Summary
Coronaviruses may activate dysregulated host immune responses. As exploratory studies have suggested that interleukin‐6 (IL‐6) levels are elevated in cases of complicated Covid‐19, we ...undertook a systematic review and meta‐analysis to assess the evidence in this field. We systematically searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for studies investigating the immunological response in Covid‐19; additional grey literature searches were undertaken. Study selection and data ion was undertaken independently by two authors. Meta‐analysis was undertaken using random effects models to compute ratios of means with 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs). Eight published studies and two preprints (n = 1798) were eligible for inclusion. Meta‐analysis of mean IL‐6 concentrations demonstrated 2.9‐fold higher levels in patients with complicated Covid‐19 compared with patients with noncomplicated disease (six studies; n = 1302; 95%CI, 1.17‐7.19; I2 = 100%). Consistent results were found in sensitivity analyses exclusively restricted to studies comparing patients requiring ICU admission vs no ICU admission (two studies; n = 540; ratio of means = 3.24; 95%CI, 2.54‐4.14; P < .001; I2 = 87%). Nine of ten studies were assessed to have at least moderate risk of bias. In patients with Covid‐19, IL‐6 levels are significantly elevated and associated with adverse clinical outcomes. Inhibition of IL‐6 may be a novel target for therapeutics for the management of dysregulated host responses in patients with Covid‐19 and high‐quality studies of intervention in this field are urgently required.
Full text
Available for:
FZAB, GIS, IJS, KILJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, SAZU, SBCE, SBMB, UL, UM, UPUK
Despite major advances in vaccination over the past century, resurgence of vaccine-preventable illnesses has led the World Health Organization to identify vaccine hesitancy as a major threat to ...global health. Vaccine hesitancy may be fueled by health information obtained from a variety of sources, including new media such as the Internet and social media platforms. As access to technology has improved, social media has attained global penetrance. In contrast to traditional media, social media allow individuals to rapidly create and share content globally without editorial oversight. Users may self-select content streams, contributing to ideological isolation. As such, there are considerable public health concerns raised by anti-vaccination messaging on such platforms and the consequent potential for downstream vaccine hesitancy, including the compromise of public confidence in future vaccine development for novel pathogens, such as SARS-CoV-2 for the prevention of COVID-19. In this review, we discuss the current position of social media platforms in propagating vaccine hesitancy and explore next steps in how social media may be used to improve health literacy and foster public trust in vaccination.
The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) has rapidly spread globally since being identified as a public health emergency of major international concern and has now been declared a pandemic ...by the World Health Organization (WHO). In December 2019, an outbreak of atypical pneumonia, known as COVID‐19, was identified in Wuhan, China. The newly identified zoonotic coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus‐2 (SARS‐CoV‐2), is characterized by rapid human‐to‐human transmission. Many cancer patients frequently visit the hospital for treatment and disease surveillance. They may be immunocompromised due to the underlying malignancy or anticancer therapy and are at higher risk of developing infections. Several factors increase the risk of infection, and cancer patients commonly have multiple risk factors. Cancer patients appear to have an estimated twofold increased risk of contracting SARS‐CoV‐2 than the general population. With the WHO declaring the novel coronavirus outbreak a pandemic, there is an urgent need to address the impact of such a pandemic on cancer patients. This include changes to resource allocation, clinical care, and the consent process during a pandemic. Currently and due to limited data, there are no international guidelines to address the management of cancer patients in any infectious pandemic. In this review, the potential challenges associated with managing cancer patients during the COVID‐19 infection pandemic will be addressed, with suggestions of some practical approaches.
Implications for Practice
The main management strategies for treating cancer patients during the COVID‐19 epidemic include clear communication and education about hand hygiene, infection control measures, high‐risk exposure, and the signs and symptoms of COVID‐19. Consideration of risk and benefit for active intervention in the cancer population must be individualized. Postponing elective surgery or adjuvant chemotherapy for cancer patients with low risk of progression should be considered on a case‐by‐case basis. Minimizing outpatient visits can help to mitigate exposure and possible further transmission. Telemedicine may be used to support patients to minimize number of visits and risk of exposure. More research is needed to better understand SARS‐CoV‐2 virology and epidemiology.
Cancer patients have an increased risk of contracting COVID‐19. This article addresses the challenges associated with managing cancer patients during the COVID‐19 infection pandemic and suggests some practical approaches.
Full text
Available for:
FZAB, GIS, IJS, KILJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, SAZU, SBCE, SBMB, UL, UM, UPUK
Despite vaccination’s role in preventing communicable diseases, misinformation threatens uptake. Social media may disseminate such anti-vaccination messages. We characterized trends in pro- and ...anti-vaccination discourse on Twitter. All tweets between 2010 and 2019 containing vaccine-related hashtags were identified. Pro- and anti-vaccine tweets and users per quarter (3-months) were tabulated; discussion subcommunities were identified with network analysis. 1,637,712 vaccine-related tweets were identified from 154 pro-vaccine and 125 anti-vaccine hashtags, with 86% of users posting exclusively pro-vaccine and 12% posting exclusively anti-vaccine hashtags. Pro-vaccine tweet volumes are larger than anti-vaccine tweets and consistently increase over time. In contrast, anti-vaccine tweet volumes have decreased since 2014, despite an increasing anti-vaccine user-base. Users infrequently responded across pro/anti-vaccine alignment (0.2%). Despite greater volumes of pro-vaccination discourse in recent years, and the anti-vaccination content userbase being smaller, the anti-vaccine community continues to grow in size. This finding coupled with the minimal inter-communication between communities suggests possible ideological isolation.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UILJ, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZAGLJ, ZRSKP
Objective
Systematically review the literature for cardiac catheterization and coronary angiography via distal transradial access (dTRA) and its outcomes.
Background
dTRA, via anatomical snuffbox, ...may have several advantages over conventional transradial access (cTRA) for percutaneous cardiac procedures, including easier left‐sided access for aorto‐coronary grafts, future proximal radial artery preservation, and patient and operator comfort. However, its procedural characteristics and safety profile remain unclear.
Methods
Ovid MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched from inception to September 2018. Two authors independently performed two‐stage selection and data extraction. Reports assessing the dTRA approach for cardiac intervention in adults reporting any outcomes were eligible. Descriptive summary statistics were calculated from pooled data.
Results
A total of 19 publications comprising 4,212 participants undergoing dTRA were included. Mean age was 63.8 years, and 23.0% were female. dTRA was primarily undertaken for assessment of stable coronary artery disease (87.6%), with 41.7% for diagnostic procedures and 46.9% undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. The overall success rate for undertaking the dTRA approach was 95.4% (69–100%). Complications occurred in 2.4% of cases, of which the leading complications were bleeding/hematoma (18.2%). Complication rates did not significantly differ between dTRA and cTRA. The occurrence of radial artery occlusion in patients undergoing dTRA was low (1.7%).
Conclusions
Observational data demonstrate that dTRA is a safe and feasible method for percutaneous cardiac procedures, with high rates of procedural success and low rates of complication. As data comparing dTRA with cTRA remain limited, future high‐quality randomized comparative studies are required.
Full text
Available for:
BFBNIB, FZAB, GIS, IJS, KILJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, SAZU, SBCE, SBMB, UL, UM, UPUK
7.
Hemodynamic Standstill in Cardiac Tamponade Haghbayan, Hourmazd; Gunaratne, Keith; Coomes, Eric A
American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine,
10/2019, Volume:
200, Issue:
7
Journal Article
Peer reviewed
Haghbayan discuss the case study of a 46-year-old patient presented with dyspnea, jugular venous distension, tachycardia, hypotension, and a pulsus paradoxus of 16 mm Hg. Transthoracic ...echocardiography demonstrated a large circumferential pericardial effusion and features consistent with carcfac tamponade, including right atrial inversion in end-systole and right ventricular colapse during early diastole. Cardiac tamponade is a medical emergency arising from the acute accumulation of pericardial effusion causing impaired right heart filling and decreased O, culminating in obstructive shock.
Quarantine Coomes, Eric A; Leis, Jerome A; Gold, Wayne L
CMAJ. Canadian Medical Association journal,
03/2020, Volume:
192, Issue:
13
Journal Article
Peer reviewed
Open access
Coomes et al present several facts about quarantine. Quarantine is a strategy for containment of infectious diseases that differs from isolation. Quarantine sequesters healthy, asymptomatic people ...exposed to an infectious disease for the duration of the incubation period, to contain the spread of the disease. In contrast, isolation refers to separating patients with active infection from healthy, unexposed people, to prevent transmission.
PDF
