Objectives: Few data are available regarding follow up of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) after their discharge. We aim to describe the long-term outcomes of survivors of hospitalization for COVID-19 followed up first at an outpatient facility and subsequently by telephone. Methods: Observational prospective study conducted at a tertiary general hospital. Clinical and radiological progression was assessed and data were recorded on a standardized reporting form. Patients were divided into three groups according to PaO 2 /FiO 2 at hospitalization: PaO 2 /FiO 2 >300, PaO 2 /FiO 2 300e200 and PaO 2 /FiO 2 <200. A logistic multivariate regression model was performed to identify factors associated with persistence of symptoms. Results: For facility follow up, 302 individuals were enrolled. Median follow up was 45 days after discharge; 78% (228/294) of patients had COVID-19-related symptoms (53% asthenia, 56% respiratory symptoms) and 40% (122/302) had residual pulmonary radiographic lesions. PaO 2 /FiO 2 <200 was an independent predictor of persistent dyspnoea (OR 1.87, 95% CI 1.38e2.52, p < 0.0001). PaO 2 /FiO 2 >300 was associated with resolution of chest radiographic lesions (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.42e0.74, p < 0.0001). Fifty per cent of patients required specific medical follow up after the first consultation and were transferred to another physician. A total of 294 patients were contacted for telephone follow up after a median followup time of 7 months. Fifty per cent of patients (147/294) still presented symptoms and 49% (145/294) had psychological disorders. Asthenia was identified in 27% (78/294) and dyspnoea in 10% (28/294) of patients independently of PaO 2 /FiO 2 . Conclusions: Patients with COVID-19 require long-term follow up because of the persistence of symptoms; patients with low PaO 2 /FiO 2 during the acute illness require special attention.

IntroductionThe therapeutic response to statins has a high interindividual variability with respect to reductions in plasma LDL-cholesterol (c-LDL) and increases in HDL cholesterol (c-HDL). Many studies suggest that there is a relationship between the rs20455 KIF6 gene variant (c.2155T> C, Trp719Arg) and a lower risk of cardiovascular disease in patients being treated with statins.AimThe aim of this study was to investigate whether or not the c.2155T> C KIF6 gene variant modulates the hypercholesteremic effects of treatment with simvastatin, atorvastatin, or rosuvastatin.Materials and methodsThis was a prospective, observational and multicenter study. Three hundred and forty-four patients who had not undergone prior lipid-lowering treatment were recruited. Simvastatin, atorvastatin or rosuvastatin were administered. Lipid profiles and multiple clinical and biochemical variables were assessed before and after treatment.ResultsThe c.2155T> C variant of the KIF6 gene was shown to influence physiological responses to treatment with simvastatin and atorvastatin. Patients who were homozygous for the c.2155T> C variant (CC genotype, ArgArg) had a 7.0% smaller reduction of LDL cholesterol levels (p = 0.015) in response to hypolipidemic treatment compared to patients with the TT (TrpTrp) or CT (TrpArg) genotype. After pharmacological treatment with rosuvastatin, patients carrying the genetic variant had an increase in c-HDL that was 21.9% lower compared to patients who did not carry the variant (p = 0.008).ConclusionBeing a carrier of the c.2155T> C variant of the KIF6 gene negatively impacts patient responses to simvastatin, atorvastatin or rosuvastatin in terms of lipid lowering effect. Increasing the intensity of hypolipidemic therapy may be advisable for patients who are positive for the c.2155T> C variant.

BackgroundLipemia, a significant source of analytical errors in clinical laboratory settings, should be removed prior to measuring biochemical parameters. We investigated whether lipemia in serum/plasma samples can be removed using a method that is easier and more practicable than ultracentrifugation, the current reference method.MethodsSeven hospital laboratories in Spain participated in this study. We first compared the effectiveness of ultracentrifugation (108,200×g) and high-speed centrifugation (10,000×g for 15 minutes) in removing lipemia. Second, we compared high-speed centrifugation with two liquid-liquid extraction methods—LipoClear (StatSpin, Norwood, USA), and 1,1,2-trichlorotrifluoroethane (Merck, Darmstadt, Germany). We assessed 14 biochemical parameters: serum/plasma concentrations of sodium ion, potassium ion, chloride ion, glucose, total protein, albumin, creatinine, urea, alkaline phosphatase, gamma-glutamyl transferase, alanine aminotransferase, aspartate-aminotransferase, calcium, and bilirubin. We analyzed whether the differences between lipemia removal methods exceeded the limit for clinically significant interference (LCSI).ResultsWhen ultracentrifugation and high-speed centrifugation were compared, no parameter had a difference that exceeded the LCSI. When high-speed centrifugation was compared with the two liquid-liquid extraction methods, we found differences exceeding the LCSI in protein, calcium, and aspartate aminotransferase in the comparison with 1,1,2-trichlorotrifluoroethane, and in protein, albumin, and calcium in the comparison with LipoClear. Differences in other parameters did not exceed the LCSI.ConclusionsHigh-speed centrifugation (10,000×g for 15 minutes) can be used instead of ultracentrifugation to remove lipemia in serum/plasma samples. LipoClear and 1,1,2-trichlorotrifluoroethane are unsuitable as they interfere with the measurement of certain parameters.

IntroductionThe clinical impact on fertility in carriers of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations remains unclear. The aim of this study was to assess ovarian reserve as measured by anti-mullerian hormone levels in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers, as well as to investigate the impact of anti-mullerian hormone levels on reproductive outcomes.MethodsThe study involved a cohort of women who tested positive for BRCA1 and BRCA2 screening or were tested for a BRCA1 or BRCA2 family mutation. Blood samples were collected for anti-mullerian hormone analysis and the reproductive outcomes were analyzed after a mean follow-up of 9 years. Participants were classified into BRCA mutation-positive versus BRCA mutation-negative. Controls were healthy relatives who tested negative for the family mutation. All patients were contacted by telephone to collect data on reproductive outcomes. Linear regression was used to predict anti-mullerian hormone levels by BRCA status adjusted for a polynomial form of age.ResultsResults of anti-mullerian hormone analysis and reproductive outcomes were available for 135 women (BRCA mutation-negative, n=66; BRCA1 mutation-positive, n=32; BRCA2 mutation-positive, n=37). Anti-mullerian hormone curves according to BRCA status and adjusted by age showed that BRCA2 mutation-positive patients have lower levels of anti-mullerian hormone as compared with BRCA-negative and BRCA1 mutation-positive. Among the women who tried to conceive, infertility was observed in 18.7% of BRCA mutation-negative women, in 22.2% of BRCA1 mutation-positive women, and in 30.8% of BRCA2 mutation-positive women (p=0.499). In the multivariable analysis, there were no factors independently associated with infertility.DiscussionBRCA2 mutation-positive carriers showed more diminished anti-mullerian hormone levels than BRCA1 mutation-positive and BRCA mutation-negative women. However, these differences do not appear to have a negative impact on reproductive outcome. This is important to consider at the time of reproductive counseling in women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations.