Coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid‐2019) has been associated with several cutaneous manifestations(1–3). A temporary field hospital was implemented during the pandemic peak in Madrid, Spain, to attend COVID‐19 patients with mild to moderate pneumonia.

Mortality and re-admission rates for decompensated acute heart failure (AHF) is increasing overall and risk stratification might be challenging. We sought to evaluate the prognostic role of systemic venous ultrasonography in patients hospitalized for AHF. We prospectively recruited 74 AHF patients with a NT-proBNP level above 500 pg/mL. Then, multi-organ ultrasound assessments (lung, inferior vena cava (IVC), pulsed-wave Doppler (PW-Doppler) of hepatic, portal, intra-renal and femoral veins) were performed at admission, discharge, and follow-up (for 90 days). We also calculated the Venous Excess Ultrasound System (VExUS), a new score of systemic congestion based on IVC dilatation and pulsed-wave Doppler morphology of hepatic, portal and intra-renal veins. An intra-renal monophasic pattern (area under the curve (AUC) 0.923, sensitivity (Sn) 90%, specificity (Sp) 81%, positive predictive value (PPV) 43%, and negative predictive value (NPV) 98%), a portal pulsatility > 50% (AUC 0.749, Sn 80%, Sp 69%, PPV 30%, NPV 96%) and a VExUS score of 3 corresponding to severe congestion (AUC 0.885, Sn 80%, Sp 75%, PPV 33%, and NPV 96%) predicted death during hospitalization. An IVC above 2 cm (AUC 0.758, Sn 93.l% and Sp 58.3) and the presence of an intra-renal monophasic pattern (AUC 0. 834, sensitivity 0.917, specificity 67.4%) in the follow-up visit predicted AHF-related re-admission. Additional scans during hospitalization or the calculation of a VExUS score probably adds unnecessary complexity to the assessment of AHF patients. In conclusion, VExUS score does not contribute to the guidance of therapy or the prediction of complications, compared with the presence of an IVC greater than 2 cm, a venous monophasic intra-renal pattern or a pulsatility > 50% of the portal vein in AHF patients. Early and multidisciplinary follow-up visits remain necessary for the improvement of the prognosis of this highly prevalent disease.

Accumulated data show the utility of diagnostic multi-organ point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS) in the assessment of patients admitted to an internal medicine ward. We assessed whether multi-organ PoCUS (lung, cardiac, and abdomen) provides relevant diagnostic and/or therapeutic information in patients admitted for any reason to an internal medicine ward. We conducted a prospective, observational, and single-center study, at a secondary hospital. Multi-organ PoCUS was performed during the first 24 h of admission. The sonographer had access to the patients’ medical history, physical examination, and basic complementary tests performed in the Emergency Department (laboratory, X-ray, electrocardiogram). We considered a relevant ultrasound finding if it implied a significant diagnostic and/or therapeutic change. In the second semester of 2019, we enrolled 310 patients, 48.7% were male and the mean age was 70.5 years. Relevant ultrasound findings were detected in 86 patients (27.7%) and in 60 (19.3%) triggered a therapeutic change. These findings were associated with an older age (Mantel–Haenszel χ² = 25.6; p < 0.001) and higher degree of dependency (Mantel–Haenszel χ² = 5.7; p = 0.017). Multi-organ PoCUS provides relevant diagnostic information, complementing traditional physical examination, and facilitates therapy adjustment, regardless of the cause of admission. Multi-organ PoCUS to be useful need to be systematically integrated into the decision-making process in internal medicine.

Point-of-care lung ultrasound (LUS) is an attractive alternative to chest X-ray (CXR), but its diagnostic accuracy compared to CXR has not been well studied in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. We conducted a prospective observational study to assess the correlation between LUS and CXR findings in COVID-19 patients. Ninety-six patients with a clinical diagnosis of COVID-19 underwent an LUS exam and CXR upon presentation. Physicians blinded to the CXR findings performed all LUS exams. Detection of pulmonary infiltrates by CXR versus LUS was compared between patients categorized as suspected or confirmed COVID-19 based on reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction. Sensitivities and correlation by Kappa statistic were calculated between LUS and CXR. LUS detected pulmonary infiltrates more often than CXR in both suspected and confirmed COVID-19 subjects. The most common LUS abnormalities were discrete B-lines, confluent B-lines, and small subpleural consolidations. Most important, LUS detected unilateral or bilateral pulmonary infiltrates in 55% of subjects with a normal CXR. Substantial agreement was demonstrated between LUS and CXR for normal, unilateral or bilateral findings (Κ = 0.48 (95% CI 0.34 to 0.63)). In patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19, LUS detected pulmonary infiltrates more often than CXR, including more than half of the patients with a normal CXR.

Introduction. The diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection is crucial for medical and public health reasons, to allow the best treatment of cases and the best control of the pandemic. Serology testing allows for the detection of asymptomatic infections and 19-COVID cases once the virus has been cleared. We analyzed the usefulness of the SARS-CoV-2 rapid test of Autobio and tried to correlate its pattern with the severity of COVID19 infection. Material and methods. We analyzed the accuracy and clinical usefulness of a point-of-care IgM and/or IgG test for SARS-CoV-2 in 35 COVID-19 patients [12 (34.3%) mild-moderate and 23 (65.7%) severe-critical] admitted to a field hospital in Madrid, as well as in 5 controls. Results. The mean time from the first day of symptoms to the antibody test was 28 days (SD: 8.7), similar according to the severity of the disease. All patients with SARS-CoV-2 PCR+ showed the corresponding IgG positivity, while these results were negative in all control individuals. A total of 26 (74%) cases also presented with positive IgM, 19 (83%) were severe-critical cases and 7 (58%) were mild-moderate cases. The IgM response lasted longer in the severe critical cases (mean: 29.7 days; SD: 8.4) compared to the moderate cases (mean: 21.2 days; SD: 2.0). Conclusions. Rapid serology tests are useful for the diagnosis of patients with COVID-19 (mainly IgG detection) and may also be correlated with the severity of the infection (based on IgM detection).