Conflict of interest: JDL is the founder of Amyndas Pharmaceuticals, which develops complement inhibitors for therapeutic purposes; he has a broad portfolio of patents describing the use of complement inhibitors for therapeutic purposes (www.lambris.com/ patents), some of which are developed by Amyndas (US patents 8946145/9371365, 9630992) and Apellis (US patents 6319897, 7989589, 7888323). JDL is also the inventor of the compstatin technology licensed to Apellis Pharmaceuticals (i.e., 4(1MeW)7W/ POT-4/APL-1 and PEGylated derivatives such as pegcetacoplan and APL-9).

Emerging data indicate that complement and neutrophils are involved in the maladaptive host immune response that fuels hyper-inflammation and thrombotic microangiopathy increasing the mortality rate in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Here, we investigated the interaction between complement and the platelet/neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs)/thrombin axis, using COVID-19 clinical samples, cell-based inhibition studies and NETs/human aortic endothelial cell (HAEC) co-cultures. Increased plasma levels of NETs, TF activity and sC5b-9 were detected in patients. Neutrophils yielded high tissue factor (TF) expression and released NETs carrying functionally active TF. Confirming our ex vivo findings, treatment of control neutrophils with COVID-19 platelet-rich plasma generated TF-bearing NETs that induced thrombotic activity of HAEC. Thrombin or NETosis inhibition or C5aR1 blockade attenuated platelet-mediated NET-driven thrombogenicity. Serum isolated from COVID-19 patients induces complement activation in vitro, which is consistent with high complement activity in clinical samples. Complement inhibition at the level of C3 with compstatin Cp40 disrupted TF expression in neutrophils. In conclusion, we provide a mechanistic basis that reveals the pivotal role of complement and NETs in COVID-19 immmunothrombosis. This study supports emerging strategies against SARS-CoV-2 infection that exploit complement therapeutics or NETosis inhibition.

Patients exposed to a surgical safety checklist experience better postoperative outcomes, but this could simply reflect wider quality of care in hospitals where checklist use is routine.

IntroductionCrush asphyxia is different from positional asphyxia, as respiratory compromise in the latter is caused by splinting of the chest and/or diaphragm, thus preventing normal chest expansion. There are only a few cases or small case series of crush asphyxia in the literature, reporting usually poor outcomes.Case presentationWe present the case of a 44-year-old Caucasian man who developed traumatic asphyxia with severe thoracic injury and mild brain edema after being crushed under heavy auto vehicle mechanical parts. He remained unconscious for an unknown time. The treatment included oropharyngeal intubation and mechanical ventilation, bilateral chest tube thoracostomies, treatment of brain edema and other supportive measures. Our patient’s outcome was good. Traumatic asphyxia is generally under-reported and most authors apply supportive measures, while the final outcome seems to be dependent on the length of time of the chest compression and on the associated injuries.ConclusionTreatment for traumatic asphyxia is mainly supportive with special attention to the re-establishment of adequate oxygenation and perfusion; treatment of the concomitant injuries might also affect the final outcome.

BackgroundSeptic shock has been found to disrupt circadian rhythms. Moreover, timing of onset has been associated with different circadian profiles in experimental studies.ResultsIn this prospective study, we enrolled 26 patients divided into two groups: Group A (N = 15) included subjects who had septic shock at the time of ICU admission and Group B (N = 11) included patients who developed septic shock during ICU admission. 6-Sulfatoxymelatonin (aMT6s) and cortisol levels were measured in urine samples every 4 h over a 24-h period. Two sets of samples were taken from Group A (entry/septic shock and exit) and three sets from Group B (entry, septic shock and exit). Mean, amplitude that is the difference between peak and mean values, as well as peak time, were estimated for both aMT6s and cortisol. In Group A, amplitude of aMT6s upon entry (septic shock) was reduced in relation to exit (437.2 ± 309.2 vs. 674.1 ± 657.6 ng/4 h, p < 0.05). Peak time occurred earlier (10:00 p.m. vs. 07:00 a.m, p < 0.05) and correlated with higher APACHE II score and longer ICU stay. In Group B, aMT6s mean values were significantly increased during septic shock (2492.2 ± 1709.1 ng/4 h) compared to both entry (895.4 ± 715.5 ng/4 h) and exit (1308.6 ± 1214.4 ng/4 h, p < 0.05 for all comparisons). Amplitude of aMT6s was also elevated during septic shock (794.8 ± 431.8 ng/4 h) in relation to entry (293.1 ± 275.9 ng/4 h, p < 0.05). Regarding cortisol rhythm in Group A, during septic shock amplitude was increased compared to exit (13.3 ± 31 ng/4 h vs. 8.7 ± 21.2 ng/4 h p < 0.05) and correlated with reduced hospital length of stay. In Group B, cortisol mean values and amplitude during septic shock (10 ± 5.3 and 3 ± 1.8 ng/4 h, respectively) were significantly reduced compared to both entry (30 ± 57.9 and 12.3 ± 27.3 ng/4 h) and exit (14.4 ± 20.7 and 6.6 ± 8.7 ng/4 h, p < 0.05 for all comparisons) and correlated with higher SOFA score and longer ICU and hospital stay.ConclusionsSeptic shock induced inverse changes of aMT6s and cortisol circadian rhythm profiles both within and between different groups of patients, depending on timing of onset. Reduced rhythmicity was correlated with severity of disease and longer ICU stay.