No abstract

Introduction: The rate of secondary attacks of SARS-COV-2 is high among household close contacts. Social distancing, isolation and infection control measures are important for preventing exposure to infection, but insufficient. Aim: The study aimed to evaluate possible role of oral ivermectin as a chemoprophylaxis in asymptomatic family close contacts with COVID-19 patients. Materials and Methods: A prospective interventional randomised open label-controlled study was conducted (registered at clinicaltrials.gov; NCT04422561) during June and July 2020. Two arms were designed according to use of ivermectin. In ivermectin arm, contacts received ivermectin according to Body Weight (BW) on day of the diagnosis of their index case. The non-intervention group received no treatment. Both groups were followed-up for two weeks for development of symptoms suggestive of COVID-19. Results: Ivermectin group included 203 contacts (to 52 index cases) aged 39.75±14.94 years; 52.2% were males. Non-intervention group included 101 contacts (to a total of 24 index cases) aged 37.69±16.96 years, 49.5% were males. Fifteen contacts (7.4%) developed COVID-19 in the ivermectin arm compared to 59 (58.4%) in the non-intervention arm (p<0.001). The protection rate for ivermectin was more prominent in contacts aged less than 60-year-old (6.2% infected compared to 58.7% if no treatment). Ivermectin in the protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection had an OR of 12.533 and 11.445 (compared to nontreatment) in both univariate and multivariate models, respectively. Side effects of ivermectin were reported in 5.4%; they were mild. Conclusion: Ivermectin is suggested to be a promising, effective and safe chemoprophylactic drug in management of COVID-19.

No abstract

Background A few people infected by the coronavirus become seriously ill, while others show little to no signs of the symptoms, or are asymptomatic. Recent researches are pointing to the fact that the ABO blood group might play an important role in a person’s susceptibility and severity of COVID-19 infection. Aim of the study: try to understand the relationship between ABO groups and COVID-19 (susceptibility and severity). Results A total of (507) patients were included in this study. The study population was divided based on the ABO blood group into types A+, A−, B+, AB, O+, and O−. Blood group A was associated with high susceptibility of infection: group A, 381 (75.1%); and less common in group O, 97 (19.2%), group B, 18 (3.5%), and group AB, 11 (2.2%). The severity of COVID-19 infection was common in non-blood group O where (20 (7.1%), 4 (26.7%), 2 (11%), and 1 (9%) in type A+, A−, B+, and AB, respectively), while in type O 3.1%. And mechanically ventilated patients were 22 (5.9%), 2 (13.4%), 2 (11.1%), and 1 (1%). Mortality was high in blood groups A and B, 16 (4.37%) and 1 (5.5%), respectively, while in blood group O, it was 1%. Conclusion The incidence, severity, and mortality of COVID-19 were common in non-blood group O. While blood group O was protected against COVID-19.

Background: Acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) are both common and often fatal. Lack of an accurate prognostic tool that can accurately predict inhospital mortality and help clinicians triaging patients to the appropriate level of care is a challenge. Toward this aim, the Dyspnea, Esinopenia, Consolidation, Acidemia and atrial Fibrillation (DECAF) Score is needed to be assessed against other available scores.Patients and methods: Two hundred patients with primary diagnosis of AECOPD were included. They were subjected to thorough medical history taking, full clinical examination, plain chest X-ray, routine laboratory investigations, ECG, ABG s analysis, assessment of DECAF Score, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II) score, COPD and Asthma Physiology Score (CAPS) and CURB-65 score. Inhospital mortality was recorded.Results: Twenty-five (12.5%) patients died in hospital. The DECAF Score showed an excellent discrimination for inhospital mortality (AUROC = 0.83) and performed significantly better for the prediction of inhospital mortality than: APACHE II Score (AUROC = 0.68, DECAF vs APACHE II p = 0.03); and the COPD and Asthma Physiology Score (CAPS) (AUROC = 0.65, p = 0.01). Furthermore, DECAF was a significantly stronger predictor of inhospital mortality than CURB-65 for the subgroup of patients with radiological consolidation (AUROC = 0.87 vs 0.65, p = 0.02).Conclusion: The DECAF Score is a simple and effective clinical tool that can risk stratify hospitalized patients with AECOPD and could therefore help clinicians managing this fatal condition.