An Unusual Cause of Abdominal Ascites.

Abdominal ascites is most commonly caused by portal hypertension from liver cirrhosis. When present, portal hypertension is associated with an elevated serum-ascites albumin gradient (SAAG) ≥1.1 g/dL. In contrast, a SAAG < 1.1 g/dL suggests malignancy, tuberculosis, pancreatitis, or nephrotic syndrome. Here, we present a case of low SAAG ascites caused by epithelioid peritoneal mesothelioma in a woman with no known liver disease. The diagnosis proved elusive until diagnostic laparoscopy with biopsy was performed

A patient with anaphylaxis to diphenhydramine without cross-reactivity to loratadine

Link_to_subscribed_fulltex

Effectiveness of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac vaccinations against SARS-CoV-2 omicron infection in people aged 60 years or above: a case–control study

BACKGROUND: In view of limited evidence that specifically addresses vaccine effectiveness (VE) in the older population, this study aims to evaluate the real-world effectiveness of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac in older adults during the Omicron BA.2 outbreak. METHODS: This case-control study analyzed data available between January and March 2022 from the electronic health databases in Hong Kong and enrolled individuals aged 60 or above. Each case was matched with up to 10 controls by age, sex, index date and Charlson Comorbidity Index for the four outcomes (COVID-19 infection, COVID-19-related hospitalization, severe complications, and all-cause mortality) independently. Conditional logistic regression was conducted to evaluate VE of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac against COVID-19-related outcomes within 28 days after COVID-19 infection among participants stratified by age groups (60-79, ≥80 years old). RESULTS: A dose-response relationship between the number of vaccine doses received and protection against severe or fatal disease was observed. Highest VE (95% CI) against COVID-19 infection was observed in individuals aged ≥80 who received three doses of BNT162b2 [75.5% (73.1-77.7%)] or three doses of CoronaVac [53.9% (51.0-56.5%)] compared to those in the younger age group who received three doses of BNT162b2 [51.1% (49.9-52.4%)] or three doses of CoronaVac [2.0% (-0.1-4.1%)]. VE (95% CI) was higher for other outcomes, reaching 91.9% (89.4-93.8%) and 86.7% (84.3-88.8%) against COVID-19-related hospitalization; 85.8% (61.2-94.8%) and 89.8% (72.4-96.3%) against COVID-19-related severe complications; and 96.4% (92.9-98.2%) and 95.0% (92.1-96.8%) against COVID-19-related mortality after three doses of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac in older vaccine recipients, respectively. A similar dose-response relationship was established in younger vaccine recipients and after stratification by sex and Charlson Comorbidity Index. CONCLUSION: Both BNT162b2 and CoronaVac vaccination were effective in protecting older adults against COVID-19 infection and COVID-19-related severe outcomes amidst the Omicron BA.2 pandemic, and VE increased further with the third dose

Waning effectiveness against COVID-19-related hospitalisation, severe complications, and mortality with two to three doses of CoronaVac and BNT162b2: a case-control study

BACKGROUND: This study aims to evaluate waning effectiveness against severe and fatal COVID-19 with 2-3 doses of CoronaVac/BNT162b2, where data is limited. METHODS: A case-control study included individuals aged ≥18 years, unvaccinated or received 2-3 doses of CoronaVac/BNT162b2, using electronic healthcare databases in Hong Kong. Those with first COVID-19-related hospitalisation, severe complications, or mortality between 1 January and 15 August 2022 were defined as cases and matched with up-to-10 controls by age, sex, index date, and Charlson Comorbidity Index. Vaccine effectiveness (VE) against COVID-19-related outcomes was estimated at different time intervals from second and third dose vaccination (0-13 up-to 210-240 days) using conditional logistic regression adjusted for comorbidities and medications. RESULTS: By 211-240 days after second dose, VE against COVID-19-related hospitalisation reduced to 46.6% (40.7%-51.8%) for BNT162b2 and 36.2% (28.0%-43.4%) for CoronaVac, and VE against COVID-19-related mortality were 73.8% (55.9%-84.4%) and 76.6% (60.8%-86.0%). After third dose, VE against COVID-19-related hospitalisation decreased from 91.2% (89.5%-92.6%) for BNT162b2 and 76.7% (73.7%-79.4%) for CoronaVac at 0-13 days, to 67.1% (60.4%-72.6%) and 51.3% (44.2%-57.5%) at 91-120 days. VE against COVID-19-related mortality for BNT162b2 remained high from 0-13 days [98.2% (95.0%-99.3%)] to 91-120 days [94.6% (77.7%-98.7%)], and for CoronaVac reduced from 0-13 days [96.7% (93.2%-98.4%)] to 91-120 days [86.4% (73.3%-93.1%)]. CONCLUSIONS: Significant risk reduction against COVID-19-related hospitalisation and mortality after CoronaVac or BNT162b2 vaccination was observed for >240 and >120 days after second and third dose compared to unvaccinated, despite significant waning over time. Timely administration of booster doses could provide higher levels of protection

Comparing hybrid and regular COVID-19 vaccine-induced immunity against the Omicron epidemic

Evidence on the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines among people who recovered from a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection is warranted to inform vaccination recommendations. Using the territory-wide public healthcare and vaccination records of over 2.5 million individuals in Hong Kong, we examined the potentially differential risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospitalization, and mortality between those receiving two homologous doses of BNT162b2 or CoronaVac versus those with a previous infection receiving only one dose amid the Omicron epidemic. Results show a single dose after a SARS-CoV-2 infection is associated with a lower risk of infection (BNT162b2: adjusted incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 0.475, 95% CI: 0.410–0.550; CoronaVac: adjusted IRR = 0.397, 95% CI: 0.309–0.511) and no significant difference was detected in the risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization or mortality compared with a two-dose vaccination regimen. Findings support clinical recommendations that those with a previous infection could receive a single dose to gain at least similar protection as those who received two doses without a previous infection

The Spill-Over Impact of the Novel Coronavirus-19 Pandemic on Medical Care and Disease Outcomes in Non-communicable Diseases: A Narrative Review

OBJECTIVES: The coronavirus-19 (COVID-19) pandemic has claimed more than 5 million lives worldwide by November 2021. Implementation of lockdown measures, reallocation of medical resources, compounded by the reluctance to seek help, makes it exceptionally challenging for people with non-communicable diseases (NCD) to manage their diseases. This review evaluates the spill-over impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on people with NCDs including cardiovascular diseases, cancer, diabetes mellitus, chronic respiratory disease, chronic kidney disease, dementia, mental health disorders, and musculoskeletal disorders. METHODS: Literature published in English was identified from PubMed and medRxiv from January 1, 2019 to November 30, 2020. A total of 119 articles were selected from 6,546 publications found. RESULTS: The reduction of in-person care, screening procedures, delays in diagnosis, treatment, and social distancing policies have unanimously led to undesirable impacts on both physical and psychological health of NCD patients. This is projected to contribute to more excess deaths in the future. CONCLUSION: The spill-over impact of COVID-19 on patients with NCD is just beginning to unravel, extra efforts must be taken for planning the resumption of NCD healthcare services post-pandemic

Effectiveness of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac vaccinations against mortality and severe complications after SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.2 infection: a case–control study

Data regarding protection against mortality and severe complications after Omicron BA.2 infection with CoronaVac and BNT162b2 vaccines remains limited. We conducted a case–control study to evaluate the risk of severe complications and mortality following 1–3 doses of CoronaVac and BNT162b2 using electronic health records database. Cases were adults with their first COVID-19-related mortality or severe complications between 1 January and 31 March 2022, matched with up-to 10 controls by age, sex, index date, and Charlson Comorbidity Index. Vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19-related mortality and severe complications by type and number of doses was estimated using conditional logistic regression adjusted for comorbidities and medications. Vaccine effectiveness (95% CI) against COVID-19-related mortality after two doses of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac were 90.7% (88.6–92.3) and 74.8% (72.5–76.9) in those aged ≥65, 87.6% (81.4–91.8) and 80.7% (72.8–86.3) in those aged 50–64, 86.6% (71.0–93.8) and 82.7% (56.5–93.1) in those aged 18–50. Vaccine effectiveness against severe complications after two doses of BNT162b2 and CoronaVac were 82.1% (74.6–87.3) and 58.9% (50.3–66.1) in those aged ≥65, 83.0% (69.6–90.5) and 67.1% (47.1–79.6) in those aged 50–64, 78.3% (60.8–88.0) and 77.8% (49.6–90.2) in those aged 18–50. Further risk reduction with the third dose was observed especially in those aged ≥65 years, with vaccine effectiveness of 98.0% (96.5–98.9) for BNT162b2 and 95.5% (93.7–96.8) for CoronaVac against mortality, 90.8% (83.4–94.9) and 88.0% (80.8–92.5) against severe complications. Both CoronaVac and BNT162b2 vaccination were effective against COVID-19-related mortality and severe complications amidst the Omicron BA.2 pandemic, and risks decreased further with the third dose

Survival of syngeneic and allogeneic iPSC–derived neural precursors after spinal grafting in minipigs

The use of autologous (or syngeneic) cells derived from induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) holds great promise for future clinical use in a wide range of diseases and injuries. It is expected that cell replacement therapies using autologous cells would forego the need for immunosuppression, otherwise required in allogeneic transplantations. However, recent studies have shown the unexpected immune rejection of undifferentiated autologous mouse iPSCs after transplantation. Whether similar immunogenic properties are maintained in iPSC-derived lineage-committed cells (such as neural precursors) is relatively unknown. We demonstrate that syngeneic porcine iPSC-derived neural precursor cell (NPC) transplantation to the spinal cord in the absence of immunosuppression is associated with long-term survival and neuronal and glial differentiation. No tumor formation was noted. Similar cell engraftment and differentiation were shown in spinally injured transiently immunosuppressed swine leukocyte antigen (SLA)–mismatched allogeneic pigs. These data demonstrate that iPSC-NPCs can be grafted into syngeneic recipients in the absence of immunosuppression and that temporary immunosuppression is sufficient to induce long-term immune tolerance after NPC engraftment into spinally injured allogeneic recipients. Collectively, our results show that iPSC-NPCs represent an alternative source of transplantable NPCs for the treatment of a variety of disorders affecting the spinal cord, including trauma, ischemia, or amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

Effectiveness of molnupiravir vs nirmatrelvir-ritonavir in non-hospitalised and hospitalised patients with COVID-19: a target trial emulation study

BACKGROUND: Molnupiravir and nirmatrelvir-ritonavir have emerged as promising options for COVID-19 treatment, but direct comparisons of their effectiveness have been limited. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of these two oral antiviral drugs in non-hospitalised and hospitalised patients with COVID-19. METHODS: In this target trial emulation study, we used data from a territory-wide electronic health records database on eligible patients aged ≥18 years infected with COVID-19 who were prescribed either molnupiravir or nirmatrelvir-ritonavir within five days of infection between 16 March 2022 and 31 December 2022 in the non-hospitalised and hospitalised settings in Hong Kong. A sequence trial approach and 1:1 propensity score matching was applied based on age, sex, number of COVID-19 vaccine doses received, Charlson comorbidity index, comorbidities, and drug use within past 90 days. Cox regression adjusted with patients' characteristics was used to compare the risk of effectiveness outcomes (all-cause mortality, intensive care unit (ICU) admission or ventilatory support and hospitalisation) between groups. Subgroup analyses included age (<70; ≥70 years); sex, Charlson comorbidity index (<4; ≥4), and number of COVID-19 vaccine doses received (0-1; ≥2 doses). FINDINGS: A total of 63,522 non-hospitalised (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 31,761; molnupiravir: 31,761) and 11,784 hospitalised (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 5892; molnupiravir: 5892) patients were included. In non-hospitalised setting, 336 events of all-cause mortality (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 71, 0.22%; molnupiravir: 265, 0.83%), 162 events of ICU admission or ventilatory support (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 71, 0.22%; molnupiravir: 91, 0.29%), and 4890 events of hospitalisation (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 1853, 5.83%; molnupiravir: 3037, 9.56%) were observed. Lower risks of all-cause mortality (absolute risk reduction (ARR) at 28 days: 0.61%, 95% CI: 0.50-0.72; HR: 0.43, 95% CI: 0.33-0.56) and hospital admission (ARR at 28 days: 3.73%, 95% CI: 3.31-4.14; HR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.67-0.76) were observed in nirmatrelvir-ritonavir users compared to molnupiravir users. In hospitalised setting, 509 events of all-cause mortality (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 176, 2.99%; molnupiravir: 333, 5.65%), and 50 events of ICU admission or ventilatory support (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir: 26, 0.44%; molnupiravir: 24, 0.41%) were observed. Risk of all-cause mortality was lower for nirmatrelvir-ritonavir users than for molnupiravir users (ARR at 28 days: 2.66%, 95% CI: 1.93-3.40; HR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.49-0.71). In both settings, there was no difference in the risk of intensive care unit admission or ventilatory support between groups. The findings were consistent across all subgroup's analyses. INTERPRETATION: Our analyses suggest that nirmatrelvir-ritonavir was more effective than molnupiravir in reducing the risk of all-cause mortality in both non-hospitalised and hospitalised patients. When neither drug is contraindicated, nirmatrelvir-ritonavir may be considered the more effective option