Introduction To our knowledge, the diagnostic value of the sP-Selectin level in the diagnosis of COVID-19 disease has not yet been investigated. In this study, we aimed to assess this by evaluating the relationship between sP-Selectin level and the clinical severity of COVID-19 infections. Methods A total of 80 patients (50 with mild to moderate and 30 with severe COVID-19 pneumonia), and 60 non-symptomatic healthy volunteers participated in the study. Following serum isolation, sP-Selectin levels were assessed by Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) method. Results The serum sP-Selectin level was 1.7 ng/ml in the control group (1–3.78); 6.24 ng/ml (5.14–7.23) in mild-to-moderate pneumonia group; and 6.72 ng/ml (5.36–8.03) in the severe pneumonia group. Serum sP-Selectin levels in both mild-to-moderate pneumonia and severe pneumonia groups were found to be higher than the control group, with statistical significance ( p = 0.0001 and p = 0.0001, respectively). Receiver operating characteristic analysis (ROC) showed greater area under the curve (AUC) for the serum sP-Selectin levels of the COVID-19 patients (AUC = 0.913, 95% CI = 0.857–0.969; p = 0.0001). The serum sP-Selectin level was found to be 97.5% sensitive and 80% specific at 4.125 ng/ml level for diagnosis (p = 0.0001). The serum sP-Selectin level was found to be 76.9% sensitive and 51.9% specific at the level of 6.12 ng/ml ( p = 0.005) to predict the need for intensive care treatment. Conclusion This study showed that sP-Selectin can be used as a valuable biomarker in both diagnosing and predicting the need for intensive care treatment of COVID-19 infection.

Background Annexin A1 (AnxA1) is an important endogenous glucocoticoid protein that contributes to the suppression of inflammation by limiting the production of neutrophil and pro‐inflammatory cytokines. This study aims to determine the clinical predictivity value of blood AnxA1 levels in patients with mild and severe–critical pneumonia induced by COVID‐19. Methods This study employed a prospective, case–control study design and was conducted at Ankara Training and Research hospital between 10 February 2021 and 15 March 2021. A total of 74 patients (42 of whom had moderate and 32 of whom had severe/critical cases of COVID‐19 disease according to World Health Organization guidelines) and 50 nonsymptomatic healthy volunteers participated in the study. Blood samples were taken from patients at the time of hospital admission, after which serum was isolated. Following the isolation of serum, AnxA1 levels were evaluated using the enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay method. Results The serum AnxA1 levels were measured as 25.5 (18.6‐38.6) ng/ml in the control group, 21.2 (14.7‐32) ng/ml in the moderate disease group, and 14.8 (9.7‐26.8) ng/ml in the severe/critical disease group. Serum AnxA1 levels were significantly lower in the severe/critical disease group compared with the control and moderate disease groups ( P = .01 and P = .0001, respectively). Using receiver operating characteristic analysis, a larger area under the curve (AUC) for the serum AnxA1 levels of the control group (AUC = 0.715, 95% CI = 0.626‐0.803; P = .0001) was calculated compared with the COVID‐19 patient group for the diagnosis of COVID‐19 disease. The AnxA1 level was found to be 80% sensitive and 54.1% specific at a cut‐off level of 18.5 ng/ml for the diagnosis of COVID‐19 disease. Moreover, the AnxA1 level was found to be 69.8% sensitive and 58.1% specific at a cut‐off level of 17.2 ng/ml in predicting the need for intensive care unit (ICU) treatment. Conclusion AnxA1 levels may be a beneficial biomarker in the diagnosis of COVID‐19 pneumonia and in predicting the need for ICU treatment in patients with COVID‐19 pneumonia at the time of admission to the emergency department.

BackgroundRecent studies have investigated the importance of Galetin-3 in inflammation, fibrosis, cell proliferation, cardiac disease, diabetes, and tumor formation. AimsThis study aims to investigate the role of the Galectin-3 level in the diagnosis of COVID-19 pneumonia and the value of the Galectin-3 level in predicting the clinical course of the patient. MethodsThis study employed a prospective, case-control study design and was conducted at Bakircay University Ciğli Training and Research Hospital. A total of 100 patients (40 had moderate and 60 had severe/critical COVID-19 disease according to World Health Organisation guidelines) and 50 non-symptomatic healthy volunteers participated in the study. Blood samples were taken from patients at the time of hospital admission, after which serum was isolated. Following the isolation of serum, Galectin-3 levels were evaluated using the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) method. ResultsThe serum Galectin-3 level was measured as 13.57 (10.9-16.4) ng/mL in the control group, 13.52 (10.69-16.6) ng/mL in the moderate disease group, and 11.65 (6.09-14.33) ng/mL in the severe/critical disease group. Serum Galectin-3 levels were significantly lower in the severe/critical disease group compared to the control and moderate disease groups (p=0.001 and p=0.019, respectively).Using ROC analysis, a larger area under the curve (AUC) for the serum Galectin-3 levels of the control group (AUC=0.622, 95% CI =0.529-0.714; p=0.015) was calculated compared to the COVID-19 patient group for the diagnosis of COVID-19 disease. The Galectin-3 level was found to be 75% sensitive and 50% specific at a cutoff level of 11.3 ng/mL in predicting the need for ICU treatment. ConclusionGalectin-3 levels may be a beneficial biomarker in predicting the clinical severity of COVID-19 disease when used in conjunction with other known biomarkers, at the time of admission to the emergency department (ED).

No abstract

Purpose: Lumbar puncture (LP) is a medical procedure in which a cerebrospinal fluid sample is taken for biochemical, microbiological and cytological examination. The aim of our study was to compare the ultrasonography (USG) method to the palpation method in determining the location of LP. Methods: 203 patients were included in the study. In the study, specifying location manually or with USG was performed by the same emergency medicine resident with USG certificate who completed his 4 th year. LP points were determined and marked firstly by ultrasound and then the manual method while the patients were in the left and right lateral decubitus and sitting positions. Results: The USG method was found to be significantly more successful than the manual method in determining the LP location (p=0.012). The USG method was found to be significantly more successful in determining the LP site than the manual method, especially when the LP site was identified in the sitting position (p=0.031). In other positions, no difference was observed between the two groups (Right p=1, Left p=0.500). Body Mass Index (BMI) affects success during site location with USG (p=0.0001). Likewise, BMI affected the success in identifying the LP site by the manual method (p=0.0001). The USG method was found to be significantly more successful than the manual method in determining the LP site in patients with BMI>25 (p=0.012). Conclusion: During the detection of LP location by palpation or USG, as the BMI increased, the duration of the determination of location increased significantly, too. LP site can be identified by the USG in patients whose LP site cannot be specified by palpation. In addition, the USG is more successful in obese individuals in terms of locating the LP site.