Background/ObjectiveTo minimize the wide spread of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, Italy was placed in an almost complete lockdown state that forced people to “stay at home”. Aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of lockdown on glycemic control in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D) followed through telemedicine.Subjects/MethodsThis observational study involved patients with T1D using the real-time continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) Dexcom G6®. Ambulatory glucose profile data from the 3-months before schools closure (November 26, 2019–February 23, 2020; T0) and from the 3-months of consecutive lockdown (February 24–May 18, 2020; T1) were compared.ResultsSixty-two children and adolescents (11.1 ± 4.37 years, 50% males) with T1D (median time disease 3.67 years) were enrolled in the study. Insulin total daily dose was unchanged, while time spent on physical activities was decreased (p<0.0001). Despite the lack of statistical significance, median value of the glucose management indicator decreased from 7.4% to 7.25%. Glucose standard deviation (p<0.0001) and coefficient of variation (p=0.001) improved across the study. Median time in range increased from 60.5% to 63.5% (p=0.008), time above range decreased from 37.3% to 34.1% (p=0.048), and time below range decreased from 1.85% to 1.45% (p=0.001).ConclusionsOverall, in our children and adolescents with T1D glycemic control improved during lockdown. Despite patients were confined to their homes and limited to exercise, our data suggest that the use of real-time CGM, the continuous parental management, and the telemedicine can display beneficial effects on T1D care.

The use of umbilical venous catheters (UVCs) has become the standard of care in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) to provide newborns fluids, medications and parenteral nutrition. However, is well known that UVCs can be related to some serious complications, both mechanical and infective, including CLABSI (Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infections). Most authors recommend removing UVC within a maximum of 14 days from its placement. However, the last Infusion Therapy Standards of Practice (INS) guidelines recommends limiting the UVC dwell time to 7 to 10 days, in order to reduce risks of infectious and thrombotic complications. These guidelines also suggest UVC removal at 4 days followed by insertion of a PICC if a central access is still needed as an infection prevention strategy. Nevertheless, the maximum UVC dwell time in order to reduce the risk of CLABSI is still controversial, as well as the time of its replacement with a PICC. In this study we reviewed a total of 177 articles, found by using the PubMed database with the following search strings: “UVC AND neonates”, “(neonate* OR newborn*) AND (UVC OR central catheter*) AND (infection*)”. As previously mentioned, we also analyzed INS guidelines to provide the readers an updated overview on this topic. The purpose of this review is to provide updated information on CVCs infectious risks by examining the literature in this field. These data could help clinicians make decisions regarding the best time to remove the UVC or to replace it with a PICC, in order to reduce CLABSIs risk. Despite a lack of strong evidence, the risk of CLABSI seems to be minimized when UVC is removed/replaced within 7 days from insertion and this indication is emerging from more recent and larger studies.

Background: Neonatal encephalopathy due to perinatal asphyxia is one of the leading causes of neonatal death and morbidity worldwide. The neurodevelopmental outcomes of asphyxiated neonates have considerably improved after therapeutic hypothermia (TH). The current challenge is to identify all newborns with encephalopathy at risk of cerebral lesions and subsequent disability within 6 h of life and who may be within the window period for treatment with TH. This study evaluated the neurodevelopmental outcomes in surviving asphyxiated neonates who did and did not receive TH, based on clinical and polygraphic electroencephalographic (p-EEG) criteria. Methods: The study included 139 asphyxiated newborns divided into two groups: 82 who received TH and 57 who were not cooled. TH was administered to asphyxiated newborns (gestational age ≥ 35 weeks, birth weight ≥ 1800 g) with encephalopathy of any grade and moderate-to-severe p-EEG abnormalities or seizures. Neurodevelopmental outcomes between the groups at 24 months of life and the risk factors for severe outcomes were assessed. Results: Severe neurodevelopmental impairment occurred in 10 (7.2%) out of the 139 enrolled neonates. Nine out of the 82 cooled neonates (11.0%) had severe neurodevelopmental impairment. All but one neonate (98.2%) who did not receive TH had normal outcomes. The multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that abnormal p-EEG patterns (OR: 27.6; IC: 2.8–267.6) and general movements (OR: 3.2; IC: 1.0–10.0) were significantly associated with severe neurodevelopmental impairment (area under ROC curve: 92.7%). Conclusion: The combination of clinical and p-EEG evaluations in hypoxic–ischemic encephalopathy contributed to a more accurate selection of patients treated with therapeutic hypothermia. When administered to infants with moderate to severe p-EEG abnormalities, TH prevents approximately 90% of severe neurodevelopmental impairment after any grade of hypoxic–ischemic encephalopathy.