Search

Circulating cell-free DNA (ccfDNA) of mitochondrial origin (ccf-mtDNA) consists of a minor fraction of total ccfDNA in blood or in other biological fluids. Aberrant levels of ccf-mtDNA have been observed in many pathologies. Here, we introduce a simple and effective standardized Taqman probe-based dual-qPCR assay for the simultaneous detection and relative quantification of nuclear and mitochondrial fragments of ccfDNA. Three pathologies of major burden, one malignancy (Breast Cancer, BrCa), one inflammatory (Osteoarthritis, OA) and one metabolic (Type 2 Diabetes, T2D), were studied. Higher levels of ccf-mtDNA were detected both in BrCa and T2D in relation to health, but not in OA. In BrCa, hormonal receptor status was associated with ccf-mtDNA levels. Machine learning analysis of ccf-mtDNA datasets was used to build biosignatures of clinical relevance. (A) a three-feature biosignature discriminating between health and BrCa (AUC: 0.887) and a five-feature biosignature for predicting the overall survival of BrCa patients (Concordance Index: 0.756). (B) a five-feature biosignature stratifying among T2D, prediabetes and health (AUC: 0.772); a five-feature biosignature discriminating between T2D and health (AUC: 0.797); and a four-feature biosignature identifying prediabetes from health (AUC: 0.795). (C) a biosignature including total plasma ccfDNA with very high performance in discriminating OA from health (AUC: 0.934). Aberrant ccf-mtDNA levels could have diagnostic/prognostic potential in BrCa and Diabetes, while the developed multiparameter biosignatures can add value to their clinical management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is a paucity of reporting outcomes of complex aortic aneurysm treatment such as juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms, where additional techniques to preserve renal artery perfusion are required. Methods: Retrospective analysis of consecutive patients who underwent emergent and elective aortic repair with fenestrated PMEGs between March 2019 and January 2023. Endpoints were technical success, reinterventions, secondary reinterventions and target vessel patency. Results: Forty-seven target vessels in 37 patients (23 male, median age 75 years) were targeted, of which 44 were renal arteries (RAs) with a mean diameter of 5.4 ± 1.0 mm. Thirteen were accessory RAs and six had a diameter ≤ 4 mm. Technical success rate was 87% overall; 97% for main and 62% for accessory RAs respectively. Target vessel patency and freedom from secondary reintervention was 100% and 97% at 30 days and 96% and 91% at one year, respectively. There was no 30-day mortality. Conclusion: Fenestrated physician-modified endografts are safe and effective for the treatment of patients with juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms when incorporating main renal arteries. Limited technical success may be expected when targeting accessory renal arteries, especially when small in diameter. Long-term follow-up is needed to confirm durability of PMEGs for renal artery preservation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The pressure of the COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare systems led to limited roles of infectious diseases services, increased rates of irrational use of antimicrobials, and incidence of infections by multidrug-resistant microorganisms. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the incidence of antimicrobial resistance and the management of bloodstream infections before and during the COVID-19 pandemic at the University General Hospital of Alexandroupolis (Greece). Materials and Methods: This is a retrospective study conducted from January 2018 to December 2022. Data were collected from the University Microbiology Laboratory per semester regarding the isolated strains of Gram-positive and -negative bacteria in blood cultures and respiratory samples in hospitalized patients in medical and surgical wards and in the intensive care unit (ICU). Additionally, bloodstream infections with requested infectious disease consultations were reported (n = 400), determining whether these were carried out via telephone contact or at the patient's bedside. Demographic data, comorbidities, focus of infection, antimicrobial regimen, duration of treatment, length of hospitalization, and clinical outcome were analyzed. Results: A total of 4569 strains of Gram-positive and -negative bacteria were isolated. An increasing trend was reported compared to the pre-pandemic period in the incidence of resistant Gram-negative bacteria, particularly in ICUs. Prior antimicrobial use and the rate of hospital-acquired infections were increased significantly during the pandemic. In the pre-pandemic period 2018–2019, a total of 246 infectious disease consultations were carried out, while during the period 2020–2022, the number was 154, with the percentage of telephone consultations 15% and 76%, respectively. Detection of the source of infection and timely administration of appropriate antimicrobial agents were more frequently recorded before the pandemic, and 28-day mortality was significantly reduced in cases with bedside consultations. Conclusion: The empowering of infectious disease surveillance programs and committees, rational use of antimicrobials agents, and bedside infectious disease consultations are vital in order to reduce the impact of infections caused by multidrug-resistant strains. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 and the prevalence of Omicron variants have reduced the risk of the severe clinical progress of COVID-19. However, the risk of breakthrough infections has increased, and early administration of an effective antiviral treatment is significant in order to prevent the severe progression of COVID-19 in vulnerable patients with comorbidities. Patients and methods: Adults with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were included in a matched-pair retrospective study based on age, gender, comorbidities and vaccination status. They were divided into two groups: group A (n = 200) consisted of outpatients at increased risk of severe clinical progress who were treated with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir and group B (n = 200) consisted of non-hospitalized patients who did not receive antiviral treatment. Demographic data, clinical outcome (death, intubation), days of hospitalization, time for recovery, adverse events and treatment compliance were reported. Results: The median age (75.24 ± 13.12 years in the study group and 76.91 ± 14.02 years in the comparison group) and the proportion of males (59% vs. 60.5%, respectively) were similar between the two groups. A total of 6.5% of patients in group A and 10.5% in group B were unvaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. Three patients from group A (1.5%) and one hundred eleven (55.5%) from group B required hospitalization. The duration of hospitalization (3 days vs. 10 days in group B, p < 0.001) and the total time needed for recovery (5 days vs. 9 days, p < 0.001) was shorter in the study group. A rebound of SARS-CoV-2 infection within 8–12 days after diagnosis was documented in 6.5% of patients in group A and 8% of patients in group B. Conclusion: Oral treatment with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in high-risk non-hospitalized patients was safe and effective in preventing the severe clinical progress of COVID-19 pneumonia. Early administration of antiviral agents in vulnerable outpatients combined with a full vaccination scheme is significant in order to avoid hospitalization and severe clinical outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In several randomized studies, remdesivir (RDV) has been reported to shorten the recovery period and improve clinical outcomes in COVID-19 patients, and thus, it is recommended as a standard of care. Nevertheless, controversial reports have been published. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the effectiveness of remdesivir in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 pneumonia at three Greek University Departments of Infectious Diseases with homogenous treatment protocols. From September 2020 to February 2021, we retrospectively analyzed adults hospitalized with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and radiological findings of pneumonia, who received remdesivir once daily for five days. Exploratory end points were duration of hospitalization, time of intubation, and death. Overall, 551 patients were included in the study. The optimal cutoff point for the number of days needed after symptom initiation for drug administration associated with better clinical outcome was 7 days. Higher odds for discharge and lower for intubation were observed in patients with treatment initiation ≤7 days (p = 0.052 and p = 0.019, retrospectively) regardless of gender (p = 0.537), hypertension (p = 0.096), dyslipidemia (p = 0.221), diabetes mellitus (p = 0.306), and usage of immunomodulators (p = 0.408). Our study has demonstrated beneficial effects of early treatment with remdesivir (≤7 days from symptom onset) on rates of intubation and probability of discharge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The need for minimally invasive biomarkers for the early diagnosis of type 2 diabetes (T2DM) prior to the clinical onset and monitoring of β-pancreatic cell loss is emerging. Here, we focused on studying circulating cell-free DNA (ccfDNA) as a liquid biopsy biomaterial for accurate diagnosis/monitoring of T2DM. Methods: ccfDNA levels were directly quantified in sera from 96 T2DM patients and 71 healthy individuals via fluorometry, and then fragment DNA size profiling was performed by capillary electrophoresis. Following this, ccfDNA methylation levels of five β-cell-related genes were measured via qPCR. Data were analyzed by automated machine learning to build classifying predictive models. Results: ccfDNA levels were found to be similar between groups but indicative of apoptosis in T2DM. INS (Insulin), IAPP (Islet Amyloid Polypeptide-Amylin), GCK (Glucokinase), and KCNJ11 (Potassium Inwardly Rectifying Channel Subfamily J member 11) levels differed significantly between groups. AutoML analysis delivered biosignatures including GCK, IAPP and KCNJ11 methylation, with the highest ever reported discriminating performance of T2DM from healthy individuals (AUC 0.927). Conclusions: Our data unravel the value of ccfDNA as a minimally invasive biomaterial carrying important clinical information for T2DM. Upon prospective clinical evaluation, the built biosignature can be disruptive for T2DM clinical management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The persistence of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has triggered research into limiting transmission, morbidity and mortality, thus warranting a comprehensive approach to guide balanced healthcare policies with respect to people's physical and mental health. The mainstay priority during COVID-19 is to achieve widespread immunity, which could be established through natural contact or vaccination. Deep knowledge of the immune response combined with recent specific data indicates the potential inferiority of induced immunity against infection. Moreover, the prevention of transmission has been founded on general non-pharmacological measures of protection, albeit debate exists considering their efficacy and, among other issues, their socio-psychological burden. The second line of defense is engaged after infection and is supported by a plethora of studied agents, such as antibiotics, steroids and non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs, antiviral medications and other biological agents that have been proposed, though variability in terms of benefits and adverse events has not allowed distinct solutions, albeit certain treatments might have a role in prevention and/or treatment of the disease. This narrative review summarizes the existing literature on the advantages and weaknesses of current COVID-19 management measures, thus underlining the necessity of acting based on the classical principle of "ofeleein i mi vlaptin", that is, to help or not to harm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

(1) Background: It is well-established that coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is highly pro-inflammatory, leading to activation of the coagulation cascade. COVID-19-induced hypercoagulability is associated with adverse outcomes and mortality. Current guidelines recommend that hospitalized COVID-19 patients should receive pharmacological prophylaxis against venous thromboembolism (VTE). (2) INTERACT is a retrospective, phase IV, observational cohort study aiming to evaluate the overall clinical effectiveness and safety of a higher than conventionally used prophylactic dose of anticoagulation with tinzaparin administered for VTE prevention in non-critically ill COVID-19 patients with moderate disease severity. (3) Results: A total of 705 patients from 13 hospitals in Greece participated in the study (55% men, median age 62 years). Anticoagulation with tinzaparin was initiated immediately after admission. A full therapeutic dose was received by 36.3% of the participants (mean ± SD 166 ± 33 IU/Kgr/day) and the remaining patients (63.9%) received an intermediate dose (mean ± SD 114 ± 22 IU/Kgr/day). The median treatment duration was 13 days (Q1−Q3: 8−20 days). During the study (April 2020 to November 2021), 14 thrombotic events (2.0%) were diagnosed (i.e., three cases of pulmonary embolism (PE) and 11 cases of deep venous thrombosis, DVT). Four bleeding events were recorded (0.6%). In-hospital death occurred in 12 patients (1.7%). Thrombosis was associated with increasing age (median: 74.5 years, Q1−Q3: 62−79, for patients with thrombosis vs. 61.9 years, Q1−Q3: 49−72, p = 0.0149), increased D-dimer levels for all three evaluation time points (at admission: 2490, Q1−Q3: 1580−6480 vs. 700, Q1−Q3: 400−1475, p < 0.0001), one week ± two days after admission (3510, Q1−Q3: 1458−9500 vs. 619, Q1−Q3: 352−1054.5, p < 0.0001), as well as upon discharge (1618.5, Q1−Q3: 1010−2255 vs. 500, Q1−Q3: 294−918, p < 0.0001). Clinical and laboratory improvement was affirmed by decreasing D-dimer and CRP levels, increasing platelet numbers and oxygen saturation measurements, and a drop in the World Health Organization (WHO) progression scale. (4) Conclusions: The findings of our study are in favor of prophylactic anticoagulation with an intermediate to full therapeutic dose of tinzaparin among non-critically ill patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

The current severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic warrants an imperative necessity for effective and safe vaccination, to restrain Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) including transmissibility, morbidity, and mortality. In this regard, intensive medical and biological research leading to the development of an arsenal of vaccines, albeit incomplete preconditioned evaluation, due to emergency. The subsequent scientific gap raises some concerns in the medical community and the general public. More specifically, the accelerated vaccine development downgraded the value of necessary pre-clinical studies to elicit medium- and long-term beneficial or harmful consequences. Previous experience and pathophysiological background of coronaviruses' infections and vaccine technologies, combined with the global vaccines' application, underlined the obligation of a cautious and qualitative approach, to illuminate potential vaccination-related adverse events. Moreover, the high SARS-CoV-2 mutation potential and the already aggregated genetical alterations provoke a rational vagueness and uncertainty concerning vaccines' efficacy against dominant strains and the respective clinical immunity. This review critically summarizes existing evidence and queries regarding SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, to motivate scientists' and clinicians' interest for an optimal, individualized, and holistic management of this unprecedented pandemic.