Background/Aim: SARS-CoV-2 pandemic imposed extraordinary restriction measures and a complete reorganization of the Health System. The aim of the study was to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on emergency surgical department accesses. Patients and Methods: Patients admitted to surgical emergency departments was retrospectively recorded during the Lockdown (
In this study, we compared the incidence of pneumomediastinum in coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patients during the ascending phases of the 1
st
and 2
nd
epidemic waves. Crude incidence was higher during the 2
nd
wave at a quasi-significant level (0.68/1000 vs. 2.05/1000 patient-days, p = 0.05). When restricting the analysis to patients who developed pneumomediastinum during noninvasive ventilation, the difference became clearly significant (0.17/1000 vs 1.36/1000 patient-days, p = 0.039). At logistic regression, predisposing factors (p = 0.031), and COVID-19 radiological severity (p = 0.019) were independently associated with pneumomediastinum. Mortality in patients with pneumomediastinum was 87.5%. However, pneumomediastinum seemed to be related to a generally worse disease presentation in hospitalized patients during the 2
nd
wave, rather than to a separate pattern of disease.
Respiratory tract infections account for high morbidity and mortality around the world. Fragile patients are at high risk of developing complications such as pneumonia and may die from it. Limited information is available on the extent of the circulation of respiratory viruses in the hospital setting. Most knowledge relates to influenza viruses (FLU) but several other viruses produce flu-like illness. The study was conducted at the University Hospital Policlinico Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy. Clinical and laboratory data from hospitalized patients with respiratory tract infections during the period October 2016-March 2019 were analysed. The retrospective analysis included 17 viral agents detected by FilmArray test and clinical data from medical records and hospital discharge sheets. Models were adjusted for relevant confounders such as clinical severity and risk of death, socio-demographic characteristics and surgical procedures. From a total of 539 specimens analysed, 180 (33.39%) were positive for one or more respiratory viruses. Among them, 83 (46.1 %) were positive for influenza viruses (FLU), 36 (20%) rhino/enteroviruses (RHV/EV), 17 (9.44%) human coronaviruses (HCOV-229E, -HKU1, -NL63, and -OC43), 17 (9.44%) respiratory syncytial virus, 15 (8.33%) human metapneumovirus (HMPV), 8 (4.44%) parainfluenza viruses (PIV) and 4 (2.22%) adenoviruses (ADV). The distribution of viral agents varied across age groups and month of detection. The positive specimens were from 168 patients [102 M, 66 F; median age (range): 64 years (19−93)]. Overall, 40% of them had a high-grade clinical severity and a 27% risk of death; 27 patients died and 22 of them (81.5%) had received a clinical diagnosis of pneumonia. Respiratory viral infections may have a severe course and a poor prognosis in hospitalized patients, due to underlying comorbidities. Monitoring the circulation of respiratory viruses in hospital settings is important to improve diagnosis, prevention and treatment.
Day surgery breast-conserving surgery (DS-BCS) is a surgical approach applied in many specialized breast surgery departments. This study demonstrates the benefits of this approach from the perspectives of patients and of the Hospital/National Health System compared to ordinary breast-conserving surgery (ORD-BCS) under general anesthetic. A comparison of costs and diagnosis-related group (DRG) reimbursement demonstrated improved cost-effectiveness in DS-BCS compared to ORD-BCS.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.