UNASSIGNED: Patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) are at higher risk of having infections due to receiving disease modifying therapies. The current study was conducted among Iranian MS patients who had experienced at least one episode of COVID-19 infection in order to evaluate the effects of COVID-19 vaccination on symptoms of their infection. Data on demographic information, MS characteristics, COVID-19 infection details, and vaccination status were collected. Statistical analyses, were performed to evaluate the association between vaccination and symptoms of COVID-19 infection.
UNASSIGNED: This cross-sectional study was conducted on confirmed MS patients. Demographic data and COVID-19 related symptoms were gathered via an online questionnaire. Confirmation of patients\' who declared to be vaccinated was checked by their COVID-19 vaccination card.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 236 MS patients participated in the study. The majority were female (79.7%), with a mean age of 36.1 ± 7.9 years. Among the participants, 72.5% had received the COVID-19 vaccine before their first episode of COVID-19 infection. The analysis showed a significant difference in the incidence of respiratory symptoms (P-value: 0.01) and headache (P-value: 0.04) between vaccinated and non-vaccinated individuals. Logistic regression analysis revealed that vaccinated MS patients had lower odds of developing respiratory symptoms (OR:0.29, 95% CI: 0.16 to 0.53, P-value<0.001) or headache (OR: 0.50, 95% CI: 0.25 to 0.98, P-value: 0.04) during their next COVID-19 infection episode. Moreover, MS patients who were receiving immunosuppressive drugs were less likely to have respiratory symptoms (OR:0.35, 95% CI: 0.16 to 0.77, P-value:0.009) but not headache (OR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.30 to 1.60, P-value: 0.39).
UNASSIGNED: COVID-19 vaccination can reduce the incidence of respiratory symptoms and headaches in MS patients during COVID-19 infection episodes. Additionally, patients who are receiving immunosuppressive drugs may benefit from COVID-19 vaccination.

UNASSIGNED: Early prediction of prognosis may help early treatment measures to reduce mortality in critically ill coronavirus disease (COVID-19) patients. The study aimed to develop a mortality prediction model for critically ill COVID-19 patients.
UNASSIGNED: This retrospective study analyzed the clinical data of critically ill COVID-19 patients in an intensive care unit between April and June 2022. Propensity matching scores were used to reduce the effect of confounding factors. A predictive model was built using logistic regression analysis and visualized using a nomogram. Calibration and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to estimate the accuracy and predictive value of the model. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was used to examine the value of the model for clinical interventions.
UNASSIGNED: In total, 137 critically ill COVID-19 patients were enrolled; 84 survived, and 53 died. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses revealed that aspartate aminotransferase (AST), creatinine, and myoglobin levels were independent prognostic factors. We constructed logistic regression prediction models using the seven least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression-selected variables (hematocrit, red blood cell distribution width-standard deviation, procalcitonin, AST, creatinine, potassium, and myoglobin; Model 1) and three independent factor variables (Model 2). The calibration curves suggested that the actual predictions of the two models were similar to the ideal predictions. The ROC curve indicated that both models had good predictive power, and Model 1 had better predictive power than Model 2. The DCA results suggested that the model intervention was beneficial to patients and patients benefited more from Model 1 than from Model 2.
UNASSIGNED: The predictive model constructed using characteristic variables screened using LASSO regression can accurately predict the prognosis of critically ill COVID-19 patients. This model can assist clinicians in implementing early interventions. External validation by prospective large-sample studies is required.

Background and objective COVID-19 is a respiratory disease that is highly contagious and is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Symptoms vary from mild to severe, where most of the patients suffer from high fever, severe headaches, dry cough, and exhaustion, while the less common symptoms are diarrhea, loss of taste, sore throat, and loss of smell. Following recovery from COVID-19, some patients displayed a restricted pattern in the function of their lungs. As a result, documenting the effects of COVID-19 after infection is essential since it provides a better understanding of the long-term consequences of COVID-19. Hence, the objective of the present study was to assess pulmonary functions in post-convalescent COVID-19 patients. Methodology A cross-sectional comparative study was conducted among students and staff members of Gulf Medical University for a duration of one year from 2021 to 2022. Through a convenient sampling method, a total of 100 participants were recruited for the present study, in which pulmonary function tests (PFTs) were performed using a spirometer, and O2 levels were measured using a pulse oximeter. Additionally, respiratory rate and pulse rate were monitored. Results The present study highlighted the comparison of PFTs in post-convalescent COVID-19 patients and concluded that smoker and convalescent COVID-19 groups showed non-significant decrease (p>0.05) in forced vital capacity (FVC) prediction, forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1) prediction, FEV1/FVC%, forced mid-expiratory flow rate (FEF25-75%) prediction, peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) prediction, respiratory rate, and pulse rate in comparison to the control group. In comparison to the convalescent COVID-19 group, convalescent COVID-19 smoking patients showed a significant increase in FEV1/FVC% (p=0.04). Additionally, in comparison to the convalescent COVID-19 group, a significant increase in PEFR prediction values was observed with a p-value of 0.045 and in comparison to the smoker group with a p-value of 0.006. Moreover, oxygen saturation (SpO2) levels demonstrated non-significant changes between the groups. Conclusion The study concluded that for FEV1/FVC% and PEFR prediction values among the convalescent COVID-19 smoking patient group, a significant increase was observed in comparison to the convalescent COVID-19 group. This aids healthcare professionals in amending strategies to prevent consequences resulting from post-COVID-19 infection.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to investigate the impact of sarcopenia and sarcopenic obesity (SO) on the clinical outcome in older patients with COVID-19 infection and chronic disease.
METHODS: We prospectively collected data from patients admitted to Huadong Hospital for COVID-19 infection between November 1, 2022, and January 31, 2023. These patients were included from a previously established comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) cohort. We collected information on their pre-admission condition regarding sarcopenia, SO, and malnutrition, as well as their medical treatment. The primary endpoint was the incidence of intubation, while secondary endpoints included in-hospital mortality rates. We then utilized Kaplan-Meier (K-M) survival curves and the log-rank tests to compare the clinical outcomes related to intubation or death, assessing the impact of sarcopenia and SO on patient clinical outcomes.
RESULTS: A total of 113 patients (age 89.6 ± 7.0 years) were included in the study. Among them, 51 patients had sarcopenia and 39 had SO prior to hospitalization. Intubation was required for 6 patients without sarcopenia (9.7%) and for 18 sarcopenia patients (35.3%), with 16 of these being SO patients (41%). Mortality occurred in 2 patients without sarcopenia (3.3%) and in 13 sarcopenia patients (25.5%), of which 11 were SO patients (28%). Upon further analysis, patients with SO exhibited significantly elevated risks for both intubation (Hazard Ratio [HR] 7.43, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 1.26-43.90, P < 0.001) and mortality (HR 6.54, 95% CI 1.09-39.38, P < 0.001) after adjusting for confounding factors.
CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of sarcopenia or SO was high among senior inpatients, and both conditions were found to have a significant negative impact on the clinical outcomes of COVID-19 infection. Therefore, it is essential to regularly assess and intervene in these conditions at the earliest stage possible.

UNASSIGNED: The botulinum toxin is an extremely potent substance that impacts the nervous system. There has been a rise in cases of medical poisoning associated with it, particularly in the field of plastic and aesthetic procedures, in recent years.
UNASSIGNED: A 51-year-old woman underwent a facial wrinkle reduction procedure with an unauthorized injection of 100 U of botulinum toxin at an unlicensed medical facility six days prior to hospitalization. Over time, her toxicity symptoms intensified, impacting her respiratory muscles, and she did not receive antitoxin treatment. She was concurrently diagnosed with a COVID-19 infection during this period. Nonetheless, she experienced a full recovery 86 days after the injection.
UNASSIGNED: Currently, there is no effective antidote for botulism. Nevertheless, the timely administration of antitoxin can contribute to reducing the duration of the illness, alleviating symptoms, and preventing its recurrence. It is essential to recognize that individual responses may vary, and in this instance, the absence of antitoxin treatment did not significantly prolong the course of the disease. Accurate diagnosis of medical poisoning can be based on injection history and clinical symptoms. Early indications like fatigue and dry mouth warrant particular attention, emphasizing the importance of immediate medical intervention. To address emergencies, the Center for Disease Control (CDC) should maintain an accessible supply of antitoxin. Patients with severe poisoning should be hospitalized until their respiratory muscle strength is fully restored.

Although Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccinations are generally recommended for persons with epilepsy (PwE), a significant vaccination gap remains due to patient concerns over the risk of post-vaccination seizure aggravation (PVSA). In this single-centre, retrospective cohort study, we aimed to determine the early (7-day) and delayed (30-day) risk of PVSA, and to identify clinical predictors of PVSA among PwE. Adult epilepsy patients aged ≥18 years without a history of COVID-19 infection were recruited from a specialty epilepsy clinic in early 2022. Demographic, epilepsy characteristics, and vaccination data were extracted from a centralized electronic patient record. Seizure frequency before and after vaccination, vaccination-related adverse effects, and reasons for or against vaccination were obtained by a structured questionnaire. A total of 786 PwEs were included, of which 27.0% were drug-resistant. At the time of recruitment, 74.6% had at least 1 dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. Subjects with higher seizure frequency (p < 0.0005), on more anti-seizure medications (p = 0.004), or had drug-resistant epilepsy (p = 0.001) were less likely to be vaccinated. No significant increase in seizure frequency was observed in the early (7 days) and delayed phases (30 days) after vaccination in our cohort. On the contrary, there was an overall significant reduction in seizure frequency 30 days after vaccination (1.31 vs. 1.89, t = 3.436; p = 0.001). This difference was seen in both types of vaccine (BNT162b2 and CoronaVac) and drug-resistant epilepsy, but just missed significance for the second dose (1.13 vs. 1.87, t = 1.921; p = 0.055). Only 5.3% had PVSA after either dose of vaccine. Higher pre-vaccination seizure frequency of ≥1 per week (OR 3.01, 95% CI 1.05-8.62; p = 0.04) and drug-resistant status (OR 3.32, 95% CI 1.45-249 7.61; p = 0.005) were predictive of PVSA. Meanwhile, seizure freedom for 3 months before vaccination was independently associated with a lower risk of PVSA (OR 0.11, 95% CI 0.04-0.28; p < 0.0005). This may guide epilepsy treatment strategies to achieve better seizure control for at least 3 months prior to vaccination. As COVID-19 shifts to an endemic phase, this study provides important data demonstrating the overall safety of COVID-19 vaccinations among PwE. Identification of high-risk patients with subsequent individualized approaches in treatment and monitoring strategies may alleviate vaccination hesitancy among PwE.

BACKGROUND: the COVID-19 pandemic has brought to light the intricate interplay between viral infections and preexisting health conditions. In the field of kidney diseases, patients with Autosomal Dominant Polycystic Kidney Disease (ADPKD) and Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) face unique challenges when exposed to the SARS-CoV-2 virus. This study aims to evaluate whether SARS-CoV-2 virus infection impacts renal function differently in patients suffering from ADPKD and CKD when compared to patients suffering only from CKD.
METHODS: clinical data from 103 patients were collected and retrospectively analyzed. We compared the renal function of ADPKD and CKD patients at two distinct time points: before COVID-19 infection (T0) and 1 year after the infection (T1). We studied also a subpopulation of 37 patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 60 mL/min and affected by ADPKD and CKD.
RESULTS: clinical data were obtained from 59 (57.3%) ADPKD patients and 44 (42.7%) CKD patients. At T1, ADPKD patients had significantly higher serum creatinine levels compared to CKD patients, and a significantly lower eGFR was observed only in ADPKD patients with eGFR < 60 mL/min compared to CKD patients (p < 0.01, p < 0.05; respectively). Following COVID-19 infection, ADPKD-CKD patients exhibited significantly higher variation in both median serum creatinine (p < 0.001) and median eGFR (p < 0.001) compared to CKD patients.
CONCLUSIONS: the interplay between COVID-19 and kidney disease is complex. In CKD patients, the relationship between COVID-19 and kidney disease progression is more established, while limited studies exist on the specific impact of COVID-19 on ADPKD patients. Current evidence does not suggest that ADPKD patients are at a higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection; however, in our study we showed a significant worsening of the renal function among ADPKD patients, particularly those with an eGFR < 60 mL/min, in comparison to patients with only CKD after a one-year follow-up from COVID-19 infection.