No abstract

Aim of this study is to investigate the course of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), in our cohort of familial Mediterranean fever (FMF) patients in means of mortality, admission to hospital and/or intensive care unit and length of hospital stay.A retrospective cohort was formed from patients who have previously been followed with a diagnosis of FMF. Patients of this cohort were retrospectively evaluated for a positive severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV 2) polymerized chain reaction (PCR) test result and information regarding hospitalisation, intensive care unit admission and mortality were collected from medical records.Out of a total 496 FMF patients, 34 were detected to have a positive SARS-CoV 2 PCR test. Eighty-five point three percent of these patients were under colchicine treatment and 17.6% were under interleukin (IL)—1 inhibitor treatment. Eight of the 34 patients (23.9%) were found to be hospitalized, one of them was admitted to the intensive care unit and died thereafter (2.9%). An increasing trend in the frequency of comorbid diseases (presence of at least one comorbidity 64.7% in all patients vs 75.0% in hospitalized patients) and IL-1 inhibitor usage (17.6% in all patients vs 50.0% in hospitalized patients) was observed in hospitalized patients.Rates of comorbid diseases and IL-1 inhibitor use for FMF were observed to be increased in FMF patients hospitalized for COVID-19.

No abstract

Background Intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIg) have been used in management of severe Covid-19. Here in this study, we report our single-center experience regarding IVIg treatment in management of severe Covid-19. Materials and Method Among hospitalized adult Covid-19 patients between April 1 and December 31, 2020, patients with confirmed diagnosis of Covid-19 who had Brescia-COVID respiratory severity scale score ≥3, hyperinflammation and received IVIg treatment in addition to standard of care were retrospectively investigated. We grouped IVIg recipients into three according to reasons for IVIg administration: Group 1 patients requiring anti-inflammatory treatment but complicated with secondary infection and/or sepsis , group 2 patients with Covid-19 related complications including progressive disease refractory to other anti-inflammatory agents, myocarditis, adult multisystem inflammatory syndrome, hemophagocytic lymphohystiocytosis like syndrome and group 3 patients with other complications non-specific to Covid-19. Mortality and clinical data was compared among groups. Results A total of 46 IVIg recipients were enrolled. Group 1 comprised 17 (36.9%), group 2 comprised 18 (39.1%) and group 3 comprised 11 (23.9%) patients. No significant differences in means of age, gender and comorbidities were observed among groups. Mortality was significantly lower in group 3 when compared to group 1 (64.7 % vs 18.2 %, p=0.016) and close to significance when compared to group 2 (50 % vs 18.2 % p=0.087). Conclusions IVIg seemed to be used mostly in severe, refractory and complicated cases in our population. As a rescue agent in severe cases refractory to other anti-inflammatory strategies, 33.7% survival rate was observed with IVIg.

COVID‐19 pandemic has been affecting the whole world by increasing morbidity and mortality rates day by day. Treatment algorithms have been attempted as parallel to the increasing experience with COVID‐19. In the pathogenesis of this virus pro‐inflammatory cytokine storm has been called to have the main role. The right timing should be made for treatments. We proposed IL‐ 1 blocking by anakinra in seventeen COVID‐19 patients at high risk of worsening. Patients were assessed according to HScore, SOFA (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score = SOFA), MuLBSTA Score (multilobular infiltration, hypo‐lymphocytosis, bacterial coinfection, smoking history, hyper‐tension, and age), Brescia‐COVID respiratory severity scale (BCRSS). In our study, the mortality rate was 17.6%. Consequently, 1 (5.9%) patient was receiving low‐flow oxygen supply, 3 (17.6%) patients needed no longer oxygen supply and 10 (58.8%) patients were discharged from the hospital. According to the results of our study in the manner of general evaluation; we found that SOFA, MuLBSTA, and BCRSS scores were one step ahead according to HScore being insufficient to determine early phases of the disease. In our opinion, the prominent factors that emphasize the use of anakinra could be listed as comorbidity, risk, or presence of secondary infection, ongoing malignant disease. However, the other factors that enhance the use of anakinra in the situation of viremia also could be sorted as no response to full dose antivirals, antiviral side effects, or no success to antiviral treatment.

Aim: To determine frequency of adverse events and attacks related to vaccination in recipients of CoronaVac and BNT162b2 in familial Mediterranean fever (FMF) patients, and to search whether history of prior COVID-19 or a booster dose increases occurrence of adverse events/attacks. Methods: FMF patients were surveyed for administration of any COVID-19 vaccine and vaccine-related adverse events or FMF attacks. Demographic, clinical, vaccinerelated data, history of COVID-19 infection before or after vaccination, adherence to FMF treatment during vaccination were collected.Results: A total of 161 vaccinated FMF patients were included. Ninety-three patients out of 161 had reported suffering from an adverse event/attack after a vaccine dose. There were 54.7% of BNT162b2 recipients who reported any adverse event after any vaccine dose in comparison to 29.9% of CoronaVac recipients (P < .001). There were 22.2% of BNT162b2 recipients who reported suffering from a FMF attack within 1 month after vaccination in comparison to 19.4% of CoronaVac recipients (P = .653).When patients with or without adverse event/attack were compared, no significant differences were observed in means of demographics, comorbid diseases, disease duration, total vaccine doses, or treatments adhered to for FMF. Rates of adverse events/ attacks were similar between patients with and without prior COVID-19. In booster recipients, adverse events/attacks were most frequent after the booster dose. Conclusions:A considerable number of FMF patients suffered from vaccine-related adverse events/attacks, particularly with BNT162b2. No serious events or mortalities due to vaccination were detected. Demographics, clinical characteristics and prior history of vaccination did not significantly affect these results. We observed an increased rate of adverse events/attacks with booster dose administration.

Background Positioning of the patient is a common strategy to increase oxygenation in the management of acute respiratory distress syndrome. The aim of this study is to demonstrate the effects of our positioning approach on disease outcomes in COVID‐19 patients with respiratory failure, by comparing patients compliant to positioning and not. Methods COVID‐19 patients who were admitted to our internal medicine inpatient clinic and developed hypoxaemia and underwent positioning during hospital stay were retrospectively investigated for compliance to positioning. Rates of mortality, intensive care unit admission, intubation, initiation of anti‐inflammatory treatment and length of hospital stay were compared between patients with and without compliance to positioning. Results A total of 144 patients were enrolled in this study (97 compliant with positioning, 47 incompliant with positioning). Rates of ICU admission (7.2% vs 25.5%, p < .001), anti‐inflammatory treatment initiation (68% vs 97.9%, p < .001) and length of hospital stay (5 (2‐16) days vs 12 (3‐20) days, p < .001) were significantly reduced in patients compliant with positioning. Conclusion Prone or other positioning should be considered in patients with noninvasive oxygen support for the potential to reduce rates of intensive care unit admissions, airway interventions, anti‐inflammatory treatment initiation and mortality.

The aim of this study is to evaluate development of side effects, thrombotic or obstetric complications in our antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) patient group, after vaccination against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). A cohort was formed from patients who have previously been followed up with a diagnosis of APS. The patients of the cohort were evaluated retrospectively to find out if they were vaccinated with CoronaVac and/or BNT162b2 vaccines which are being used in our country. To evaluate the side effects seen after the vaccination, the information was collected by the patients in their outpatient appointments or making a phone call. Thirty‐five APS patients who had received at least 1 dose of any of the COVID‐19 vaccines were included in the study. Median (min–max) number of vaccine doses per patient was 2 (1–3). Eleven patients had a booster dose after primary vaccination. Twenty patients were ever vaccinated with BNT162b2 and 18 with CoronaVac. Among BNT162b2 recipients, 9 (45.0%) and among CoronaVac recipients 15 (42.9%) reported an adverse event after a vaccine administration. The most common adverse events were myalgia and malaise after any dose of both vaccines. No vaccine‐related new thrombotic events or APS flares were observed. Our results were comparable with those reported in the literature. Comprehensive large‐scale studies are needed for more accurate results on the evaluation of side effects after COVID‐19 vaccination in APS patients.