A case series of concomitant burn and COVID-19

Acute burns during the COVID-19 pandemic: A one-year retrospective study of 611 patients at a referral burn centre in northern Iran

Patients with acute burns are more vulnerable to COVID-19 because of physiologically weak immune systems. This study aimed to assess and compare individual characteristics, clinical features, and clinical outcomes of acute burn among COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients. A retrospective study, with data collected from 611 acute burn patients with or without a COVID-19 diagnosis referred to a burn centre in Iran. Data were collected from April 2020 to 2021. The mean age of acute burns patients with COVID-19 was higher compared with acute burns patients with non-COVID-19 (47.82 vs. 32.59 years, P < .001). Acute burns occurred more frequently in COVID-19 patients with comorbidities compared with non-COVID-19 patients (48.72% vs. 26.92%, P = .003). 58.97% of COVID-19 patients and 55.42% of non-COVID-19 patients had grade II & III and II burns, respectively (P < .001). The mean total body surface area of the burn was higher in COVID-19 patients compared with non-COVID-19 patients (32.69% vs. 16.22%, P < .001). Hospitalisation in the intensive care unit (ICU) was higher in COVID-19 patients than in non-COVID-19 patients (76.92% vs. 15.73%, P < .001). Length of stay in hospital and ICU, the cost of hospitalisation, and waiting time for the operating room was higher in COVID-19 patients compared with non-COVID-19 patients (15.30 vs. 3.88 days, P < .001; 9.61 vs. 0.75 days, P < .001; 30 430 628.717 vs. 10 219 192.44 rials, P = .011; 0.84 vs. 0.24 min, P < .001, respectively). Intubation and mortality in-hospital were higher in COVID-19 patients compared with non-COVID-19 patients (41.02% vs. 6.99%, P < .001; 35.90% vs. 6.12%, P < .001, respectively). Therefore, it is recommended that health managers and policymakers develop a care plan to provide high-quality care to acute burns patients with COVID-19, especially in low-income countries.

COVID-19-Associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (CARDS): Mechanistic insights on therapeutic intervention and emerging trends

AIMS

The novel Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused great distress worldwide. Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is well familiar but when it happens as part of COVID-19 it has discrete features which are unmanageable. Numerous pharmacological treatments have been evaluated in clinical trials to control the clinical effects of CARDS, but there is no assurance of their effectiveness.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review of the literature of the Medline, Scopus, Bentham, PubMed, and EMBASE (Elsevier) databases was examined to understand the novel therapeutic approaches used in COVID-19-Associated Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome and their outcomes.

KEY FINDINGS

Current therapeutic options may not be enough to manage COVID-19-associated ARDS complications in group of patients and therefore, the current review has discussed the pathophysiological mechanism of COVID-19-associated ARDS, potential pharmacological treatment and the emerging molecular drug targets.

SIGNIFICANCE

The rationale of this review is to talk about the pathophysiology of CARDS, potential pharmacological treatment and the emerging molecular drug targets. Currently accessible treatment focuses on modulating immune responses, rendering antiviral effects, anti-thrombosis or anti-coagulant effects. It is expected that considerable number of studies conducting globally may help to discover effective therapies to decrease mortality and morbidity occurring due to CARDS. Attention should be also given on molecular drug targets that possibly will help to develop efficient cure for COVID-19-associated ARDS.

Burn care strategy in the covid-19 pandemic: a narrative review study

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic has changed the world and intensified health management in many parts of the world. Sensitivity in burn patients' care and prevalence of COVID-19 have a major impact on this group's healthcare system and infection control strategies. The purpose of this study is to review burn care strategies during the COVID-19 outbreak.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The present study is a narrative review study. In writing this paper, to access information, the keywords of Coronavirus, COVID-19, burn, strategy, care, and SARS were used. Due to the emergence of COVID disease, searches in Science Direct, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, SID, Magiran, Springer, and Elsevier databases were performed without time limit. Research articles were purposefully selected and approved to be investigated based on the criteria for entering the research. A total of 14 articles had a full text related to the research scope. The researchers used qualitative content analysis to analyze the data. Data analysis was conducted as a comprehensive review of articles, qualitative conclusions, and results.

RESULTS

In this study, 14 articles related to burn care strategies in the COVID-19 epidemic were selected. Their results were reviewed in two areas of staff care strategies and burn patients during the COVID-19 outbreak. Findings indicate that appropriate prevention and protection strategies and measures should be followed to prevent the transmission of the COVID-19 virus to burn care professionals. In addition, burn patient care strategies were proposed in two levels of minor and moderate to severe burns, so that patients with burns receive adequate burn care during the COVID-19 outbreak.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of staff and burn patient care strategies during the COVID-19 pandemic is essential to treat burn patients and prevent the spread of the COVID virus.

Problems of Pathogenesis and Pathogenetic Therapy of COVID-19 from the Perspective of the General Theory of Pathological Systems (General Pathological Processes)

The COVID-19 pandemic examines not only the state of actual health care but also the state of fundamental medicine in various countries. Pro-inflammatory processes extend far beyond the classical concepts of inflammation. They manifest themselves in a variety of ways, beginning with extreme physiology, then allostasis at low-grade inflammation, and finally the shockogenic phenomenon of "inflammatory systemic microcirculation". The pathogenetic core of critical situations, including COVID-19, is this phenomenon. Microcirculatory abnormalities, on the other hand, lie at the heart of a specific type of general pathological process known as systemic inflammation (SI). Systemic inflammatory response, cytokine release, cytokine storm, and thrombo-inflammatory syndrome are all terms that refer to different aspects of SI. As a result, the metabolic syndrome model does not adequately reflect the pathophysiology of persistent low-grade systemic inflammation (ChSLGI). Diseases associated with ChSLGI, on the other hand, are risk factors for a severe COVID-19 course. The review examines the role of hypoxia, metabolic dysfunction, scavenger receptors, and pattern-recognition receptors, as well as the processes of the hemophagocytic syndrome, in the systemic alteration and development of SI in COVID-19.

Impact of COVID-19 on Patient Trends and Outcome: Results from a Tertiary Care Burn and Plastic Unit in Northern India

Background  Burn and trauma injuries need emergency care and resuscitation, which required uninterrupted delivery of inpatient care services during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Burn patients are physiologically immunocompromised, increasing the risk of COVID-19 infection in them. This study analyzes the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on patient trends in a burn and plastic unit and assesses the effect of COVID-19 infection in burns.

Methods  This single-center, retrospective observational case–control study was conducted in the Department of Burns, Plastic and Maxillofacial Surgery of a tertiary care hospital in New Delhi, India. Patient data was collected from April 1, 2019 to August 10, 2019 and from April 1, 2020 to August 10, 2020. All data of burns and trauma patients collected was analyzed and compared.

Results  There were total 350 admissions during COVID time period and 562 admissions during non-COVID time period. The admission rate, type of burn injury, and death rate did not vary significantly during the two time periods. Thermal burn was the most common type of burn injury. There were total 18 cases diagnosed to be COVID-19 positive during the pandemic. There were two deaths among COVID-19 positive burn cases.

Conclusion  This study finds no difference in patient patterns during COVID and non-COVID time period. Amongst burn patients, no increased risk of COVID-19 infection is seen with larger body surface area of burns. No increase in mortality is seen in burn patients infected with COVID-19.