Cardiovascular Involvement in Erdheim-Chester Disease: A Case Report and Review of the Literature

Erdheim-Chester disease (ECD) is a rare, multiorgan, non-Langerhans cell histiocytosis of uncertain origin, characterized by systemic xanthogranulomatous infiltration from CD68+CD1a- histiocytes. Skeletal involvement is present in up to 96% of cases with bilateral osteosclerosis of meta-diaphysis of long bones. Furthermore, in more than 50% of cases there is 1 extraskeletal manifestation. In this case report, we describe an interesting case of ECD with an extensive pan-cardiac and vascular involvement, in addition to skeletal, retro-orbital, and retroperitoneum one.A 44-year-old woman with a long history of exophthalmos referred to our hospital for elective surgical orbital decompression. At preoperative examinations a large pericardial effusion was discovered. Echocardiography, computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) described an inhomogeneous mass involving pericardium and the right heart, abdominal aorta and its main branches and the retroperitoneum, suggestive for a systemic inflammatory disorder. Histological examination on a biopsy sample confirmed the diagnosis of ECD. Radiology showed the pathognomonic long-bone involvement. Surgical orbital decompression was performed and medical therapy with interferon-\u3b1 (INF-\u3b1) was started.Among extraskeletal manifestations of ECD, cardiovascular involvement is often asymptomatic and thus under-diagnosed but linked to poor prognosis. This is why clinician should always look for it when a new case of ECD is diagnosed

Lung Ultrasound Findings Are Associated with Mortality and Need for Intensive Care Admission in COVID-19 Patients Evaluated in the Emergency Department

Lung ultrasound (LUS) has recently been advocated as an accurate tool to diagnose coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia. However, reports on its use are based mainly on hypothesis studies, case reports or small retrospective case series, while the prognostic role of LUS in COVID-19 patients has not yet been established. We conducted a prospective study aimed at assessing the ability of LUS to predict mortality and intensive care unit admission of COVID-19 patients evaluated in a tertiary level emergency department. Patients in our sample had a median of 6 lung areas with pathologic findings (inter-quartile range [IQR]: 6, range: 0-14), defined as a score different from 0. The median rate of lung areas involved was 71% (IQR: 64%, range: 0-100), while the median average score was 1.14 (IQR: 0.93, range: 0-3). A higher rate of pathologic lung areas and a higher average score were significantly associated with death, with an estimated difference of 40.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 4%-68%, p = 0.01) and of 0.47 (95% CI: 0.06-0.93, p = 0.02), respectively. Similarly, the same parameters were associated with a significantly higher risk of intensive care unit admission with estimated differences of 29% (95% CI: 8%-50%, p = 0.008) and 0.47 (95% CI: 0.05-0.93, p = 0.02), respectively. Our study indicates that LUS is able to detect COVID-19 pneumonia and to predict, during the first evaluation in the emergency department, patients at risk for intensive care unit admission and death

Blood Glucose Levels Combined with Triage Revised Trauma Score Improve the Outcome Prediction in Adults and in Elderly Patients with Trauma

Introduction: This study was aimed to assess if combining the evaluation of blood glucose level (BGL) and the Triage Revised Trauma Score (T-RTS) may result in a more accurate prediction of the actual clinical outcome, both in general adult population and in elderly patients with trauma. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study, conducted in the emergency department (ED) of an urban teaching hospital, with an average ED admission rate of 75,000 patients per year. Those excluded: known diagnosis of diabetes, age <18 years old, pregnancy, and mild trauma (classified as isolate trauma of upper or lower limb, in absence of exposed fractures). A combined Revised Trauma Score Glucose (RTS-G) score was obtained adding to T-RTS: two for BGL <160mg/dL (8.9mmol/L); one for BGL 65160mg/dL and < 200mg/dL (11.1mmol/L); and zero for BGL 65 200mg/dL. The primary outcome was a composite of patient's death in ED or admission to intensive care unit (ICU). Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to evaluate the overall performance of T-RTS and of the combined RTS-G score. Results: Among a total of 68,933 traumas, 9,436 patients (4,407 females) were enrolled, aged from 18 to 103 years; 4,288 were aged 6565 years. A total of 577 (6.1%) met the primary endpoint: 38 patients died in ED (0.4%) and 539 patients were admitted to ICU. The T-RTS and BGL were independently associated to primary endpoint at multivariate analysis. The cumulative RTS-G score was significantly more accurate than T-RTS and reached the best accuracy in elderly patients. In general population, ROC area under curve (AUC) for T-RTS was 0.671 (95% CI, 0.661 - 0.680) compared to RTS-G ROC AUC 0.743 (95% CI, 0.734 - 0.752); P <.001. In patients 6565 years, T-RTS ROC AUC was 0.671 (95% CI, 0.657 - 0.685) compared to RTS-G ROC AUC 0.780 (95% CI, 0.768 - 0.793); P <.001. Conclusions: Results showed RTS-G could be used effectively at ED triage for the risk stratification for death in ED and ICU admission of trauma patients, and it could reduce under-triage of approximately 20% compared to T-RTS. Comparing ROC AUCs, the combined RTS-G score performs significantly better than T-RTS and gives best results in patients 6565 years

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin II receptor blockers and prognosis of hypertensive patients hospitalised with COVID-19

Background: Among hypertensive patients, the association between treatment with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB) and the clinical severity of COVID-19, remains uncertain. Aims: To determine whether hypertensive patients hospitalised with COVID-19 are at risk of worse outcomes if on treatment with ACEI or ARB compared to other anti-hypertensive medications. Methods: This is a retrospective study conducted at a single academic medical centre (Fondazione Policlinico A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy) from 1 to 31 March 2020. We compared patients on treatment with an ACEI/ARB (ACEI/ARB group) to patients receiving other anti-hypertensive medications (No-ACEI/ARB group). The end-points of the study were the all-cause in-hospital death and the combination of in-hospital death or need for intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Results: The sample included 166 COVID-19 patients; median age was 74 years and 109 (66%) were men. Overall, 111 (67%) patients were taking an ACEI or ARB. Twenty-nine (17%) patients died during the hospital stay, and 51 (31%) met the combined end-point. After adjustment for comorbidities, age and degree of severity at the presentation, ACEI or ARB treatment was an independent predictor neither of in-hospital death nor of the combination of in-hospital death/need for ICU. No differences were documented between treatment with ACEI compared to ARB. Conclusions: Among hypertensive patients hospitalised for COVID-19, treatment with ACEI or ARB is not associated with an increased risk of in-hospital death

Asthma in patients admitted to emergency department for COVID-19: prevalence and risk of hospitalization

Non

The management of acute venous thromboembolism in clinical practice - study rationale and protocol of the European PREFER in VTE Registry

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a major health problem, with over one million events every year in Europe. However, there is a paucity of data on the current management in real life, including factors influencing treatment pathways, patient satisfaction, quality of life (QoL), and utilization of health care resources and the corresponding costs. The PREFER in VTE registry has been designed to address this and to understand medical care and needs as well as potential gaps for improvement. Methods/design: The PREFER in VTE registry was a prospective, observational, multicenter study conducted in seven European countries including Austria, France Germany, Italy, Spain, Switzerland, and the UK to assess the characteristics and the management of patients with VTE, the use of health care resources, and to provide data to estimate the costs for 12 months treatment following a first-time and/or recurrent VTE diagnosed in hospitals or specialized or primary care centers. In addition, existing anticoagulant treatment patterns, patient pathways, clinical outcomes, treatment satisfaction, and health related QoL were documented. The centers were chosen to reflect the care environment in which patients with VTE are managed in each of the participating countries. Patients were eligible to be enrolled into the registry if they were at least 18 years old, had a symptomatic, objectively confirmed first time or recurrent acute VTE defined as either distal or proximal deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism or both. After the baseline visit at the time of the acute VTE event, further follow-up documentations occurred at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. Follow-up data was collected by either routinely scheduled visits or by telephone calls. Results: Overall, 381 centers participated, which enrolled 3,545 patients during an observational period of 1 year. Conclusion: The PREFER in VTE registry will provide valuable insights into the characteristics of patients with VTE and their acute and mid-term management, as well as into drug utilization and the use of health care resources in acute first-time and/or recurrent VTE across Europe in clinical practice. Trial registration: Registered in DRKS register, ID number: DRKS0000479