Seroprevalence for norovirus genogroups GII and GIV in captive non-human primates

Noroviruses (NoVs) are a major cause of epidemic gastroenteritis in children and adults. Several pieces of evidence suggest that viruses genetically and antigenically closely related to human NoVs might infect animals, raising public health concerns about potential cross-species transmission. The natural susceptibility of non-human primates (NPHs) to human NoV infections has already been reported, but a limited amount of data is currently available. In order to start filling this gap, we screened a total of 86 serum samples of seven different species of NPHs housed at the Zoological Garden (Bioparco) of Rome (Italy), collected between 2001 and 2017, using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) based on virus-like particles (VLPs) of human GII.4 and GIV.1 NoVs. Antibodies specific for both genotypes were detected with an overall prevalence of 32.6%. In detail, IgG antibodies against GII.4 NoVs were found in 18 Japanese macaques (29.0%, 18/62), a mandrill (10.0%, 1/10), a white-crowned mangabey (16.6%, 1/6) and in an orangutan (33.3%, 1/3). Twelve macaques (19.3%, 12/62), five mandrills (50.0%, 5/10), two chimpanzees (100%, 2/2) and a white-crowned mangabey (16.6%, 1/6) showed antibodies for GIV.1 NoVs. The findings of this study confirm the natural susceptibility of captive NHPs to GII NoV infections. In addition, IgG antibodies against GIV.1 were detected, suggesting that NHPs are exposed to GIV NoVs or to antigenically related NoV strains

Mesenchymal Stromal Cells Do Not Increase the Risk of Viral Reactivation Nor the Severity of Viral Events in Recipients of Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation

Mesenchymal stromal cells (MSC) are tested in clinical trials to treat graft versus host disease (GvHD) after stem cell transplantation (SCT). In vitro studies demonstrated MSC's broad immunosuppressive activity. As infections represent a major risk after SCT, it is important to understand the role of MSC in this context. We analyzed 24 patients (pts) receiving MSC for GvHD in our Unit between 2009 and 2011. We recorded viral reactivations as measured in whole blood with polymerase chain reaction for 100 days following MSC administration. In patients with a documented viral reactivation in the first 3 days following MSCs infusion the frequency of virus-specific IFNgamma-producing cells was determined through enzyme-linked immunospot assay. In our cohort of patients viral reactivation after MSC infusion occurred in 45% of the cases, which did not significantly differ from the incidence in a historical cohort of patients affected by steroid resistant GvHD and treated with conventional immunosuppression. No patient presented severe form of infection. Two cases could be checked for immunological response to viral stimulus and demonstrated virus specific T-cytotoxic lymphocyte activity. In our experience MSC infusion did not prove to trigger more frequent or severer viral reactivations in the post transplantation setting

The mechanics of congenital heart disease: from a morphological trait to the functional echocardiographic evaluation

Advances in pediatric cardiac surgery have resulted in a recent growing epidemic of children and young adults with congenital heart diseases (CHDs). In these patients, congenital defects themselves, surgical operations and remaining lesions may alter cardiac anatomy and impact the mechanical performance of both ventricles. Cardiac function significantly influences outcomes in CHDs, necessitating regular patient follow-up to detect clinical changes and relevant risk factors. Echocardiography remains the primary imaging method for CHDs, but clinicians must understand patients' unique anatomies as different CHDs exhibit distinct anatomical characteristics affecting cardiac mechanics. Additionally, the use of myocardial deformation imaging and 3D echocardiography has gained popularity for enhanced assessment of cardiac function and anatomy. This paper discusses the role of echocardiography in evaluating cardiac mechanics in most significant CHDs, particularly its ability to accommodate and interpret the inherent anatomical substrate in these conditions

Clinical features and outcomes of elderly hospitalised patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, heart failure or both

Background and objective: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and heart failure (HF) mutually increase the risk of being present in the same patient, especially if older. Whether or not this coexistence may be associated with a worse prognosis is debated. Therefore, employing data derived from the REPOSI register, we evaluated the clinical features and outcomes in a population of elderly patients admitted to internal medicine wards and having COPD, HF or COPD + HF. Methods: We measured socio-demographic and anthropometric characteristics, severity and prevalence of comorbidities, clinical and laboratory features during hospitalization, mood disorders, functional independence, drug prescriptions and discharge destination. The primary study outcome was the risk of death. Results: We considered 2,343 elderly hospitalized patients (median age 81 years), of whom 1,154 (49%) had COPD, 813 (35%) HF, and 376 (16%) COPD + HF. Patients with COPD + HF had different characteristics than those with COPD or HF, such as a higher prevalence of previous hospitalizations, comorbidities (especially chronic kidney disease), higher respiratory rate at admission and number of prescribed drugs. Patients with COPD + HF (hazard ratio HR 1.74, 95% confidence intervals CI 1.16-2.61) and patients with dementia (HR 1.75, 95% CI 1.06-2.90) had a higher risk of death at one year. The Kaplan-Meier curves showed a higher mortality risk in the group of patients with COPD + HF for all causes (p = 0.010), respiratory causes (p = 0.006), cardiovascular causes (p = 0.046) and respiratory plus cardiovascular causes (p = 0.009). Conclusion: In this real-life cohort of hospitalized elderly patients, the coexistence of COPD and HF significantly worsened prognosis at one year. This finding may help to better define the care needs of this population

An overview of the Italian forest biodiversity and its conservation level, based on the first outcomes of the 4th Habitat Report ex-Art. 17

In 2019 the 4th Report ex-Art. 17 on the conservation status (CS) of Annex I Habitats of the 92/43/EEC Directive was expected by every EU/28 country, with reference to the period 2013-18. In Italy, the process was in charge to the Italian Institute for Environmental Protection and Research (ISPRA), on behalf of the Ministry for Environment, Land and Sea Protection (MATTM), with the scientific support of the Italian Botanical Society (SBI). A large group of thematic and territorial experts elaborated the available data concerning the 124 types of terrestrial and inland water Habitats present in Italy, 39 of which are represented by Forest Habitats (Group 9),. The main aim of the work was the evaluation of the overall CS of each Habitat by Biogeographic Region (Mediterranean, Continental and Alpine), for a total amount of 294 assessments. A high proportion of these (92, corresponding to 31% of the total) referred to Forest Habitats, including 20 marginal types for which the CS was not requested. The analysis was carried out at different scales: a) administrative territory, through the data contained in the ISPRA database, whose compilation was in charge to the Regions and Autonomous Provinces; b) Natura 2000 site, with the latest updates available (Standard Data Forms updated to 2018); c) national scale, implementing the distribution maps for each Habitat based on the European grid ETRS89-LAEA5210 (10x10 km2 mesh); d) Biogeographic Region, scale of the final assessment. Cartographic outcomes, associated databases and additional data used for the assessments will be available online on the ISPRA Portal as soon as the validation process by the European Commission will be completed. A dedicated archive named "HAB_IT" has been created in the national database "VegItaly" (1), managed by the Italian Society of Vegetation Science, where the phytosociological relevés representative of the various Annex I Habitats in Italy will be archived and freely accessible. An overview of the results regarding the Forest habitats is here provided, including a comparison with the outcomes of the former reporting cycle, the 3rd Report ex-Art. 17 (2). In several cases (e.g. 9120, 91L0), the distribution maps have been remarkably improved due to better knowledge and more fitful interpretation. The conservation status resulted as Favourable (FV) for 6,7%, Inadequate (U1) for 58,7% and Bad (U1) for 32,0% of the 72 assessed forest Habitat types. In no case there was an improvement of the conservation status, while in 6 cases a worsening of the conditions resulted from the data analysis, pointing out the Habitats types with a higher need of action. Similarly to other projects carried out as a team by the network of Annex I Habitat experts of the Italian Botanical Society and the Italian Society for Vegetation Science (e.g. 3, 4), this is another step in the direction of supporting the implementation of the 92/43/EEC "Habitat" Directive in Italy and Europe. On this ground, the high biodiversity of the Italian forest Habitats could be emphasized, however results pointed out that some rare or endemic types (e.g. Alnus cordata or Betula aetnensis-dominated forests) are still scarcely acknowledged by the most prominent EU conservation tools such as the Annex I to the "Habitat" Directive. 1) F. Landucci et al. (2012) Plant Biosyst., 146(4), 756-763 2) P. Genovesi et al. (2014) ISPRA, Serie Rapporti, 194/2014 3) E. Biondi et al. (2009) Società Botanica Italiana, MATTM, D.P.N., http://vnr.unipg.it/habitat/ 4) D. Gigante et al. (2016) Plant Sociology, 53(2), 77-8

Antimicrobial resistance among migrants in Europe: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Rates of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) are rising globally and there is concern that increased migration is contributing to the burden of antibiotic resistance in Europe. However, the effect of migration on the burden of AMR in Europe has not yet been comprehensively examined. Therefore, we did a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify and synthesise data for AMR carriage or infection in migrants to Europe to examine differences in patterns of AMR across migrant groups and in different settings. METHODS: For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, and Scopus with no language restrictions from Jan 1, 2000, to Jan 18, 2017, for primary data from observational studies reporting antibacterial resistance in common bacterial pathogens among migrants to 21 European Union-15 and European Economic Area countries. To be eligible for inclusion, studies had to report data on carriage or infection with laboratory-confirmed antibiotic-resistant organisms in migrant populations. We extracted data from eligible studies and assessed quality using piloted, standardised forms. We did not examine drug resistance in tuberculosis and excluded articles solely reporting on this parameter. We also excluded articles in which migrant status was determined by ethnicity, country of birth of participants' parents, or was not defined, and articles in which data were not disaggregated by migrant status. Outcomes were carriage of or infection with antibiotic-resistant organisms. We used random-effects models to calculate the pooled prevalence of each outcome. The study protocol is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42016043681. FINDINGS: We identified 2274 articles, of which 23 observational studies reporting on antibiotic resistance in 2319 migrants were included. The pooled prevalence of any AMR carriage or AMR infection in migrants was 25·4% (95% CI 19·1-31·8; I2 =98%), including meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (7·8%, 4·8-10·7; I2 =92%) and antibiotic-resistant Gram-negative bacteria (27·2%, 17·6-36·8; I2 =94%). The pooled prevalence of any AMR carriage or infection was higher in refugees and asylum seekers (33·0%, 18·3-47·6; I2 =98%) than in other migrant groups (6·6%, 1·8-11·3; I2 =92%). The pooled prevalence of antibiotic-resistant organisms was slightly higher in high-migrant community settings (33·1%, 11·1-55·1; I2 =96%) than in migrants in hospitals (24·3%, 16·1-32·6; I2 =98%). We did not find evidence of high rates of transmission of AMR from migrant to host populations. INTERPRETATION: Migrants are exposed to conditions favouring the emergence of drug resistance during transit and in host countries in Europe. Increased antibiotic resistance among refugees and asylum seekers and in high-migrant community settings (such as refugee camps and detention facilities) highlights the need for improved living conditions, access to health care, and initiatives to facilitate detection of and appropriate high-quality treatment for antibiotic-resistant infections during transit and in host countries. Protocols for the prevention and control of infection and for antibiotic surveillance need to be integrated in all aspects of health care, which should be accessible for all migrant groups, and should target determinants of AMR before, during, and after migration. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research Imperial Biomedical Research Centre, Imperial College Healthcare Charity, the Wellcome Trust, and UK National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit in Healthcare-associated Infections and Antimictobial Resistance at Imperial College London

Lack of SARS-CoV-2 RNA environmental contamination in a tertiary referral hospital for infectious diseases in Northern Italy

none140noNAnoneColaneri M.; Seminari E.; Piralla A.; Zuccaro V.; Di Filippo A.; Baldanti F.; Bruno R.; Mondelli M.U.; Brunetti E.; Di Matteo A.; Maiocchi L.; Pagnucco L.; Mariani B.; Ludovisi S.; Lissandrin R.; Parisi A.; Sacchi P.; Patruno S.F.A.; Michelone G.; Gulminetti R.; Zanaboni D.; Novati S.; Maserati R.; Orsolini P.; Vecchia M.; Sciarra M.; Asperges E.; Sambo M.; Biscarini S.; Lupi M.; Roda S.; Chiara Pieri T.; Gallazzi I.; Sachs M.; Valsecchi P.; Perlini S.; Alfano C.; Bonzano M.; Briganti F.; Crescenzi G.; Giulia Falchi A.; Guarnone R.; Guglielmana B.; Maggi E.; Martino I.; Pettenazza P.; Pioli di Marco S.; Quaglia F.; Sabena A.; Salinaro F.; Speciale F.; Zunino I.; De Lorenzo M.; Secco G.; Dimitry L.; Cappa G.; Maisak I.; Chiodi B.; Sciarrini M.; Barcella B.; Resta F.; Moroni L.; Vezzoni G.; Scattaglia L.; Boscolo E.; Zattera C.; Michele Fidel T.; Vincenzo C.; Vignaroli D.; Bazzini M.; Iotti G.; Mojoli F.; Belliato M.; Perotti L.; Mongodi S.; Tavazzi G.; Marseglia G.; Licari A.; Brambilla I.; Daniela B.; Antonella B.; Patrizia C.; Giulia C.; Giuditta C.; Marta C.; Rossana D.; Milena F.; Bianca M.; Roberta M.; Enza M.; Stefania P.; Maurizio P.; Elena P.; Antonio P.; Francesca R.; Antonella S.; Maurizio Z.; Guy A.; Laura B.; Ermanna C.; Giuliana C.; Luca D.; Gabriella F.; Gabriella G.; Alessia G.; Viviana L.; Claudia L.; Valentina M.; Simona P.; Marta P.; Alice B.; Giacomo C.; Irene C.; Alfonso C.; Di Martino R.; Di Napoli A.; Alessandro F.; Guglielmo F.; Loretta F.; Federica G.; Alessandra M.; Federica N.; Giacomo R.; Beatrice R.; Maria S.I.; Monica T.; Nepita Edoardo V.; Calvi M.; Tizzoni M.; Nicora C.; Triarico A.; Petronella V.; Marena C.; Muzzi A.; Lago P.; Comandatore F.; Bissignandi G.; Gaiarsa S.; Rettani M.; Bandi C.Colaneri, M.; Seminari, E.; Piralla, A.; Zuccaro, V.; Di Filippo, A.; Baldanti, F.; Bruno, R.; Mondelli, M. U.; Brunetti, E.; Di Matteo, A.; Maiocchi, L.; Pagnucco, L.; Mariani, B.; Ludovisi, S.; Lissandrin, R.; Parisi, A.; Sacchi, P.; Patruno, S. F. A.; Michelone, G.; Gulminetti, R.; Zanaboni, D.; Novati, S.; Maserati, R.; Orsolini, P.; Vecchia, M.; Sciarra, M.; Asperges, E.; Sambo, M.; Biscarini, S.; Lupi, M.; Roda, S.; Chiara Pieri, T.; Gallazzi, I.; Sachs, M.; Valsecchi, P.; Perlini, S.; Alfano, C.; Bonzano, M.; Briganti, F.; Crescenzi, G.; Giulia Falchi, A.; Guarnone, R.; Guglielmana, B.; Maggi, E.; Martino, I.; Pettenazza, P.; Pioli di Marco, S.; Quaglia, F.; Sabena, A.; Salinaro, F.; Speciale, F.; Zunino, I.; De Lorenzo, M.; Secco, G.; Dimitry, L.; Cappa, G.; Maisak, I.; Chiodi, B.; Sciarrini, M.; Barcella, B.; Resta, F.; Moroni, L.; Vezzoni, G.; Scattaglia, L.; Boscolo, E.; Zattera, C.; Michele Fidel, T.; Vincenzo, C.; Vignaroli, D.; Bazzini, M.; Iotti, G.; Mojoli, F.; Belliato, M.; Perotti, L.; Mongodi, S.; Tavazzi, G.; Marseglia, G.; Licari, A.; Brambilla, I.; Daniela, B.; Antonella, B.; Patrizia, C.; Giulia, C.; Giuditta, C.; Marta, C.; D'Alterio, Rossana; Milena, F.; Bianca, M.; Roberta, M.; Enza, M.; Stefania, P.; Maurizio, P.; Elena, P.; Antonio, P.; Francesca, R.; Antonella, S.; Maurizio, Z.; Guy, A.; Laura, B.; Ermanna, C.; Giuliana, C.; Luca, D.; Gabriella, F.; Gabriella, G.; Alessia, G.; Viviana, L.; Meisina, Claudia; Valentina, M.; Simona, P.; Marta, P.; Alice, B.; Giacomo, C.; Irene, C.; Alfonso, C.; Di Martino, R.; Di Napoli, A.; Alessandro, F.; Guglielmo, F.; Loretta, F.; Federica, G.; Albertini, Alessandra; Federica, N.; Giacomo, R.; Beatrice, R.; Maria, S. I.; Monica, T.; Nepita Edoardo, V.; Calvi, M.; Tizzoni, M.; Nicora, C.; Triarico, A.; Petronella, V.; Marena, C.; Muzzi, A.; Lago, P.; Comandatore, F.; Bissignandi, G.; Gaiarsa, S.; Rettani, M.; Bandi, C

Abdominal drainage after elective colorectal surgery: propensity score-matched retrospective analysis of an Italian cohort

background: In italy, surgeons continue to drain the abdominal cavity in more than 50 per cent of patients after colorectal resection. the aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of abdominal drain placement on early adverse events in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. methods: a database was retrospectively analysed through a 1:1 propensity score-matching model including 21 covariates. the primary endpoint was the postoperative duration of stay, and the secondary endpoints were surgical site infections, infectious morbidity rate defined as surgical site infections plus pulmonary infections plus urinary infections, anastomotic leakage, overall morbidity rate, major morbidity rate, reoperation and mortality rates. the results of multiple logistic regression analyses were presented as odds ratios (OR) and 95 per cent c.i. results: a total of 6157 patients were analysed to produce two well-balanced groups of 1802 patients: group (A), no abdominal drain(s) and group (B), abdominal drain(s). group a versus group B showed a significantly lower risk of postoperative duration of stay >6 days (OR 0.60; 95 per cent c.i. 0.51-0.70; P < 0.001). a mean postoperative duration of stay difference of 0.86 days was detected between groups. no difference was recorded between the two groups for all the other endpoints. conclusion: this study confirms that placement of abdominal drain(s) after elective colorectal surgery is associated with a non-clinically significant longer (0.86 days) postoperative duration of stay but has no impact on any other secondary outcomes, confirming that abdominal drains should not be used routinely in colorectal surgery