SARS-CoV-2 currently lacks effective first-line drug treatment. We present promising data from in silico docking studies of new Methisazone compounds (modified with calcium, Ca; iron, Fe; magnesium, Mg; manganese, Mn; or zinc, Zn) designed to bind more strongly to key proteins involved in replication of SARS-CoV-2. In this in silico molecular docking study, we investigated the inhibiting role of Methisazone and the modified drugs against SARS-CoV-2 proteins: ribonucleic acid (RNA)-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp), spike protein, papain-like protease (PlPr), and main protease (MPro). We found that the highest binding interactions were found with the spike protein (6VYB), with the highest overall binding being observed with Mn-bound Methisazone at −8.3 kcal/mol, followed by Zn and Ca at −8.0 kcal/mol, and Fe and Mg at −7.9 kcal/mol. We also found that the metal-modified Methisazone had higher affinity for PlPr and MPro. In addition, we identified multiple binding pockets that could be singly or multiply occupied on all proteins tested. The best binding energy was with Mn–Methisazone versus spike protein, and the largest cumulative increases in binding energies were found with PlPr. We suggest that further studies are warranted to identify whether these compounds may be effective for treatment and/or prophylaxis.

Background Thoracoscopic surgeries are an absolute indication of one lung ventilation OLV, the choice of using volume-controlled ventilation (VCV) or pressure controlled ventilation (PCV) remains controversial. Respiratory complications are major cause of postoperative morbidity which is associated with increased extravascular lung water (EVLW). Assessment of (EVLW) helps in early detection and treatment of respiratory complications. Lung ultrasound (LUS) has been suggested as reliable method of assessment of EVLW. This study was designed to figure out whether there was any difference in OLV by either PCV or VCV on EVLW water in the ventilated lung using LUS score and arterial oxygenation. Methodology 50 patients were randomly assigned into two groups; Group V: received VCV (Vt 7 ml/kg ideal body weight) Group P: received PCV (To achieve Vt 7 ml/kg ideal body weight, Pmax 30 cmh(2)o) Results We found that both techniques PCV and VCV showed no statistically significant differences as regards the ultrasound score at different timings of measurement; (T0) before induction of anesthesia, (T5) immediately at the end of operation after extubation, and (T6) 2 hours after ICU admission. Where P values were 0.525, 0.309, and 0.597 consecutively, we also found there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups regarding hemodynamics, arterial blood gases, ventilatory parameters. Conclusion We concluded that when utilizing VCV & PCV in OLV in thoracospic surgeries there was no statistically significant difference regarding EVLW score measured by LUS in the ventilated lung.