second dose among the general population or healthcare workers, and 25 were related to booster dose among immunocompromised patient. Conclusions: Initially, the need for a booster dose was equivocal;however, several studies demonstrated the benefit of the booster dose over time. Adequate scientific information is required regarding the administration of booster doses to the general population as well as the high-risk individuals.

Resumption of professional football league with spectators during the COVID-19 pandemic: The implementation of Bio-secure bubble protocol.

BACKGROUND: Elite professional sports events involving mass gatherings carry a high risk of viral transmission during the coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. We describe the potential impact of resuming professional football leagues involving international participants adhering to a strict Bio-secure bubble protocol and investigate the consequences of spectators/fan attendance at such mass events during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic in Qatar. METHODS: We conducted a descriptive cohort study involving football players, referees, match officials, local organizing committee (LOC) members, hotel and security staff working in close coordination, and over 10,000 spectators from the Asian Football Confederation (AFC) Champions League (East) and the final match. The study covered almost four weeks of the event (November 19 to December 19, 2020) under a robust Bio-secure bubble protocol. It included extensive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) RT-PCR (reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction) every 3-6 days and clinical symptom monitoring on and off the field. Target variables included positive RT-PCR results and clinical symptom monitoring among participants, and rapid antigen testing for fan attendance to examine their safe return to the stadiums. RESULTS: A total of 12,250 RT-PCR tests involving 3158 individuals in the Bio-secure bubble were done over one month for all the AFC (East) matches, including the final match. Overall, 44 matches involving 16 teams were played. During the championship, only five individuals (three LOC members and two match officials) returned positive for COVID-19 infections. Four individuals (three team staff/officials and one person outside the Bio-secure bubble) had reactive results. None of the players tested positive for COVID-19 infection. All individuals testing positive were asymptomatic or had mild symptoms, with no one requiring hospitalization other than symptomatic treatment. The overall positivity rate was 0.15% for the entire duration of the AFC (East) Champions League. For the final match, a total of 10,320 rapid antigen tests were done for spectators, of which only one test was positive for COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: This report shows a very low incidence rate of COVID-19 infections during mass gathering events at the international level. For the resumption of football with spectators, careful mitigation strategies should be considered to reduce the risk of transmission to a sufficiently safe level. This may require proper coordination and measures (i.e., physical distancing, testing, entry, and exit routes in the stadium, and seating arrangement inside the stadium with limited attendance). Based on this, during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, the supervised and controlled resumption of football matches with spectators can be done safely provided that a strict Bio-secure bubble protocol has been implemented.

FIFA Arab Cup tournament with full capacity of spectators during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: We sought to assess the risk of COVID-19 and seasonal flu including respiratory syncytial (RSV) and influenza viruses during the FIFA Arab Cup 2021 in Qatar with full capacity of spectators. We also, evaluated the post-event attitude toward resumption of mass football events. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study in which spectators (age ≥ 18 years) were invited for reverse-transcription PCR testing for COVID-19 and seasonal flu. At the same time, between 7 and 14 days after the event, the participants completed a self-administered questionnaire regarding their concerns during the tournament. RESULTS: The tournament included 16 international football teams from the Arab countries. As per the study protocol, 10,000 spectators were approached and 6,475 participated. Among the participants, 4,195 (65.1%), 2,253 (34.9%) and 27 (0.4%) were vaccinated with 2 doses, vaccinated with 3 doses, and recovered from SARS-Cov-2 infection, respectively. There were 61 (0.9%), 41(0.6%) and 11(0.2%) participants who tested positive for COVID-19, RSV and influenza (A/B), respectively. The average cycle threshold (Ct) value for COVID-19 positive cases was 26.1±7.3. Among those who were electronically approached, 6,102 completed the survey whereas 373 had incomplete survey. Overall, 2069 (33.9%) participants reported symptoms that theoretically could be related to COVID-19, of them 39 had positive PCR test (1.9%). Spectators (94.3%) were optimistic about returning sport events to the pre-pandemic status. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant increase in the daily COVID-19 cases during FIFA Arab Cup 2021 with a full capacity of spectators. Therefore, upcoming mass football events can be held safely.

Recommencement of football competition with spectators during the active phase of the COVID-19 pandemic in a Middle Eastern country.

BACKGROUND: With the global spread of COVID-19 infection caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 virus (SARS-CoV-2), all the national and international sports events were ceased early in 2020. The sport activities have been reinstated since then, albeit without spectators. However, several governments have established a variety of risk-mitigation measures to gradually reintroduce the spectators to stadiums. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate the implementation of a strict health protocol to ensure the resumption of professional football with spectators and to access its effectiveness in limiting the spread of COVID-19 infections within the community. METHODS: This was a retrospective, observational study involving football players, match officials, local organizing committee members, working in close coordination, and over 16,000 spectators in the state of Qatar. We examined data from the Amir Cup final (December 18th, 2020), which was played under a strict protocol that included extensive reverse transcription-Polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing for players and match officials, as well as the utility of COVID-19 rapid antigen and antibody testings as screening tools for spectators to ensure their safe return to the stadiums. In addition, we reviewed the guidelines and protocols that were put in place to organize Qatar's Amir Cup Football Final, which drew over 16,000 spectators in the stadium. RESULTS: A total of 16,171 spectators undertook rapid antigen and antibody tests for the Amir cup final (from December16-December18, 2020). Fifteen Spectators (n = 15) returned with a positive result for COVID-19 infection during the final event (positivity rate = 0.12%). All players underwent RT-PCR testing 48 h before the match. None of the players tested positive for COVID-19 infections. 1311 individuals reported having symptoms related to COVID-19 post final of Amir Cup. These spectators were tested for COVID-19 RT-PCR with an overall positivity rate (positive/reactive) to be 0.42% (69/16171). CONCLUSION: This report shows a meagre incidence rate of COVID-19 infections during and post-Amir Cup football final. Based on the low infectivity rate reported during and post the Amir Cup, we propose that supervised and controlled resumption of football matches with spectators can be carried out safely following a strict testing and tracing protocol. Similar infection control policies can be replicated with a higher number of spectators.

Friend or foe—The Pfizer‐BioNTech (BNT162b2) vaccination: A case report of reversible acute acalculous cholecystitis

We described a rare case of vaccine‐induced acalculous cholecystitis (ACC). A 52‐year‐old female developed ACC after 8 h of receiving a 3rd dose of the Pfizer‐BioNTech COVID‐19 vaccination. The symptoms subsided completely with conservative treatment for 12 days, and the ultrasound and laboratory findings went back to normal. A 52‐year‐old female developed vaccine–induced acalculous cholecystitis (ACC) 8 h after receiving a 3rd dose of Pfizer BioNtech COVID‐19 vaccination. The symptoms subsided completely with conservative treatment for 12 days and the ultrasound and laboratory findings went back to normal. A high index of suspicion is needed for diagnosis as well as further studies.

Friend or foe-The Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) vaccination: A case report of reversible acute acalculous cholecystitis.

We described a rare case of vaccine-induced acalculous cholecystitis (ACC). A 52-year-old female developed ACC after 8 h of receiving a 3rd dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccination. The symptoms subsided completely with conservative treatment for 12 days, and the ultrasound and laboratory findings went back to normal.

Outcome of post-traumatic acute respiratory distress syndrome in young patients requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO).

We aimed to evaluate the outcomes of post-traumatic acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in young patients with and without Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support. A retrospective analysis was conducted for trauma patients who developed ARDS at a level I trauma facility between 2014 and 2020. Data were analyzed and compared between ECMO and non-ECMO group. We identified 85 patients with ARDS (22 patients had ECMO support and 63 matched patients managed by the conventional mechanical ventilation; 1:3 matching ratio). The two groups were comparable for age, sex, injury severity score, abbreviated injury score, shock index, SOFA score, and head injury. Kaplan Meier survival analysis showed that the survival in the ECMO group was initially close to that of the non-ECMO, however, during follow-up, the survival rate was better in the ECMO group, but did not reach statistical significance (Log-rank, p = 0.43 and Tarone-Ware, p = 0.37). Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that acute kidney injury (AKI) (Odds ratio 13.03; 95% CI 3.17-53.54) and brain edema (Odds ratio 4.80; 95% CI 1.10-21.03) were independent predictors of mortality. Sub-analysis showed that in patients with severe Murray Lung Injury (MLI) scores, non-ECMO group had higher mortality than the ECMO group (100% vs 36.8%, p = 0.004). Although ARDS is uncommon in young trauma patients, it has a high mortality. ECMO therapy was used in a quarter of ARDS cases. AKI and brain edema were the predictors of mortality among ARDS patients. ECMO use did not worsen the outcome in trauma patients; however, the survival was better in those who had severe MLI and ECMO support. Further prospective study is needed to define the appropriate selection criteria for the use of ECMO to optimize the outcomes in trauma patients.

Balloon-Assisted Percutaneous Thrombin Injection for Treatment of Iatrogenic Left Subclavian Artery Pseudoaneurysm in a Critically Ill COVID-19 Patient.

BACKGROUND: Central venous catheter represents an important tool in the management of critically ill patient. In this report, we described a COVID-19-positive case who had COVID-related complications and iatrogenic left subclavian artery pseudoaneurysm after central venous catheter insertion. Case Presentation. A 58-year-old male patient presented with a high-grade fever, myalgia, and shortness of breath due to COVID-19 infection. He required mechanical ventilation support and hemodialysis. He also developed uneventful deep vein thrombosis and myocardial infarction. As a complication of central line insertion, the patient developed pseudoaneurysm that originated from the subclavian artery with significant bleeding and large hematoma. Balloon-assisted percutaneous thrombin injection was done under ultrasound guidance. The patient was extubated 2 days later with no evidence of flow in the pseudoaneurysm. However, he lost movement in the left arm secondary to the compression of the brachial plexus from the pseudoaneurysm/hematoma, and therefore, 1.5 litres of the hematoma was evacuated in the operating room through a lateral left chest wall incision along the anterior axillary line to relieve the compression over the brachial plexus. The patient declined surgical reconstruction of the brachial plexus, and the flaccid paralysis of the arm did not recover during the follow-up. CONCLUSION: This is a case of unusual complications of COVID infection and iatrogenic left subclavian artery pseudoaneurysm postcentral vein cannulation. Balloon-assisted percutaneous thrombin injection for treatment of left subclavian artery pseudoaneurysm is feasible; however, delayed diagnosis could be associated with long-term or permanent disability.

Implementation of vascular surgery teleconsultation during the COVID-19 pandemic: Insights from the outpatient vascular clinics in a tertiary care hospital in Qatar.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has sparked a surge in the use of virtual communication tools for delivering clinical services for many non-urgent medical needs allowing telehealth or telemedicine, to become an almost inevitable part of the patient care. However, most of patients with vascular disease may require face-to-face interaction and are at risk of worse outcomes if not managed in timely manner. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to describe the utilization of telemedicine services in the outpatient vascular surgery clinics in a tertiary hospital. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of data on all vascular outpatient encounters during 2019 and 2020 was conducted and compared to reflect the pattern of practice prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: The study showed that 61% of the total patient encounters in 2020 were reported through teleconsultation. Females were the majority of patients who sought the virtual vascular care. Consultations for the new cases decreased from 29% to 26% whereas, the follow-up cases increased from 71% to 74% in 2020 (p = 0.001). The number of procedures performed in the vascular outpatient clinics decreased by 46% in 2020 when compared to 2019. This decrease in procedures was more evident in the duration from February 2020 to April 2020 in which the procedures decreased by 97%. The proportion of procedures represented 22.6% of the total encounters in 2019 and 10.5% of the encounters during 2020, (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Teleconsultation, along with supporting practice guidelines, can be used to maximize the efficiency of care in vascular surgery patients during the pandemic and beyond. Adoption of the 'hybrid care' which combines both virtual and in-person services as an ongoing practice requires evidence obtained through audits and studies on patients and healthcare providers levels. It is essential to establish a clear practice that ensures patient's needs.

Publications and retracted articles of COVID-19 pharmacotherapy-related research: A systematic review.

The current COVID-19 pandemic situation has stimulated an unplanned clinical research paradigm which is evident from the surge of clinical trial registrations and the increasing number of COVID-related publications. We aimed to explore the standards for research conduction, publications and retraction of articles related to COVID-19 pharmacotherapy research during the pandemic. We analysed data from the contemporary literatures on studies reporting pharmacological agents for COVID-19 using MEDLINE, PubMed, WHO database and Google Scholar between January 01, 2020 and March 20, 2021. The initial search revealed a total of 61,801 articles. Based on the inclusion criteria, a total of 124 studies related to various pharmacological agents were included in the final analysis. Most of the studies were reported from the United States (n = 30, 24%). Of the 124 studies, 50 (40%) were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Immunomodulatory drugs-related (n = 17, 34%) and COVID-19 vaccine-related studies (n = 14, 28%) were the main topics in the relevant RCTs. The median days for dissemination of findings in journals were 114 days (IQR 61-189). A comparative analysis revealed that RCTs were disseminated earlier (median 79 days; IQR 52-131) when compared to observational studies (median = 144 days; IQR 69-206) (p = 0.003). Six papers were retracted from high impact journals; in which the average period till publication was 33 days. Retraction of papers occurred within 10-48 days. Expedited reviews, research approval and early publications of COVID-19 related pharmaceutical studies could have an impact on the quality of publications. However, the huge number of publications in short time creates confusion for readers during the early phases of the pandemic. Retraction of papers is alarming but ensures research integrity and correctness of scientific information. These abbreviated processes could affect patient care and public awareness. It is imperative to follow rapid but rigours ethical standards for research approval and peer-review process for publications during health pandemics.

The 2019-2020 Novel Coronavirus (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2) Pandemic: A Joint American College of Academic International Medicine-World Academic Council of Emergency Medicine Multidisciplinary COVID-19 Working Group Consensus Paper.

What started as a cluster of patients with a mysterious respiratory illness in Wuhan, China, in December 2019, was later determined to be coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The pathogen severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), a novel Betacoronavirus, was subsequently isolated as the causative agent. SARS-CoV-2 is transmitted by respiratory droplets and fomites and presents clinically with fever, fatigue, myalgias, conjunctivitis, anosmia, dysgeusia, sore throat, nasal congestion, cough, dyspnea, nausea, vomiting, and/or diarrhea. In most critical cases, symptoms can escalate into acute respiratory distress syndrome accompanied by a runaway inflammatory cytokine response and multiorgan failure. As of this article's publication date, COVID-19 has spread to approximately 200 countries and territories, with over 4.3 million infections and more than 290,000 deaths as it has escalated into a global pandemic. Public health concerns mount as the situation evolves with an increasing number of infection hotspots around the globe. New information about the virus is emerging just as rapidly. This has led to the prompt development of clinical patient risk stratification tools to aid in determining the need for testing, isolation, monitoring, ventilator support, and disposition. COVID-19 spread is rapid, including imported cases in travelers, cases among close contacts of known infected individuals, and community-acquired cases without a readily identifiable source of infection. Critical shortages of personal protective equipment and ventilators are compounding the stress on overburdened healthcare systems. The continued challenges of social distancing, containment, isolation, and surge capacity in already stressed hospitals, clinics, and emergency departments have led to a swell in technologically-assisted care delivery strategies, such as telemedicine and web-based triage. As the race to develop an effective vaccine intensifies, several clinical trials of antivirals and immune modulators are underway, though no reliable COVID-19-specific therapeutics (inclusive of some potentially effective single and multi-drug regimens) have been identified as of yet. With many nations and regions declaring a state of emergency, unprecedented quarantine, social distancing, and border closing efforts are underway. Implementation of social and physical isolation measures has caused sudden and profound economic hardship, with marked decreases in global trade and local small business activity alike, and full ramifications likely yet to be felt. Current state-of-science, mitigation strategies, possible therapies, ethical considerations for healthcare workers and policymakers, as well as lessons learned for this evolving global threat and the eventual return to a "new normal" are discussed in this article.