The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in significant morbidity, mortality, and strained healthcare systems worldwide. Thus, a search for modalities that can expedite and improve the diagnosis and management of this entity is underway. Recent data suggested the utility of lung ultrasound (LUS) in the diagnosis of COVID-19 by detecting an interstitial pattern (B-pattern). Hence, we aimed to pool the proportion of various reported lung abnormalities detected by LUS in symptomatic COVID-19 patients. We conducted a systematic review (PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE until April 25, 2020) and a proportion meta-analysis. We included seven studies examining the role of LUS in 122 COVID-19 patients. The pooled proportion (PP) of B-pattern detected by lung ultrasound (US) was 0.97 (95% CI: 0.94-1.00 I 2 0%, Q 4.6). The PP of finding pleural line abnormalities was 0.70 (95% CI: 0.13-1.00 I 2 96%, Q 103.9), of pleural thickening was 0.54 (95% 0.11-0.95 I 2 93%, Q 61.1), of subpleural or pulmonary consolidation was 0.39 (95% CI: 0.21-0.58 I 2 72%, Q 17.8), and of pleural effusion was 0.14 (95% CI: 0.00-0.37 I 2 93%, Q 27.3). Our meta-analysis revealed that almost all SARS-CoV-2-infected patients have abnormal lung US. The most common abnormality is interstitial involvement depicted as B-pattern. The finding from our review highlights the potential role of this modality in the triage, diagnosis, and follow-up of COVID-19 patients. A sizable diagnostic accuracy study comparing LUS, computed tomography scan, and COVID-19-specific tests is warranted to further test this finding and to delineate the diagnostic and prognostic yield of each of these modalities.

Direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) agents are becoming the anticoagulation strategy of choice. However, their use in the treatment of acute venous thromboembolism (VTE) in morbidly obese patients (bodyweight of > 120 kg or BMI > 40 kg/ m 2) guarded. This is due to the scarce data supporting their use in this population. As a result, the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis recommended against their use in this cohort of patients. New data emerged supporting the use of DOACs in these patients. Hence, we aimed to systematically review the literature exploring the efficacy and safety of these agents compared to warfarin in VTE treatment in morbidly obese patients. A systematic review of PubMed and EMBASE since inception until 01/04/2020. Subsequently, a non-inferiority (NI of 1.75) meta-analysis utilizing the random-effects model. Five observational studies (6585 patients) were included in our meta-analysis. DOAC analogs were non-inferior compared to warfarin in reducing the primary efficacy outcome of VTE recurrence (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.93-1.23) and the primary safety outcome (major bleeding events) (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.54-1.17). Our meta-analysis comprising real-world observational data concludes that the use of DOAC analogs in morbidly obese patients (bodyweight of > 120 kg or BMI > 40 kg/m 2) is non-inferior with regards to efficacy and safety compared to warfarin. This finding helps to resolve the uncertainty associated with the use of DOACs in this cohort. Additionally, it invites for a confirmatory non-inferiority randomized controlled trial testing DOAC vs. Warfarin in this group of patients.

The COVID-19 pandemic is caused by the severe acute-respiratory-syndrome-coronavirus-2 that uses ACE2 as its receptor. Drugs that raise serum/tissue ACE2 levels include ACE inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin-II receptor blockers (ARBs) that are commonly used in patients with hypertension, cardiovascular disease and/or diabetes. These comorbidities have adverse outcomes in COVID-19 patients that might result from pharmacotherapy. Increasing ACE2 could potentially increase the risk of infection, severity or mortality in COVID-19 or it might be protective as it forms angiotensin-(1-7) which exhibits anti-inflammatory/anti-oxidative effects and prevents diabetes-and/or hypertension-induced end-organ damage. Thus, there existed clinical uncertainty. Here, we review studies implicating 15 classes of drugs in increasing ACE2 levels in vivo and the available literature on the clinical safety of these drugs in COVID-19 patients. Further, in a re-analysis of clinical data from a meta-analysis of 9 studies, we show that ACEIs/ARBs usage was not associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality. Literature suggests that ACEIs/ARBs usage generally appears to be clinically safe though their use in severe COVID-19 patients might increase the risk of acute renal injury. For definitive clarity, further clinical and mechanistic studies are needed in assessing the safety of all classes of ACE2 raising medications.