Serum Clara cell secretory protein (CC-16) in non-smoking patients with obstructive sleep apnea

Objective This study aimed to determine the association between the severity of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and serum Clara cell protein (CC16) levels in non-smoking patients with OSA. Methods This prospective study included non-smoking patients who presented with sleep-related disturbances and underwent polysomnography (PSG). The serum CC16 level was measured and its relationship to PSG parameters was investigated. Results The study included 128 patients (83 men) with a mean age of 48.4 +/- 11.9. OSA was detected in 66 men (70%) and 29 women (30%) (p = 0.051). The severity of OSA was mild in 32 (25%), moderate in 28 (22%), and severe in 35 (27%) of the patients. There was no significant difference in CC16 levels between the OSA group (1746 +/- 1006) and the OSA negative group (1721 +/- 1201,p = 0.91) levels. There was no significant difference between the CC16 levels of the each four groups. Mean serum CC16 levels were significantly lower in OSA negative men than OSA positive men (777 vs 1462,p = 0.005). No significant difference was observed in CC16 values according to OSA severity in women. Conclusion The serum CC16 level does not differ between non-smoking OSA patients and OSA negative patients.WOS:0005623130000012-s2.0-85081686113PubMed: 3214459

Factors affecting compliance with positive airway pressure therapy in obstructive sleep apnea

Objective To investigate the factors affecting compliance with positive airway pressure (PAP) therapy and establish the relationship between compliance and pulmonary function tests (PFT) in patients with OSA. Material and methods In this prospective study, patients with OSA using PAP devices were questioned about the complaints related to the device. Depression and anxiety scales along with PFT parameters were also assessed. Results Of 98 participants, 63% were men. The mean age was 52.0 +/- 9.6 years. Sixty-seven percent of the patients were compliant with their devices. A significant difference was observed between the proportion of the participants compliant or non-compliant with the device, based on OSA severity (p 0.05). The rates of nasal mask use, not having difficulty in tolerating CPAP, falling asleep, absence of abdominal distension, no facial sores, no air leakage, patients benefiting from the device, reduction in daytime sleepiness, and the belief that they are receiving appropriate therapy in participants compliant with the device were higher than those in non-compliant participants (p < 0.05). The rates of claustrophobia and discomfort due to pressure were significantly lower in patients compliant with the device than in the non-compliant patients (p < 0.05). Conclusion While no relationship was detected between PFT parameters and PAP therapy compliance, significant factors affecting the device compliance were detected.WOS:0006796382000012-s2.0-85111554942PubMed: 3432860

Factors affecting compliance with positive airway pressure therapy in obstructive sleep apnea

Objective To investigate the factors affecting compliance with positive airway pressure (PAP) therapy and establish the relationship between compliance and pulmonary function tests (PFT) in patients with OSA. Material and methods In this prospective study, patients with OSA using PAP devices were questioned about the complaints related to the device. Depression and anxiety scales along with PFT parameters were also assessed. Results Of 98 participants, 63% were men. The mean age was 52.0 +/- 9.6 years. Sixty-seven percent of the patients were compliant with their devices. A significant difference was observed between the proportion of the participants compliant or non-compliant with the device, based on OSA severity (p 0.05). The rates of nasal mask use, not having difficulty in tolerating CPAP, falling asleep, absence of abdominal distension, no facial sores, no air leakage, patients benefiting from the device, reduction in daytime sleepiness, and the belief that they are receiving appropriate therapy in participants compliant with the device were higher than those in non-compliant participants (p < 0.05). The rates of claustrophobia and discomfort due to pressure were significantly lower in patients compliant with the device than in the non-compliant patients (p < 0.05). Conclusion While no relationship was detected between PFT parameters and PAP therapy compliance, significant factors affecting the device compliance were detected.WOS:0006796382000012-s2.0-85111554942PubMed: 3432860

The predictors of long-COVID in the cohort of Turkish Thoracic Society- TURCOVID multicenter registry: One year follow-up results

Objective: To evaluate long-term effects of COVID-19, and to determine the risk factors in long-COVID in a cohort of the Turkish Thoracic Society (TTS)-TURCOVID multicenter registry.Methods: Thirteen centers participated with 831 patients; 504 patients were enrolled after exclusions. The study was designed in three-steps: (1) Phone questionnaire; (2) retrospective evaluation of the medical records; (3) face-to-face visit. Results: In the first step, 93.5% of the patients were hospitalized; 61.7% had a history of pneumonia at the time of diagnosis. A total of 27.1% reported clinical symptoms at the end of the first year. Dyspnea (17.00%), fatigue (6.30%), and weakness (5.00%) were the most prevalent long-term symptoms. The incidence of long-term symptoms was increased by 2.91 fold (95% CI 1.04-8.13, P=0.041) in the presence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and by 1.84 fold (95% CI 1.10-3.10, P=0.021) in the presence of pneumonia at initial diagnosis, 3.92 fold (95% Cl 2.29-6.72, P=0.001) of dyspnea and 1.69 fold (95% Cl 1.02-2.80, P=0.040) fatigue persists in the early-post-treatment period and 2.88 fold (95% Cl 1.52- 5.46, P=0.001) in the presence of emergency service admission in the post COVID period. In step 2, retrospective analysis of 231 patients revealed that 1.4% of the chest X-rays had not significantly improved at the end of the first year, while computed tomography (CT) scan detected fibrosis in 3.4%. In step 3, 138 (27.4%) patients admitted to face-to-face visit at the end of first year; at least one symptom persisted in 49.27% patients. The most common symptoms were dyspnea (27.60%), psychiatric symptoms (18.10%), and fatigue (17.40%). Thorax CT revealed fibrosis in 2.4% patients. Conclusions: COVID-19 symptoms can last for extended lengths of time, and severity of the disease as well as the presence of comorbidities might contribute to increased risk. Long-term clinical issues should be regularly evaluated after COVID-19

Post-discharge mortality in the first wave of COVID-19 in Turkey

© 2022 Asian Pacific Journal of Tropical Medicine.Objective: To determine post-discharge mortality and associated factors of the first-wave multicenter Turkish Thoracic Society (TTD)-TURCOVID study. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we analyzed the data of 18 of 26 centers included in the first TTD-TURCOVID study, and 1 112 cases diagnosed with COVID-19 between 11 March and 31 July 2020 participated in the study. All causes of death after COVID-19 discharge were recorded. Results: The mean age of the patients was (51.07±16.93) years, with 57.6% male patients. In the cohort group, 89.1% of COVID-19 treatment locations were hospital wards, 3.6% were intensive care units (ICUs), and 7.2% were community outpatients. In the longterm follow-up, the in-hospital mortality rate was 3.6% (95% CI 2.64.8), the post-discharge mortality rate was 2.8% (95% CI 1.9-3.9), and the total mortality was 6.3% (95% CI 5.0-7.8). After discharge, 63.3% of mortality overall occurred during the first six months. Mortality rates in post-discharge follow-ups were 12.7% (95% CI 8.0-30.6) in cancer patients, 10.8% (95% CI 6.3-22.9) in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients, 11.1% (95% CI 4.4-22.7) in heart failure patients, 7.8 (95% CI 3.8-14.3) in atherosclerotic heart disease patients, and 2.3% (95% CI 0.8-5.6) in diabetes mellitus patients. In smokers/ex-smokers, the all-mortality rates were higher than in non-smokers. Conclusions: This multicenter study showed that patients over 65 years of age, males, former/active smoker, ICU stay, lung, heart disease, and malignancy should be followed up for at least the first six months after discharge due to COVID-19

COVID-19: vaccination vs. hospitalization

Objective Vaccination is the most efficient way to control the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, but vaccination rates remain below the target level in most countries. This multicenter study aimed to evaluate the vaccination status of hospitalized patients and compare two different booster vaccine protocols. Setting Inoculation in Turkey began in mid-January 2021. Sinovac was the only available vaccine until April 2021, when BioNTech was added. At the beginning of July 2021, the government offered a third booster dose to healthcare workers and people aged > 50 years who had received the two doses of Sinovac. Of the participants who received a booster, most chose BioNTech as the third dose. Methods We collected data from 25 hospitals in 16 cities. Patients hospitalized between August 1 and 10, 2021, were included and categorized into eight groups according to their vaccination status. Results We identified 1401 patients, of which 529 (37.7%) were admitted to intensive care units. Nearly half (47.8%) of the patients were not vaccinated, and those with two doses of Sinovac formed the second largest group (32.9%). Hospitalizations were lower in the group which received 2 doses of Sinovac and a booster dose of BioNTech than in the group which received 3 doses of Sinovac. Conclusion Effective vaccinations decreased COVID-19-related hospitalizations. The efficacy after two doses of Sinovac may decrease over time; however, it may be enhanced by adding a booster dose. Moreover, unvaccinated patients may be persuaded to undergo vaccination

The predictors of COVID-19 mortality in a nationwide cohort of Turkish patients

© 2021 Elsevier LtdThe COVID-19-related death rate varies between countries and is affected by various risk factors. This multicenter registry study was designed to evaluate the mortality rate and the related risk factors in Turkey. We retrospectively evaluated 1500 adults with COVID-19 from 26 centers who were hospitalized between March 11 and July 31, 2020. In the study group, 1041 and 459 cases were diagnosed as definite and highly probable cases, respectively. There were 993 PCR-positive cases (66.2%). Among all cases, 1144 (76.3%) were diagnosed with non-severe pneumonia, whereas 212 (14.1%) had severe pneumonia. Death occurred in 67 patients, corresponding to a mortality rate of 4.5% (95% CI:3.5–5.6). The univariate analysis demonstrated that various factors, including male sex, age ≥65 years and the presence of dyspnea or confusion, malignity, chronic obstructive lung disease, interstitial lung disease, immunosuppressive conditions, severe pneumonia, multiorgan dysfunction, and sepsis, were positively associated with mortality. Favipiravir, hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin were not associated with survival. Following multivariate analysis, male sex, severe pneumonia, multiorgan dysfunction, malignancy, sepsis and interstitial lung diseases were found to be independent risk factors for mortality. Among the biomarkers, procalcitonin levels on the 3rd-5th days of admission showed the strongest associations with mortality (OR: 6.18; 1.6–23.93). This study demonstrated that the mortality rate in hospitalized patients in the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic was a serious threat and that those patients with male sex, severe pneumonia, multiorgan dysfunction, malignancy, sepsis and interstitial lung diseases were at increased risk of mortality; therefore, such patients should be closely monitored

The predictors of COVID-19 mortality in a nationwide cohort of Turkish patients

© 2021 Elsevier LtdThe COVID-19-related death rate varies between countries and is affected by various risk factors. This multicenter registry study was designed to evaluate the mortality rate and the related risk factors in Turkey. We retrospectively evaluated 1500 adults with COVID-19 from 26 centers who were hospitalized between March 11 and July 31, 2020. In the study group, 1041 and 459 cases were diagnosed as definite and highly probable cases, respectively. There were 993 PCR-positive cases (66.2%). Among all cases, 1144 (76.3%) were diagnosed with non-severe pneumonia, whereas 212 (14.1%) had severe pneumonia. Death occurred in 67 patients, corresponding to a mortality rate of 4.5% (95% CI:3.5–5.6). The univariate analysis demonstrated that various factors, including male sex, age ≥65 years and the presence of dyspnea or confusion, malignity, chronic obstructive lung disease, interstitial lung disease, immunosuppressive conditions, severe pneumonia, multiorgan dysfunction, and sepsis, were positively associated with mortality. Favipiravir, hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin were not associated with survival. Following multivariate analysis, male sex, severe pneumonia, multiorgan dysfunction, malignancy, sepsis and interstitial lung diseases were found to be independent risk factors for mortality. Among the biomarkers, procalcitonin levels on the 3rd-5th days of admission showed the strongest associations with mortality (OR: 6.18; 1.6–23.93). This study demonstrated that the mortality rate in hospitalized patients in the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic was a serious threat and that those patients with male sex, severe pneumonia, multiorgan dysfunction, malignancy, sepsis and interstitial lung diseases were at increased risk of mortality; therefore, such patients should be closely monitored

The association of antiviral drugs with COVID-19 morbidity: The retrospective analysis of a nationwide COVID-19 cohort

Copyright © 2022 Babayigit, Kokturk, Kul, Cetinkaya, Atis Nayci, Argun Baris, Karcioglu, Aysert, Irmak, Akbas Yuksel, Sekibag, Baydar Toprak, Azak, Mulamahmutoglu, Cuhadaroglu, Demirel, Kerget, Baran Ketencioglu, Ozger, Ozkan, Ture, Ergan, Avkan Oguz, Kilinc, Ercelik, Ulukavak Ciftci, Alici, Nurlu Temel, Ataoglu, Aydin, Cetiner Bahcetepe, Gullu, Fakili, Deveci, Kose, Tor, Gunluoglu, Altin, Turgut, Tuna, Ozturk, Dikensoy, Yildiz Gulhan, Basyigit, Boyaci, Oguzulgen, Borekci, Gemicioglu, Bayraktar, Elbek, Hanta, Kuzu Okur, Sagcan, Uzun, Akgun, Altinisik, Dursun, Cakir Edis, Gulhan, Oner Eyuboglu, Gultekin, Havlucu, Ozkan, Sakar Coskun, Sayiner, Kalyoncu, Itil and Bayram.Background and objectives: Although several repurposed antiviral drugs have been used for the treatment of COVID-19, only a few such as remdesivir and molnupiravir have shown promising effects. The objectives of our study were to investigate the association of repurposed antiviral drugs with COVID-19 morbidity. Methods: Patients admitted to 26 different hospitals located in 16 different provinces between March 11–July 18, 2020, were enrolled. Case definition was based on WHO criteria. Patients were managed according to the guidelines by Scientific Board of Ministry of Health of Turkey. Primary outcomes were length of hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) requirement, and intubation. Results: We retrospectively evaluated 1,472 COVID-19 adult patients; 57.1% were men (mean age = 51.9 ± 17.7years). A total of 210 (14.3%) had severe pneumonia, 115 (7.8%) were admitted to ICUs, and 69 (4.7%) were intubated during hospitalization. The median (interquartile range) of duration of hospitalization, including ICU admission, was 7 (5–12) days. Favipiravir (n = 328), lopinavir/ritonavir (n = 55), and oseltamivir (n = 761) were administered as antiviral agents, and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ, n = 1,382) and azithromycin (n = 738) were used for their immunomodulatory activity. Lopinavir/ritonavir (β [95% CI]: 4.71 [2.31–7.11]; p = 0.001), favipiravir (β [95% CI]: 3.55 [2.56–4.55]; p = 0.001) and HCQ (β [95% CI]: 0.84 [0.02–1.67]; p = 0.046) were associated with increased risk of lengthy hospital stays. Furthermore, favipiravir was associated with increased risks of ICU admission (OR [95% CI]: 3.02 [1.70–5.35]; p = 0.001) and invasive mechanical ventilation requirement (OR [95% CI]: 2.94 [1.28–6.75]; p = 0.011). Conclusion: Our findings demonstrated that antiviral drugs including lopinavir, ritonavir, and favipiravir were associated with negative clinical outcomes such as increased risks for lengthy hospital stay, ICU admission, and invasive mechanical ventilation requirement. Therefore, repurposing such agents without proven clinical evidence might not be the best approach for COVID-19 treatment

Image_1_The association of antiviral drugs with COVID-19 morbidity: The retrospective analysis of a nationwide COVID-19 cohort.JPEG

Background and objectivesAlthough several repurposed antiviral drugs have been used for the treatment of COVID-19, only a few such as remdesivir and molnupiravir have shown promising effects. The objectives of our study were to investigate the association of repurposed antiviral drugs with COVID-19 morbidity.MethodsPatients admitted to 26 different hospitals located in 16 different provinces between March 11–July 18, 2020, were enrolled. Case definition was based on WHO criteria. Patients were managed according to the guidelines by Scientific Board of Ministry of Health of Turkey. Primary outcomes were length of hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) requirement, and intubation.ResultsWe retrospectively evaluated 1,472 COVID-19 adult patients; 57.1% were men (mean age = 51.9 ± 17.7years). A total of 210 (14.3%) had severe pneumonia, 115 (7.8%) were admitted to ICUs, and 69 (4.7%) were intubated during hospitalization. The median (interquartile range) of duration of hospitalization, including ICU admission, was 7 (5–12) days. Favipiravir (n = 328), lopinavir/ritonavir (n = 55), and oseltamivir (n = 761) were administered as antiviral agents, and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ, n = 1,382) and azithromycin (n = 738) were used for their immunomodulatory activity. Lopinavir/ritonavir (β [95% CI]: 4.71 [2.31–7.11]; p = 0.001), favipiravir (β [95% CI]: 3.55 [2.56–4.55]; p = 0.001) and HCQ (β [95% CI]: 0.84 [0.02–1.67]; p = 0.046) were associated with increased risk of lengthy hospital stays. Furthermore, favipiravir was associated with increased risks of ICU admission (OR [95% CI]: 3.02 [1.70–5.35]; p = 0.001) and invasive mechanical ventilation requirement (OR [95% CI]: 2.94 [1.28–6.75]; p = 0.011).ConclusionOur findings demonstrated that antiviral drugs including lopinavir, ritonavir, and favipiravir were associated with negative clinical outcomes such as increased risks for lengthy hospital stay, ICU admission, and invasive mechanical ventilation requirement. Therefore, repurposing such agents without proven clinical evidence might not be the best approach for COVID-19 treatment.</p