COVID-19 and Heart Transplant: A Case Series and Review of the Literature

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has resulted in many challenges in patient care, especially among high-risk populations such as heart transplant recipients. Patients with heart transplant experience a significantly higher mortality rate with COVID-19 infection, and management is based on extrapolation from clinical trials done on nontransplant patients and from clinical experience. Here we report 4 cases of patients with heart transplant who presented with COVID-19 infection in late 2020. Patients presented with symptoms similar to those seen in the general population. All 4 patients were admitted to the hospital, and they were all treated with dexamethasone. In addition, 2 patients received remdesivir. Immunosuppressive medications were adjusted to maintain adequate levels of immunosuppression but at the same time allow for an adequate immune response against the infection. All patients were discharged alive from the hospital. We then performed a literature review on studies that included heart transplant patients who developed the infection and developed suggestions for a standardized management approach, which we share in this article.     

Eradication of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus from a neonatal intensive care unit by active surveillance and aggressive infection control measures.

OBJECTIVES: To describe an outbreak of hospital-acquired MRSA in a NICU and to identify the risk factors for, outcomes of, and interventions that eliminated it. SETTING: An 18-bed, level III-IV NICU in a community hospital. METHODS: Interventions to control MRSA included active surveillance, aggressive contact isolation, and cohorting and de-colonization of infants and HCWs with MRSA. A case-control study was performed to compare infants with and without MRSA. RESULTS: A cluster of 6 cases of MRSA infection between September and October 2001 represented an increased attack rate of 21.2% compared with 5.3% in the previous months. Active surveillance identified unsuspected MRSA colonization in 6 (21.4%) of 28 patients and 6 (5.5%) of 110 HCWs screened. They were all successfully decolonized. There was an increased risk of MRSA colonization and infection among infants with low birth weight or younger gestational age. Multiple gestation was associated with an increased risk of colonization (OR, 37.5; CI95, 3.9-363.1) and infection (OR, 5.36; CI95, 1.37-20.96). Gavage feeding (OR, 10.33; CI95, 1.28-83.37) and intubation (OR, 5.97; CI95, 1.22-29.31) were associated with increased risk of infection. Infants with MRSA infection had a significantly longer hospital stay than infants without MRSA (51.83 vs 21.46 days; P = .003). Rep-PCR with mec typing and PVL analysis confirmed the presence of a single common strain of hospital-acquired MRSA. CONCLUSION: Active surveillance, aggressive implementation of contact isolation, cohorting, and decolonization effectively eradicated MRSA from the NICU for 2 1/2 years following the outbreak.     

Feasibility and diagnostic performance of hybrid PET/MRI compared with PET/CT for gynecological malignancies: a prospective pilot study

Purpose

The purpose of the study was to assess the feasibility and diagnostic performance of FDG-PET/MR imaging compared to PET/CT for staging of patients with a gynecological malignancy.

Methods

25 patients with a gynecological malignancy were prospectively enrolled into this pilot study. Patients underwent sequential full-body PET/CT and PET/MR of the abdomen and pelvis after administration of a single dose of F-18 FDG. PET/MRI and PET/CT images were independently reviewed by two expert radiologists. Readers were blinded to the results of the other imaging procedures. Clinical and pathologic information was abstracted from medical charts.

Results

18 patients were included in the final analysis with a median age of 62 years (range 31–88). 61% of patients (11/18) had cervical cancer, while the remaining patients had endometrial cancer. PET/MRI as compared to PET/CT detected all primary tumors, 7/7 patients with regional lymph nodes, and 1/1 patient with an abdominal metastasis. Two patients had additional lymph nodes outside of the abdominopelvic cavity detected on PET/CT that were not seen on PET/MRI, whereas 6 patients had parametrial invasion and one patient had invasion of the bladder seen on PET/MRI not detected on PET/CT. Five cervical cancer patients had discordant clinical vs. radiographic staging based on PET/MRI detection of soft tissue involvement. Management changed for two patients who had clinical stage IB1 and radiographic stage IIB cervical cancer.

Conclusions

PET/MRI is feasible and has at least comparable diagnostic ability to PET/CT for identification of primary cervical and endometrial tumors and regional metastases. PET/MRI may be superior to PET/CT for initial radiographic assessment of cervical cancers.