Objectives Respiratory co‐infections have the potential to affect the diagnosis and treatment of COVID‐19 patients. This meta‐analysis was performed to analyze the prevalence of respiratory pathogens (viruses and atypical bacteria) in COVID‐19 patients. Methods This review was consistent with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA). Searched databases included: PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and grey literature. Studies with a series of SARS‐CoV‐2‐positive patients with additional respiratory pathogen testing were included. Independently, 2 authors extracted data and assessed quality of evidence across all studies using Cochrane's Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology and within each study using the Newcastle Ottawa scale. Data extraction and quality assessment disagreements were settled by a third author. Pooled prevalence of co‐infections was calculated using a random‐effects model with univariate meta‐regression performed to assess the effect of study subsets on heterogeneity. Publication bias was evaluated using funnel plot inspection, Begg's correlation, and Egger's test. Results Eighteen retrospective cohorts and 1 prospective study were included. Pooling of data (1880 subjects) showed an 11.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 6.9–17.4, I2 = 0.92) pooled prevalence of respiratory co‐pathogens. Studies with 100% co‐pathogen testing (1210 subjects) found a pooled prevalence of 16.8% (95% CI = 8.1–27.9, I2 = 0.95) and studies using serum antibody tests (488 subjects) found a pooled prevalence of 26.8% (95%, CI = 7.9–51.9, I2 = 0.97). Meta‐regression found no moderators affecting heterogeneity. Conclusion Co‐infection with respiratory pathogens is a common and potentially important occurrence in patients with COVID‐19. Knowledge of the prevalence and type of co‐infections may have diagnostic and management implications.

BackgroundControversy still exists on the effect that obesity has on the morbidity and mortality in severe acute pancreatitis (SAP). The primary purpose of this study was to compare the mortality rate of obese versus nonobese patients admitted to the ICU for SAP. Secondary goals were to assess the potential risk factors for abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) and to investigate the performance of validated scoring systems to predict ACS and in-hospital mortality.MethodsA retrospective cohort of adults admitted to the ICU for SAP was stratified by their body mass index (BMI) as obese and nonobese. The rates of morbidity, mortality, and ACS were compared by univariate and multivariate regression analyses. Areas under the curve (AUC) were used to evaluate the discriminating performance of severity scores and other selected variables to predict mortality and the risk of ACS.ResultForty-five patients satisfied the inclusion criteria and 24 (53 %) were obese with similar characteristics to nonobese patients. Among all the subjects, 11 (24 %) died and 16 (35 %) developed ACS. In-hospital mortality was significantly lower for obese patients (12.5 vs. 38 %; P = 0.046) even though they seemed to develop ACS more frequently (41 vs. 28 %; P = 0.533). At multivariable analysis, age was the most significant factor associated with in-hospital mortality (odds ratio (OR) = 1.273; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.052–1.541; P = 0.013) and APACHE II and Glasgow-Imrie for the development of ACS (OR = 1.143; 95 % CI 1.012–1.292; P = 0.032 and OR = 1.221; 95 % CI 1.000–1.493; P = 0.05) respectively. Good discrimination for in-hospital mortality was observed for patients’ age (AUC = 0.846) and number of comorbidities (AUC = 0.801). ACS was not adequately predicted by any of the clinical severity scores (AUC = 0.548–0.661).ConclusionsPatients’ age was the most significant factor associated with mortality in patients affected by SAP. Higher APACHE II and Glasgow-Imrie scores were associated with the development of ACS, but their discrimination performance was unsatisfactory.

Background:The purpose of this research was to examine the morbidity, mortality and rate of recurrent bowel obstruction associated with the treatment of small bowel obstruction (SBO) in older adults. Methods:We prospectively enrolled all patients 70 years or older with an SBO who were admitted to a tertiary care teaching centre between Jul. 1, 2011, and Sept. 30, 2012. Data regarding presentation, investigations, treatment and outcomes were collected. Results:Of the 104 patients admitted with an SBO, 49% were managed nonoperatively and 51% underwent surgery. Patients who underwent surgery experienced more complications (64% v. 27%, p = 0.002) and stayed in hospital longer (10 v. 3 d, p < 0.001) than patients managed nonoperatively. Nonoperative management was associated with a high rate of recurrent SBO: 31% after a median follow-up of 17 months. Of the patients managed operatively, 60% underwent immediate surgery and 40% underwent surgery after attempted nonoperative management. Patients in whom nonoperative management failed underwent surgery after a median of 2 days, and 89% underwent surgery within 5 days. The rate of bowel resection was high (29%) among those who underwent delayed surgery. Surgery after failed nonoperative management was associated with a mortality of 14% versus 3% for those who underwent immediate surgery; however, this difference was not significant. Conclusion:These data suggest that some elderly patients with SBO may be waiting too long for surgery.Contexte : Le but de cette recherche était d'analyser la morbidité, la mortalité et le taux de récurrence de l'occlusion intestinale associés au traitement de l'occlusion intestinale grêle (OIG) chez des adultes âgés.Méthodes : Nous avons inscrit de manière prospective tous les patients de 70 ans ou plus présentant une OIG qui ont été admis dans un établissement de soins tertiaires entre le 1er juillet 2011 et le 30 septembre 2012. Nous avons recueilli les données concernant les tableaux cliniques, les épreuves diagnostiques, les traitements et leurs résultats. Résultats :Parmi les 104 patients admis pour OIG, 49 % ont été traités non chirurgicalement et 51 % ont subi une intervention chirurgicale. Les patients soumis à la chirurgie ont présenté davantage de complications (64 % c. 27 %, p = 0,002) et ont séjourné plus longtemps à l'hôpital (10 j. c. 3 j., p < 0,001) comparativement aux patients qui n'ont pas été opérés. La prise en charge non chirurgicale a été associée à un taux élevé de récurrences de l'OIG : 31 % après un suivi médian de 17 mois. Parmi les patients opérés, 60 % ont subi une chirurgie immédiate et 40 % ont subi leur chirurgie après une tentative de prise en charge non chirurgicale. Les patients chez qui la prise en charge non chirurgicale a échoué ont subi leur chirurgie après une période médiane de 2 jours et 89 % en l'espace de 5 jours. Le taux de résection intestinale a été élevé (29 %) chez ceux dont la chirurgie a été retardée. La chirurgie après une intervention non chirurgicale infructueuse a été associée à un taux d...

This study was performed to analyze the accuracy of health‐related information on Twitter during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic. Authors queried Twitter on three dates for information regarding COVID‐19 and five terms (cure, emergency or emergency room, prevent or prevention, treat or treatments, vitamins or supplements) assessing the first 25 results with health‐related information. Tweets were authoritative if written by governments, hospitals, or physicians. Two physicians assessed each tweet for accuracy. Metrics were compared between accurate and inaccurate tweets using χ 2 analysis and Mann–Whitney U . A total of 25.4% of tweets were inaccurate. Accurate tweets were more likely written by Twitter authenticated authors (49.8% vs. 20.9%, 28.9% difference, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 17.7–38.2) with accurate tweet authors having more followers (19,491 vs. 7346; 3446 difference, 95% CI: 234–14,054) versus inaccurate tweet authors. Likes, retweets, tweet length, botometer scores, writing grade level, and rank order did not differ between accurate and inaccurate tweets. We found 1/4 of health‐related COVID‐19 tweets inaccurate indicating that the public should not rely on COVID‐19 health information written on Twitter. Ideally, improved government regulatory authority, public/private industry oversight, independent fact‐checking, and artificial intelligence algorithms are needed to ensure inaccurate information on Twitter is removed.