The use of exhaled nitric oxide and peak expiratory flow to demonstrate improved breathability and antimicrobial properties of novel face mask made with sustainable filter paper and Folium Plectranthii amboinicii oil: additional option for mask shortage during COVID-19 pandemic

Electrospinning in personal protective equipment for healthcare work

Protection in many service areas is mandatory for good performance in daily activities of workers, especially health areas. Personal protective equipment (PPE) is used to protect patients and health workers from contamination by harmful pathogens and body fluids during clinical attendance. The pandemic scenario caused by SARS-CoV-2 has shown that the world is not prepared to face global disease outbreaks, especially when it comes to the PPE of healthcare workers. In the last years, the world has faced a deficiency in the development of advanced technologies to produce high-quality PPE to attend to the exponential increasing demand. Electrospinning is a technology that can be used to produce high-quality PPE by improving the protective action of clothing. In the face of this concern, this manuscript presents as focus the potential of electrospinning to be applied in protective clothing. PPE mostly used by healthcare workers are also presented. The physico-chemical characteristics and production processes of medical textiles for PPE are addressed. Furthermore, an overview of the electrospinning technique is shown. It is important to highlight most research about electrospinning applied to PPE for health areas presents gaps and challenges; thus, future projections are also addressed in this manuscript.

Allergic Rhinosinusitis and Airway Diseases

The concept of united airway disease interaction, which comprises chronic rhinosinusitis and other lower airway disorders such as asthma, has been recognized for over a decade [...]

Study of Nasal Fractional Exhaled Nitric Oxide (FENO) in Children with Allergic Rhinitis

(1) Background: Exhaled nitric oxide (NO) has been considered as a biomarker of airway inflammation. The measurement of fractional exhaled NO (FENO) is a valuable test for assessing local inflammation in subjects with allergic rhinitis (AR). (2) Objective: To evaluate (a) the correlation between nasal FENO with anthropometric characteristics, symptoms of AR and nasal peak flows in children without and with AR; and (b) the cut-off of nasal FENO for diagnosis of AR in symptomatic children. (3) Methods: The study was a descriptive and cross-sectional study in subjects with and without AR < 18 years old. All clinical and functional characteristics of the study subjects were recorded for analysis. They were divided into healthy subjects for the control group and subjects with AR who met all inclusion criteria. (4) Results: 100 subjects (14 ± 3 years) were included, including 32 control subjects and 68 patients with AR. Nasal FENO in AR patients was significantly higher than in control subjects: 985 ± 232 ppb vs. 229 ± 65 ppb (p < 0.001). In control subjects, nasal FENO was not correlated with anthropometric characteristics and nasal inspiratory or expiratory peak flows (IPF or EPF) (p > 0.05). There was a correlation between nasal FENO and AR symptoms in AR patients and nasal IPF and EPF (p = 0.001 and 0.0001, respectively). The cut-off of nasal FENO for positive AR diagnosis with the highest specificity and sensitivity was ≥794 ppb (96.7% and 92.6%, respectively). (5) Conclusion: The use of nasal FENO as a biomarker of AR provides a useful tool and additional armamentarium in the management of allergic rhinitis.

Enhanced Medical and Community Face Masks with Antimicrobial Properties: A Systematic Review

Face masks help to limit transmission of infectious diseases entering through the nose and mouth. Beyond reprocessing and decontamination, antimicrobial treatments could extend the lifetime of face masks whilst also further reducing the chance of disease transmission. Here, we review the efficacy of treatments pertaining antimicrobial properties to medical face masks, filtering facepiece respirators and non-medical face masks. Searching databases identified 2113 studies after de-duplication. A total of 17 relevant studies were included in the qualitative synthesis. Risk of bias was found to be moderate or low in all cases. Sixteen articles demonstrated success in avoiding proliferation (if not elimination) of viruses and/or bacteria. In terms of methodology, no two articles employed identical approaches to efficacy testing. Our findings highlight that antimicrobial treatment is a promising route to extending the life and improving the safety of face masks. In order to reach significant achievements, shared and precise methodology and reporting is needed.

Interleukin-6 blocking agents for treating COVID-19: a living systematic review

BACKGROUND

Interleukin 6 (IL-6) blocking agents have been used for treating severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Their immunosuppressive effect might be valuable in patients with COVID-19 characterised by substantial immune system dysfunction by controlling inflammation and promoting disease tolerance.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of IL-6 blocking agents compared to standard care alone or with placebo on efficacy and safety outcomes in COVID-19. We will update this assessment regularly.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (up to 11 February 2021) and the L-OVE platform, and Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register to identify trials up to 26 February 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating IL-6 blocking agents compared with standard care alone or with placebo for people with COVID-19, regardless of disease severity.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methodology. The protocol was amended to reduce the number of outcomes considered. Two review authors independently collected data and assessed the risk of bias with the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. We rated the certainty of evidence with the GRADE approach for the critical outcomes such as clinical improvement (defined as hospital discharge or improvement on the scale used by trialists to evaluate clinical progression or recovery) (day (D) 28 / ≥ D60); WHO Clinical Progression Score of level 7 or above (i.e. the proportion of participants with mechanical ventilation +/- additional organ support OR death) (D28 / ≥ D60); all-cause mortality (D28 / ≥ D60); incidence of any adverse events; and incidence of serious adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 10 RCTs with available data including one platform trial comparing tocilizumab and sarilumab with standard of care. These trials evaluated tocilizumab (nine RCTs including two platform trials; seven were reported as peer-reviewed articles, two as preprints; 6428 randomised participants); and two sarilumab (one platform trial reported as peer reviewed article, one reported as preprint, 880 randomised participants). All trials included were multicentre trials. They were conducted in Brazil, China, France, Italy, UK, USA, and four were multi-country trials. The mean age range of participants ranged from 56 to 65 years; 4572 (66.3%) of trial participants were male. Disease severity ranged from mild to critical disease. The reported proportion of participants on oxygen at baseline but not intubated varied from 56% to 100% where reported. Five trials reported the inclusion of intubated patients at baseline. We identified a further 20 registered RCTs of tocilizumab compared to placebo/standard care (five completed without available results, five terminated without available results, eight ongoing, two not recruiting); 11 RCTs of sarilumab (two completed without results, three terminated without available results, six ongoing); six RCTs of clazakisumab (five ongoing, one not recruiting); two RCTs of olokizumab (one completed, one not recruiting); one of siltuximab (ongoing) and one RCT of levilimab (completed without available results). Of note, three were cancelled (2 tocilizumab, 1 clazakisumab). One multiple-arm RCT evaluated both tocilizumab and sarilumab compared to standard of care, one three-arm RCT evaluated tocilizumab and siltuximab compared to standard of care and consequently they appear in each respective comparison. Tocilizumab versus standard care alone or with placebo a. Effectiveness of tocilizumab for patients with COVID-19 Tocilizumab probably results in little or no increase in the outcome of clinical improvement at D28 (RR 1.06, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.13; I² = 40.9%; 7 RCTs, 5585 participants; absolute effect: 31 more with clinical improvement per 1000 (from 0 fewer to 67 more); moderate-certainty evidence). However, we cannot exclude that some subgroups of patients could benefit from the treatment. We did not obtain data for longer-term follow-up (≥ D60). The effect of tocilizumab on the proportion of participants with a WHO Clinical Progression Score of level of 7 or above is uncertain at D28 (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.74; I² = 64.4%; 3 RCTs, 712 participants; low-certainty evidence). We did not obtain data for longer-term follow-up (≥ D60). Tocilizumab reduces all-cause mortality at D28 compared to standard care alone or placebo (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.97; I² = 0.0%; 8 RCTs, 6363 participants; absolute effect: 32 fewer deaths per 1000 (from 52 fewer to 9 fewer); high-certainty evidence). The evidence suggests uncertainty around the effect on mortality at ≥ D60 (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.40; I² = 0.0%; 2 RCTs, 519 participants; low-certainty evidence). b. Safety of tocilizumab for patients with COVID-19 The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of tocilizumab on adverse events (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.72; I² = 86.4%; 7 RCTs, 1534 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Nevertheless, tocilizumab probably results in slightly fewer serious adverse events than standard care alone or placebo (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.06; I² = 0.0%; 8 RCTs, 2312 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Sarilumab versus standard care alone or with placebo The evidence is uncertain about the effect of sarilumab on all-cause mortality at D28 (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.36; 2 RCTs, 880 participants; low certainty), on all-cause mortality at ≥ D60 (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.50 to 2.0; 1 RCT, 420 participants; low certainty), and serious adverse events (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.77; 2 RCTs, 880 participants; low certainty). It is unlikely that sarilumab results in an important increase of adverse events (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.25; 1 RCT, 420 participants; moderate certainty). However, an increase cannot be excluded No data were available for other critical outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

On average, tocilizumab reduces all-cause mortality at D28 compared to standard care alone or placebo and probably results in slightly fewer serious adverse events than standard care alone or placebo. Nevertheless, tocilizumab probably results in little or no increase in the outcome clinical improvement (defined as hospital discharge or improvement measured by trialist-defined scales) at D28. The impact of tocilizumab on other outcomes is uncertain or very uncertain. With the data available, we were not able to explore heterogeneity. Individual patient data meta-analyses are needed to be able to identify which patients are more likely to benefit from this treatment. Evidence for an effect of sarilumab is uncertain and evidence for other anti-IL6 agents is unavailable. Thirty-nine RCTs of IL-6 blocking agents with no results are currently registered, of which nine are completed and seven trials were terminated with no results available. The findings of this review will be updated as new data are made available on the COVID-NMA platform (covid-nma.com).

A comprehensive review on antimicrobial face masks: an emerging weapon in fighting pandemics

The world has witnessed several incidents of epidemics and pandemics since the beginning of human existence. The gruesome effects of microbial threats create considerable repercussions on the healthcare systems. The continually evolving nature of causative viruses due to mutation or re-assortment sometimes makes existing medicines and vaccines inactive. As a rapid response to such outbreaks, much emphasis has been placed on personal protective equipment (PPE), especially face mask, to prevent infectious diseases from airborne pathogens. Wearing face masks in public reduce disease transmission and creates a sense of community solidarity in collectively fighting the pandemic. However, excessive use of single-use polymer-based face masks can pose a significant challenge to the environment and is increasingly evident in the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. On the contrary, face masks with inherent antimicrobial properties can help in real-time deactivation of microorganisms enabling multiple-use and reduces secondary infections. Given the advantages, several efforts are made incorporating natural and synthetic antimicrobial agents (AMA) to produce face mask with enhanced safety, and the literature about such efforts are summarised. The review also discusses the literature concerning the current and future market potential and environmental impacts of face masks. Among the AMA tested, metal and metal-oxide based materials are more popular and relatively matured technology. However, the repeated use of such a face mask may pose a danger to the user and environment due to leaching/detachment of nanoparticles. So careful consideration is required to select AMA and their incorporation methods to reduce their leaching and environmental impacts. Also, systematic studies are required to establish short-term and long-term benefits.