Vancomycin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (VRSA), Vancomycin-intermediate S. aureus (VISA) and heterogeneous VISA (hVISA) are subject to vancomycin treatment failure. The aim of the present study was to determine their precise prevalence and investigate prevalence variability depending on different years and locations. Several international databases including Medline (PubMed), Embase and Web of Sciences were searched (data from 1997 to 2019) to identify studies that addressed the prevalence of VRSA, VISA and hVISA among human clinical isolates around the world. Subgroup analyses and meta-regression were conducted to indicate potential source of variation. Publication bias was assessed using Egger’s test. Statistical analyses were conducted using STATA software (version 14.0). Data analysis showed that VRSA, VISA and hVISA isolates were reported in 23, 50 and 82 studies, with an overall prevalence of 1.5% among 5855 S. aureus isolates, 1.7% among 22,277 strains and 4.6% among 47,721 strains, respectively. The overall prevalence of VRSA, VISA, and hVISA before 2010 was 1.2%, 1.2%, and 4%, respectively, while their prevalence after this year has reached 2.4%, 4.3%, and 5.3%. The results of this study showed that the frequency of VRSA, VISA and hVISA after 2010 represent a 2.0, 3.6 and 1.3-fold increase over prior years. In a subgroup analysis of different strain origins, the highest frequency of VRSA (3.6%) and hVISA (5.2%) was encountered in the USA while VISA (2.1%) was more prevalent in Asia. Meta-regression analysis showed significant increasing of VISA prevalence in recent years ( p value ≤ 0.05). Based on the results of case reports (which were not included in the calculations mentioned above), the numbers of VRSA, VISA and hVISA isolates were 12, 24 and 14, respectively, among different continents. Since the prevalence of VRSA, VISA and hVISA has been increasing in recent years (especially in the Asian and American continents), rigorous monitoring of vancomycin treatment, it’s the therapeutic response and the definition of appropriate control guidelines depending on geographical regions is highly recommended and essential to prevent the further spread of vancomycin-resistant S. aureus .

Background: Staphylococcus aureus, a leading cause of community-acquired and nosocomial infections, remains a major health problem worldwide. Molecular typing methods, such as spa typing, are vital for the control and, when typing can be made more timely, prevention of S. aureus spread around healthcare settings. The current study aims to review the literature to report the most common clinical spa types around the world, which is important for epidemiological surveys and nosocomial infection control policies.Methods: A search via PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science, Embase, the Cochrane library, and Scopus was conducted for original articles reporting the most prevalent spa types among S. aureus isolates. The search terms were “Staphylococcus aureus, spa typing.”Results: The most prevalent spa types were t032, t008 and t002 in Europe; t037 and t002 in Asia; t008, t002, and t242 in America; t037, t084, and t064 in Africa; and t020 in Australia. In Europe, all the isolates related to spa type t032 were MRSA. In addition, spa type t037 in Africa and t037and t437 in Australia also consisted exclusively of MRSA isolates. Given the fact that more than 95% of the papers we studied originated in the past decade there was no option to study the dynamics of regional clone emergence.Conclusion: This review documents the presence of the most prevalent spa types in countries, continents and worldwide and shows big local differences in clonal distribution.

Introduction: Until now, there are several reports on cutaneous manifestations in COVID-19 patients. However, the link between skin manifestations and the severity of the disease remains debatable. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the temporal relationship between different types of skin lesions and the severity of COVID-19.Methods: A systematic search was conducted for relevant studies published between January and July 2020 using Pubmed/Medline, Embase, and Web of knowledge. The following keywords were used: “SARS-CoV-2” or “COVID-19” or “new coronavirus” or “Wuhan Coronavirus” or “coronavirus disease 2019” and “skin disease” or “skin manifestation” or “cutaneous manifestation.”Results: Out of 381 articles, 47 meet the inclusion criteria and a total of 1,847 patients with confirmed COVID-19 were examined. The overall frequency of cutaneous manifestations in COVID-19 patients was 5.95%. The maculopapular rash was the main reported skin involvement (37.3%) commonly occurred in middle-aged females with intermediate severity of the disease. Forty-eight percentage of the patients had a mild, 32% a moderate, and 20% a severe COVID-19 disease. The mild disease was mainly correlated with chilblain-like and urticaria-like lesions and patients with vascular lesions experienced a more severe disease. Seventy-two percentage of patients with chilblain-like lesions improved without any medication. The overall mortality rate was 4.5%. Patients with vascular lesions had the highest mortality rate (18.2%) and patients with urticaria-like lesions had the lowest mortality rate (2.2%).Conclusion: The mere occurrence of skin manifestations in COVID-19 patients is not an indicator for the disease severity, and it highly depends on the type of skin lesions. Chilblain-like and vascular lesions are the ends of a spectrum in which from chilblain-like to vascular lesions, the severity of the disease increases, and the patient's prognosis worsens. Those with vascular lesions should also be considered as high-priority patients for further medical care.

Background and Aim: Co-infection of COVID-19 with other respiratory pathogens which may complicate the diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of COVID-19 emerge new concern. The overlap of COVID-19 and influenza, as two epidemics at the same time can occur in the cold months of the year. The aim of current study was to evaluate the rate of such co-infection as a systematic review and meta-analysis.Methods: A systematic literature search was performed on September 28, 2019 for original research articles published in Medline, Web of Science, and Embase databases from December 2019 to September 2020 using relevant keywords. Patients of all ages with simultaneous COVID-19 and influenza were included. Statistical analysis was performed using STATA 14 software.Results: Eleven prevalence studies with total of 3,070 patients with COVID-19, and 79 patients with concurrent COVID-19 and influenza were selected for final evaluation. The prevalence of influenza infection was 0.8% in patients with confirmed COVID-19. The frequency of influenza virus co-infection among patients with COVID-19 was 4.5% in Asia and 0.4% in the America. Four prevalence studies reported the sex of patients, which were 30 men and 31 women. Prevalence of co-infection with influenza in men and women with COVID-19 was 5.3 and 9.1%, respectively. Eight case reports and 7 case series with a total of 123 patients with COVID-19 were selected, 29 of them (16 men, 13 women) with mean age of 48 years had concurrent infection with influenza viruses A/B. Fever, cough, and shortness of breath were the most common clinical manifestations. Two of 29 patients died (6.9%), and 17 out of 29 patients recovered (58.6%). Oseltamivir and hydroxychloroquine were the most widely used drugs used for 41.4, and 31% of patients, respectively.Conclusion: Although a low proportion of COVID-19 patients have influenza co-infection, however, the importance of such co-infection, especially in high-risk individuals and the elderly, cannot be ignored. We were unable to report the exact rate of simultaneous influenza in COVID-19 patients worldwide due to a lack of data from several countries. Obviously, more studies are needed to evaluate the exact effect of the COVID-19 and influenza co-infection in clinical outcomes.

Objective: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative