A cytokine storm is a hyperinflammatory state secondary to the excessive production of cytokines by a deregulated immune system. It manifests clinically as an influenza-like syndrome, which can be complicated by multi-organ failure and coagulopathy, leading, in the most severe cases, even to death. The term cytokine storm was first used in 1993 to describe the graft-versus-host disease following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. It was then reused to define the adverse syndromes secondary to the administration of immunostimulating agents, such as anti-CD28 antibodies or bioengineered immune cells, i.e., CAR T-cell therapy. Currently, the concept of cytokine storm has been better elucidated and extended to the pathogenesis of many other conditions, such as sepsis, autoinflammatory disease, primary and secondary hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis, and multicentric Castleman disease. Moreover, cytokine storm has recently emerged as a key aspect in the novel Coronavirus disease 2019, as affected patients show high levels of several key pro-inflammatory cytokines, such as IL-1, IL-2, IL-6, TNF-α, IFN-γ, IP-10, GM-CSF, MCP-1, and IL-10, some of which also correlate with disease severity. Therefore, since the onset of the pandemic, numerous agents have been tested in the effort to mitigate the cytokine storm in COVID-19 patients, some of which are effective in reducing mortality, especially in critically ill patients, and are now becoming standards of care, such as glucocorticoids or some cytokine inhibitors. However, the challenge is still far from being met, and other therapeutic strategies are being tested in the hope that we can eventually overcome the disease.

The worldwide spread of SARS-CoV-2 has been responsible for an infectious pandemic, with repercussions on socio-economic aspects and on the physical and mental health of the general population. The present systematic review aimed to evaluate the data belonging to the European framework, analyzing the population by age group. Original articles and reviews on the state of mental health of the general European population have been researched starting from 2021. Initially, a total of 1764 studies were found, among which a total of 75 were selected. Youth were the age group most affected by pandemic consequences on mental health, with emotional and behavioral alterations observed from a third to more than a half of children and adolescents examined. Among both adolescents and adults, the female gender had a higher prevalence of psychopathological symptoms. The main risk factors were poor social support, economic difficulties, and, in particular, unemployment or job changes. Additional individual risk factors were the perception of loneliness, the presence of pre-pandemic mental illness/distress, and some personality traits, such as neuroticism, impulsiveness, and the use of maladaptive coping strategies. Unexpectedly, the elderly maintained good resilience towards change, even if a stress factor was represented by the feeling of loneliness and poor social contact. As regards suicidal behaviors, among adolescents, there was an increase in attempts of 25%, with a greater risk for the female gender. This risk increased also among adults, in association with symptoms of anxiety and depression, and poor socio-environmental conditions. In conclusion, some population groups were found to be at greater risk of psychological burden during pandemic waves, thus representing priority targets for socio-health interventions.

Background: Healthcare systems represent complex organizations within which multiple factors (physical environment, human factor, technological devices, quality of care) interconnect to form a dense network whose imbalance is potentially able to compromise patient safety. In this scenario, the need for hospitals to expand reactive and proactive clinical risk management programs is easily understood, and artificial intelligence fits well in this context. This systematic review aims to investigate the state of the art regarding the impact of AI on clinical risk management processes. To simplify the analysis of the review outcomes and to motivate future standardized comparisons with any subsequent studies, the findings of the present review will be grouped according to the possibility of applying AI in the prevention of the different incident type groups as defined by the ICPS. Materials and Methods: On 3 November 2023, a systematic review of the literature according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was carried out using the SCOPUS and Medline (via PubMed) databases. A total of 297 articles were identified. After the selection process, 36 articles were included in the present systematic review. Results and Discussion: The studies included in this review allowed for the identification of three main “incident type” domains: clinical process, healthcare-associated infection, and medication. Another relevant application of AI in clinical risk management concerns the topic of incident reporting. Conclusions: This review highlighted that AI can be applied transversely in various clinical contexts to enhance patient safety and facilitate the identification of errors. It appears to be a promising tool to improve clinical risk management, although its use requires human supervision and cannot completely replace human skills. To facilitate the analysis of the present review outcome and to enable comparison with future systematic reviews, it was deemed useful to refer to a pre-existing taxonomy for the identification of adverse events. However, the results of the present study highlighted the usefulness of AI not only for risk prevention in clinical practice, but also in improving the use of an essential risk identification tool, which is incident reporting. For this reason, the taxonomy of the areas of application of AI to clinical risk processes should include an additional class relating to risk identification and analysis tools. For this purpose, it was considered convenient to use ICPS classification.

Background: In recent years, the attention of the scientific world has focused on a clearance system of brain waste metabolites, called the glymphatic system, based on its similarity to the lymphatic system in peripheral tissue and the relevant role of the AQP4 glial channels and described for the first time in 2012. Consequently, numerous studies focused on its role in organ damage in cases of neuropathologies, including TBI. Methods: To evaluate the role that the glymphatic system has in the pathogenesis of TBI, on 23 March 2022, a systematic review of the literature according to PRISMA guidelines was carried out using the SCOPUS and Medline (via PubMed) databases, resulting in 12 articles after the selection process. Discussion and conclusion: The present review demonstrated that an alteration of AQP4 is associated with the accumulation of substances S100b, GFAP, and NSE, known markers of TBI in the forensic field. In addition, the alteration of the functionality of AQP4 favors edema, which, as already described, constitutes alterations of secondary brain injuries. Moreover, specific areas of the brain were demonstrated to be prone to alterations of the glymphatic pathway, suggesting their involvement in post-TBI damage. Therefore, further studies are mandatory. In this regard, a study protocol on cadavers is also proposed, based on the analyzed evidence.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is an emerging infectious disease. Bilateral pneumonia, acute respiratory failure, systemic inflammation, endothelial dysfunction and coagulation activation are key features of severe COVID-19. Fibrinogen and D-dimer levels are typically increased. The risk for venous thromboembolism is markedly increased, especially in patients in the intensive care unit despite prophylactic dose anticoagulation. Pulmonary microvascular thrombosis has also been described and the risk for arterial thrombotic diseases also appears to be increased while bleeding is less common than thrombosis, but it can occur. Evaluation for venous thromboembolism may be challenging because symptoms of pulmonary embolism overlap with COVID-19, and imaging studies may not be feasible in all cases. The threshold for evaluation or diagnosis of thromboembolism should be low given the high frequency of these events. Management and treatment are new challenges due to the paucity of high-quality evidence regarding efficacy and safety of different approaches to prevent or treat thromboembolic complications of the disease. All inpatients should receive thromboprophylaxis unless contraindicated. Some institutional protocols provide more aggressive anticoagulation with intermediate or even therapeutic dose anticoagulation for COVID-19 patients admitted to ICU. Therapeutic dose anticoagulation is always appropriate to treat deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism, unless contraindicated. This article reviews evaluation and management of coagulation abnormalities in individuals with COVID-19.

Hyperthermia is an internal body temperature increase above 40.5 °C; normally internal body temperature is kept constant through natural homeostatic mechanisms. Heat-related illnesses occur due to exposure to high environmental temperatures in conditions in which an organism is unable to maintain adequate homeostasis. This can happen, for example, when the organism is unable to dissipate heat adequately. Heat dissipation occurs through evaporation, conduction, convection, and radiation. Heat disease exhibits a continuum of signs and symptoms ranging from minor to major clinical pictures. Minor clinical pictures include cramps, syncope, edema, tetany, and exhaustion. Major clinical pictures include heatstroke and life-threatening heat stroke and typically are expressed in the presence of an extremely high body temperature. There are also some categories of people at greater risk of developing these diseases, due to exposure in particular geographic areas (e.g., hot humid environments), to unchangeable predisposing conditions (e.g., advanced age, young age (i.e., children), diabetes, skin disease with reduced sweating), to modifiable risk factors (e.g., alcoholism, excessive exercise, infections), to partially modifiable risk factors (obesity), to certain types of professional activity (e.g., athletes, military personnel, and outdoor laborers) or to the effects of drug treatment (e.g., beta-blockers, anticholinergics, diuretics). Heat-related illness is largely preventable.