Validation of the Predisposition Infection Response Organ (PIRO) dysfunction score for the prognostic stratification of patients with sepsis in the Emergency Department / Validación del sistema PIRO (predisposición, infección, respuesta, fallo orgánico) para la estratificación del pronóstico en pacientes con sepsis en el servicio de urgencias

Objective: There are many different methods for computing the Predisposition Infection Response Organ (PIRO) dysfunction score. We compared three PIRO methods (PIRO1 (Howell), PIRO2 (Rubulotta) and PIRO3 (Rathour)) for the stratification of mortality and high level of care admission in septic patients arriving at the Emergency Department (ED) of an Italian Hospital. Design, setting and participants We prospectively collected clinical data of 470 patients admitted due to infection in the ED to compute PIRO according to three different methods. We tested PIRO variables for the prediction of mortality in the univariate analysis. Calculation and comparison were made of the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) for the three PIRO methods, SOFA and qSOFA. Results Most of the variables included in PIRO were related to mortality in the univariate analysis. Increased PIRO scores were related to higher mortality. In relation to mortality, PIRO 1 performed better than PIRO2 at 30 d ((AUC 0.77 (0.716–0.824) vs. AUC 0.699 (0.64–0.758) (p=0.03) and similarly at 60 d (AUC 0.767 (0.715–0.819) vs AUC 0.709 (0.656–0.763)(p=0.55)); PIRO1 performed similarly to PIRO3 (AUC 0.765 (0.71–0.82) at 30 d, AUC 0.754 (0.701–0.806) at 60 d, p=ns). Both PIRO1 and PIRO3 were as good as SOFA referred to mortality (AUC 0.758 (0.699, 0.816) at 30 d vs. AUC 0.738 (0.681, 0.795) at 60 d; p=ns). For high level of care admission, PIRO proved inferior to SOFA. Conclusions We support the use of PIRO1, which combines ease of use and the best performance referred to mortality over the short term. PIRO2 proved to be less accurate and more complex to use, suffering from missing microbiological data in the ED setting. (AU)

Objetivo: Existen muchos métodos diferentes para calcular la escala PIRO (predisposición, infección respuesta, fallo orgánico). Comparamos 3 métodos (PIRO1 [Howell], PIRO2 [Rubolotta] y PIRO3 [Rathour]) para estratificar la mortalidad y el ingreso con alto nivel de cuidados en pacientes con sepsis atendidos en el servicio de urgencias (SU) de un hospital italiano. Diseño, entorno y participantes Recopilamos datos clínicos prospectivos de 470 pacientes que llegaban con una infección al SU, con el fin de calcular la puntuación PIRO, de acuerdo con 3 métodos diferentes. Evaluamos las variables PIRO para la predicción de la mortalidad en un análisis monovariable. Calculamos y comparamos el área bajo la curva (AUC) característica de operación del receptor (ROC) de los 3 métodos PIRO, SOFA y qSOFA. Resultados La mayoría de las variables incluidas en las puntuaciones PIRO estaban relacionadas con la mortalidad en un análisis de una sola variable. El aumento de la puntuación PIRO se relacionó con una mortalidad más elevada. En cuanto a la mortalidad, PIRO1 presentó un rendimiento mejor que PIRO2 a los 30 días (AUC 0,77 [0,716-0,824] frente a AUC 0,699 [0,64-0,758]; p=0,03) y similares a los 60 días (AUC 0,767 [0,715-0,819] frente a AUC 0,709 [0,656-0,763]; p=0,55); PIRO1 presentó un rendimiento similar al de PIRO3 (AUC 0,765 [0,71-0,82] a los 30 días, AUC 0,754 [0,701-0,806] a los 60 días; p=NS). Tanto PIRO1 como PIRO3 presentaron un rendimiento similar al de SOFA para la mortalidad (AUC 0,758 [0,699-0,816) al cabo de 30 días y AUC 0,738 [0,681-0,795] al cabo de 60 días; p=NS). En cuanto al ingreso con alto nivel de cuidados, las puntuaciones PIRO resultaron ser inferiores a SOFA. Conclusiones Apoyamos el uso de la puntuación PIRO1, que resulta fácil de usar, y presenta el mejor rendimiento en cuanto a la mortalidad a largo plazo. PIRO2 resultó ser menos precisa y más compleja de usar ... (AU)

Validation of the Predisposition Infection Response Organ (PIRO) dysfunction score for the prognostic stratification of patients with sepsis in the Emergency Department.

OBJECTIVE: There are many different methods for computing the Predisposition Infection Response Organ (PIRO) dysfunction score. We compared three PIRO methods (PIRO1 (Howell), PIRO2 (Rubulotta) and PIRO3 (Rathour)) for the stratification of mortality and high level of care admission in septic patients arriving at the Emergency Department (ED) of an Italian Hospital. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We prospectively collected clinical data of 470 patients admitted due to infection in the ED to compute PIRO according to three different methods. We tested PIRO variables for the prediction of mortality in the univariate analysis. Calculation and comparison were made of the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) for the three PIRO methods, SOFA and qSOFA. RESULTS: Most of the variables included in PIRO were related to mortality in the univariate analysis. Increased PIRO scores were related to higher mortality. In relation to mortality, PIRO 1 performed better than PIRO2 at 30 d ((AUC 0.77 (0.716-0.824) vs. AUC 0.699 (0.64-0.758) (p=0.03) and similarly at 60 d (AUC 0.767 (0.715-0.819) vs AUC 0.709 (0.656-0.763)(p=0.55)); PIRO1 performed similarly to PIRO3 (AUC 0.765 (0.71-0.82) at 30 d, AUC 0.754 (0.701-0.806) at 60 d, p=ns). Both PIRO1 and PIRO3 were as good as SOFA referred to mortality (AUC 0.758 (0.699, 0.816) at 30 d vs. AUC 0.738 (0.681, 0.795) at 60 d; p=ns). For high level of care admission, PIRO proved inferior to SOFA. CONCLUSIONS: We support the use of PIRO1, which combines ease of use and the best performance referred to mortality over the short term. PIRO2 proved to be less accurate and more complex to use, suffering from missing microbiological data in the ED setting.

False-negative real-time polymerase chain reaction tests in COVID-19 patients: an epidemiological analysis of 302 patients.

OBJECTIVES: Patients who arrive at the emergency department (ED) with COVID-19, who test negative at the first real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), represent a clinical challenge. This study aimed to evaluate if the clinical manifestation at presentation, the laboratory and imaging results, and the prognosis of COVID-19 differ in patients who tested negative at the first RT-PCR compared with those who tested positive and also to evaluate if comorbid conditions patient-related or the period of arrival are associated with negative testing. STUDY DESIGN: We retrospectively collected clinical data of patients who accessed the ED from March 1 to May 15, 2020. METHODS: We compared clinical variables, comorbid conditions, and clinical outcomes in the two groups by univariate analysis and logistic regression. RESULTS: Patients who tested negative at the first RT-PCR showed a higher prevalence of cardiopathy, immunosuppression, and diabetes, as well as a higher leukocyte and lower lymphocyte counts compared with patients who tested positive. A bilateral interstitial syndrome and a typical pattern at computed tomography scan were prevalent in the test-negative group. Test-negative patients were more likely to be admitted to the hospital but less likely to need admission in a high level of care ward. The false-negative rate increased from March to May. CONCLUSION: False-negative RT-PCR COVID-19 patients present a similar spectrum of symptoms compared with positive cohort, but more comorbidities. Imaging helps to identify them. True positives had a higher risk of serious complications.

Challenging management of gingival squamous cell carcinoma: a 10 years single-center retrospective study on Northern-Italian patients.

BACKGROUND: Aim of this study was to describe the outcome of patients with gingival squamous cell carcinoma (GSCC), and to recognize aspects affecting clinical course and to consider survival rate. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The case records of patients, over a 10-year period, were retrospectively examined. Differences in distribution of the potential risk factors by prognosis were investigated through non-parametrical tests (Wilcoxon Rank-Sum and Fisher's Exact). Survival curves for age, therapy and stage were built by the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with Log-Rank test. RESULTS: 79 patients were analysed. Significant increase in mortality for patients older than 77 and for those with advanced stages was found. Cumulative survival rate 5 years after the diagnosis was 43%, while at 10 years was of 11%. CONCLUSIONS: With a statistical relationship between age and tumour stage with survival rates, and 70% of GSCC cases identified as stage IV, early GSCC diagnosis remains challenging.

Validation of the Predisposition Infection Response Organ (PIRO) dysfunction score for the prognostic stratification of patients with sepsis in the Emergency Department.

OBJECTIVE: There are many different methods for computing the Predisposition Infection Response Organ (PIRO) dysfunction score. We compared three PIRO methods (PIRO1 (Howell), PIRO2 (Rubulotta) and PIRO3 (Rathour)) for the stratification of mortality and high level of care admission in septic patients arriving at the Emergency Department (ED) of an Italian Hospital. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We prospectively collected clinical data of 470 patients admitted due to infection in the ED to compute PIRO according to three different methods. We tested PIRO variables for the prediction of mortality in the univariate analysis. Calculation and comparison were made of the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) for the three PIRO methods, SOFA and qSOFA. RESULTS: Most of the variables included in PIRO were related to mortality in the univariate analysis. Increased PIRO scores were related to higher mortality. In relation to mortality, PIRO 1 performed better than PIRO2 at 30 d ((AUC 0.77 (0.716-0.824) vs. AUC 0.699 (0.64-0.758) (p=0.03) and similarly at 60 d (AUC 0.767 (0.715-0.819) vs AUC 0.709 (0.656-0.763)(p=0.55)); PIRO1 performed similarly to PIRO3 (AUC 0.765 (0.71-0.82) at 30 d, AUC 0.754 (0.701-0.806) at 60 d, p=ns). Both PIRO1 and PIRO3 were as good as SOFA referred to mortality (AUC 0.758 (0.699, 0.816) at 30 d vs. AUC 0.738 (0.681, 0.795) at 60 d; p=ns). For high level of care admission, PIRO proved inferior to SOFA. CONCLUSIONS: We support the use of PIRO1, which combines ease of use and the best performance referred to mortality over the short term. PIRO2 proved to be less accurate and more complex to use, suffering from missing microbiological data in the ED setting.

Alpha-thalassemia in premature newborns.

In this study we have carried out alpha-globin gene mapping, hemoglobin (Hb) Bart's quantitation serum bilirubin, and red blood cell indices determination in a group of Sardinian appropriate for gestational age premature infants (from 32 to 35 wk gestation) in order to define the incidence in this population of the different alpha-thalassemia syndromes, their expression rate, and the correlation between the alpha-globin genotype and phenotype at this developmental stage. The gene frequencies of deletion (-alpha) and nondeletion (alpha alpha th) alpha-thalassemia were 0.29 and 0.04, respectively, and thus not different from those found in full-term newborns from the same population. The majority of premature newborns with a single alpha-globin gene deletion [(-alpha/alpha alpha) genotype] were hematologically silent. Those who manifested increased Hb Bart's (1.2 to 3.4%) had slightly reduced Hb levels (17.4 +/- 2.6 g/dl), mean corpuscular volume (102.6 +/- 6.3 fl), and mean corpuscular Hb (34.8 +/- 2.0 pg) values. Those infants with the deletion of two alpha-globin structural genes (-alpha/-alpha) showed without exception moderate amount of Hb Bart's in the 3.5-8.1% range and an obvious decrease of Hb levels (16.1 +/- 1.6 g/dl) mean corpuscular Hb (30.6 +/- 3.5 pg), and mean corpuscular volume (88.5 +/- 11.5 fl) values. The only infant with the deletion of 3 alpha-globin structural genes had 25% Hb Bart's associated with a moderate microcytic anemia at birth and developed the clinical picture of Hb H disease. Carriers of nondeletion alpha-thalassemia (alpha alpha/alpha alpha th) showed variable amount of Hb Bart's always associated with thalassemia-like red cell indices.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

[Pathogenesis of atresia of the pylorus in patients with epidermolysis bullosa]. / Patogenesi dell'atresia del piloro nei pazienti affetti da epidermolisi bollosa.

A new case of pyloric atresia associated with epidermolysis bullosa was observed. To our knowledge seventeen other cases of this condition have been previously reported, five of these also presented aplasia cutis congenita. Although there is no clear agreement as to which type of epidermolysis is associated, junctional bullous epidermatosis is the most commonly reported form. This is unlikely to be a chance association, since both are extremely rare and autosomal recessive hereditary conditions. Some authors have proposed a pleiotropic effect of a single gene or autosomal recessive, with close gene linkage, inheritance of these two conditions. After careful consideration of the various pathogenetic hypotheses, we conclude that epidermolysis, even when non in the scarring form, may be responsible for pyloric atresia.

Effect of phenobarbital treatment on erythrocyte glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase in human newborns.

The effect of phenobarbital (PB) treatment on erythrocyte glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G-6-PD) levels was studied in normal and G-6-PD-deficient human newborns. An increase of erythrocyte G-6-PD levels was observed in normal G-6-PD patients, while increase in the enzymatic activity was not observed in G-6-PD-deficient neonates.