Publications by authors named "Abolfazl Mozafari"

5 Publications

  • Page 1 of 1

Safety and efficacy of Favipiravir in moderate to severe SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia.

Int Immunopharmacol 2021 Mar 11;95:107522. Epub 2021 Mar 11.

School of Medicine, Dezful University of Medical Science, Dezful, Iran.

Background: We examined the safety and efficacy of a treatment protocol containing Favipiravir for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2.

Methods: We did a multicenter randomized open-labeled clinical trial on moderate to severe cases infections of SARS-CoV-2. Patients with typical ground glass appearance on chest computerized tomography scan (CT scan) and oxygen saturation (SpO) of less than 93% were enrolled. They were randomly allocated into Favipiravir (1.6 gr loading, 1.8 gr daily) and Lopinavir/Ritonavir (800/200 mg daily) treatment regimens in addition to standard care. In-hospital mortality, ICU admission, intubation, time to clinical recovery, changes in daily SpO after 5 min discontinuation of supplemental oxygen, and length of hospital stay were quantified and compared in the two groups.

Results: 380 patients were randomly allocated into Favipiravir (193) and Lopinavir/Ritonavir (187) groups in 13 centers. The number of deaths, intubations, and ICU admissions were not significantly different (26, 27, 31 and 21, 17, 25 respectively). Mean hospital stay was also not different (7.9 days [SD = 6] in the Favipiravir and 8.1 [SD = 6.5] days in Lopinavir/Ritonavir groups) (p = 0.61). Time to clinical recovery in the Favipiravir group was similar to Lopinavir/Ritonavir group (HR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.75 - 1.17) and likewise the changes in the daily SpO after discontinuation of supplemental oxygen (p = 0.46) CONCLUSION: Adding Favipiravir to the treatment protocol did not reduce the number of ICU admissions or intubations or In-hospital mortality compared to Lopinavir/Ritonavir regimen. It also did not shorten time to clinical recovery and length of hospital stay.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.intimp.2021.107522DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7951885PMC
March 2021

Incidence of symptomatic venous thromboembolism following hospitalization for coronavirus disease 2019: Prospective results from a multi-center study.

Thromb Res 2021 02 11;198:135-138. Epub 2020 Dec 11.

Tuberculosis and Lung Disease Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.

Background: Thrombosis and pulmonary embolism appear to be major causes of mortality in hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. However, few studies have focused on the incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after hospitalization for COVID-19.

Methods: In this multi-center study, we followed 1529 COVID-19 patients for at least 45 days after hospital discharge, who underwent routine telephone follow-up. In case of signs or symptoms of pulmonary embolism (PE) or deep vein thrombosis (DVT), they were invited for an in-hospital visit with a pulmonologist. The primary outcome was symptomatic VTE within 45 days of hospital discharge.

Results: Of 1529 COVID-19 patients discharged from hospital, a total of 228 (14.9%) reported potential signs or symptoms of PE or DVT and were seen for an in-hospital visit. Of these, 13 and 12 received Doppler ultrasounds or pulmonary CT angiography, respectively, of whom only one patient was diagnosed with symptomatic PE. Of 51 (3.3%) patients who died after discharge, two deaths were attributed to VTE corresponding to a 45-day cumulative rate of symptomatic VTE of 0.2% (95%CI 0.1%-0.6%; n = 3). There was no evidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in these patients. Other deaths after hospital discharge included myocardial infarction (n = 13), heart failure (n = 9), and stroke (n = 9).

Conclusions: We did not observe a high rate of symptomatic VTE in COVID-19 patients after hospital discharge. Routine extended thromboprophylaxis after hospitalization for COVID-19 may not have a net clinical benefit. Randomized trials may be warranted.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.thromres.2020.12.001DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7836837PMC
February 2021

The challenge of deciding between home-discharge versus hospitalization in COVID-19 patients: The role of initial imaging and clinicolaboratory data.

Clin Epidemiol Glob Health 2021 Apr-Jun;10:100673. Epub 2020 Dec 3.

Department of Radiology, Imam Hossein Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

Background/objective: It is important to predict the COVID-19 patient's prognosis, particularly in countries with lack or deficiency of medical resource for patient's triage management. Currently, WHO guideline suggests using chest imaging in addition to clinicolaboratory evaluation to decide on triage between home-discharge versus hospitalization. We designed our study to validate this recommendation to guide clinicians. This study providing some suggestions to guide clinicians for better decision making in 2020.

Methods: In this retrospective study, patients with RT-PCR confirmed COVID-19 (N = 213) were divided in different clinical and management scenarios: home-discharge, ward hospitalization and ICU admission. We reviewed the patient's initial chest CT if available. We evaluated quantitative and qualitative characteristics of CT as well as relevant available clinicolaboratory data. Chi-square, One-Way ANOVA and Paired -test were used for analysis.

Results: The finding showed that most patients with mixed patterns, pleural effusion, 5 lobes involved, total score ≥10, SpO2% ≤ 90, ESR (mm/h) ≥ 60 and WBC (10/μL) ≥ 8000 were hospitalized. Most patients with Ground-glass opacities only, ≤3 lobes involvement, peripheral distribution, SpO2% ≥ 95, ESR (mm/h) < 30 and WBC(10/μL) < 6000 were home-discharged.

Conclusions: This study suggests the use of initial chest CT (qualitative and quantitative evaluation) in addition to initial clinicolaboratory data could be a useful supplementary method for clinical management and it is an excellent decision making tool (home-discharge versus ICU/Ward admission) for clinicians.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cegh.2020.11.006DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7710471PMC
December 2020

The clinical value of two combination regimens in the Management of Patients Suffering from Covid-19 pneumonia: a single centered, retrospective, observational study.

Daru 2020 Dec 19;28(2):507-516. Epub 2020 Jun 19.

School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

Background: There is no identified pharmacological therapy for COVID-19 patients, where potential therapeutic strategies are underway to determine effective therapy under such unprecedented pandemic. Therefore, combination therapies may have the potential of alleviating the patient's outcome. This study aimed at comparing the efficacy of two different combination regimens in improving outcomes of patients infected by novel coronavirus (COVID-19).

Methods: This is a single centered, retrospective, observational study of 60 laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 positive inpatients (≥18 years old) at two wards of the Baqiyatallah Hospital, Tehran, Iran. Patient's data including clinical and laboratory parameters were recorded. According to the drug regimen, the patients were divided into two groups; group I who received regimen I consisting azithromycin, prednisolone, naproxen, and lopinavir/ritonavir and group II who received regimen II including meropenem, levofloxacin, vancomycin, hydroxychloroquine, and oseltamivir.

Results: The oxygen saturation (SpO2) and temperature were positively changed in patients receiving regimen I compared to regimen II (P = 0.013 and P = 0.012, respectively). The serum level of C-reactive protein (CRP) changed positively in group I (P < 0.001). Although there was a significant difference in platelets between both groups (75.44 vs 51.62, P < 0.001), their change did not clinically differ between two groups. The findings indicated a significant difference of the average length of stay in hospitals (ALOS) between two groups, where the patients under regimen I showed a shorter ALOS (6.97 vs 9.93, P = 0.001).

Conclusion: This study revealed the beneficial effect of the short-term use of low-dose prednisolone in combination with azithromycin, naproxen and lopinavir/ritonavir (regimen I), in decreasing ALOS compared to regimen II. Since there is still lack of evidence for safety of this regimen, further investigation in our ongoing follow-up to deal with COVID-19 pneumonia is underway. Graphical abstract.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40199-020-00353-wDOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7303568PMC
December 2020

Work-related musculoskeletal disorders in truck drivers and official workers.

Acta Med Iran 2015 Jul;53(7):432-8

Department of Medical Sciences, Qom Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qom, Iran.

Work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs) are common among drivers and official workers. Musculoskeletal disorders are frequent causes of absenteeism in many countries. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders and risk factors associated with these symptoms. A total of 346 workers and truck drivers were participated in this case-control study. All the participants were interviewed using a self- administered questionnaire containing demographic data and a Nordic questionnaire about presence site and characteristics of pain. Then the data were gathered, and the prevalence of the mentioned parameters and the relationship between variables in the questionnaire were analyzed statistically. The results of this study revealed that 78.6% out of truck drivers and 55.5% out of official workers had musculoskeletal disorders in on-year and there was a significant difference between two groups in this regard (P<0.001). On the whole, the most common symptoms were neck 47 (27.2%), followed by lumbar pain 42 (24.3%) in truck drivers and knee 63 (36.4%) and lumbar symptom 21 (12.1%) in one-year in official workers. In this study, musculoskeletal disorders showed statistically significant association with work duration, age and BMI (P<0.001). Within the limits of this study, it can be concluded that the musculoskeletal troubles have a high frequency among the drivers and official workers. Both groups usually remain on a prolonged uncomfortable postures and high static muscle load which may imply a risk for development of the troubles.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
July 2015