Vegetarian (VG) and vegan (VN) diets in childhood are of growing interest due to their perceived health and environmental benefits. Concerns remain due to the possible disruption of healthy growth and development of children because of the scarcity of evidence-based studies. Among the nutrients of special concern is vitamin B12. Therefore, the Czech Vegan Children Study (CAROTS) decided to examine the relationship between B12 metabolism parameters and B12 intake through diet and supplementation. We analyzed laboratory parameters within n = 79 VG, n = 69 VN, and n = 52 omnivores (OM) children (0–18 years old). There were no significant differences in levels of holotranscobalamin (aB12), folate, homocysteine (hcys), or mean corpuscular volume. However, there was a significant difference in levels of cyanocobalamin (B12) (p = 0.018), even though we identified only n = 1 VG and n = 2 VN children as B12 deficient. On the other hand, we identified n = 35 VG, n = 28 VN, and n = 9 OM children with vitamin B12 hypervitaminosis (p = 0.004). This finding was related to a high prevalence of over-supplementation in the group (mean dose for VG 178.19 ± 238.5 µg per day; VN 278.35 ± 394.63 µg per day). Additionally, we found a significant (p < 0.05) difference between B12, aB12, and hcys levels of supplemented vs. non-supplemented VG/VN children. This can show that the intake of vitamin B12 via diet in the VG group might not be sufficient. Secondly, we analyzed a relation between supplement use in pregnancy and breastfeeding and its impact on vitamin B12 levels of children aged 0–3 years. Out of n = 46 mothers, only n = 3 (e.g., 6.5%) were not supplemented at all. We have not identified any clinical manifestation of B12 deficiency and only n = 1 child with low serum cobalamin, a child who did not receive vitamin B12 supplementation and whose mother took only low doses of vitamin B12 (25/µg/day).To conclude, we did not observe any life-threatening or severe consequences of laboratory-stated vitamin B12 deficiency; thus, our group was well supplemented. On the other hand, we have identified many subjects with vitamin B12 hypervitaminosis of unknown impact on their health. Further research and new guidelines for B12 supplementation among VG and VN children are needed.

Introduction: Our study aimed to analyze whether renal parameters can predict mortality from COVID-19 disease in hospitalized patients. Methods: This retrospective cohort includes all adult patients with confirmed COVID-19 disease who were consecutively admitted to the tertiary hospital during the 4-month period (September 1 to December 31, 2020). We analyzed their basic laboratory values, urinalysis, comorbidities, length of hospitalization, and survival. The RIFLE and KDIGO criteria were used for AKI and CKD grading, respectively. To display renal function evolution and the severity of renal damage, we subdivided patients further into 6 groups as follows: group 1 (normal renal function), group 2 (CKD grades 2 + 3a), group 3 (AKI-DROP defined as whose s-Cr level dropped by >33.3% during the hospitalization), group 4 (CKD 3b), group 5 (CKD 4 + 5), and group 6 (AKI-RISE defined as whose s-Cr level was elevated by ≥50% within 7 days or by ≥26.5 μmol/L within 48 h during hospitalization). Then, we used eGFR on admission independently of renal damage to check whether it can predict mortality. Only 4 groups were used: group I – normal renal function (eGFR > 1.5 mL/s), group II – mild renal involvement (eGFR 0.75–1.5), group III – moderate (eGFR 0.5–0.75), and group IV – severe (GFR <0.5). Results: A total of 680 patients were included in our cohort; among them, 244 patients displayed normal renal function, 207 patients fulfilled AKI, and 229 patients suffered from CKD. In total, a significantly higher mortality rate was found in the AKI and the CKD groups versus normal renal function – 37.2% and 32.3% versus 9.4%, respectively (p < 0.001). In addition, the groups 1–6 divided by severity of renal damage reported mortality of 9.4%, 21.2%, 24.1%, 48.7%, 62.8%, and 55.1%, respectively (p < 0.001). The mean hospitalization duration of alive patients with normal renal findings was 9.5 days, while it was 12.1 days in patients with any renal damage (p < 0.001). When all patients were compared according to eGFR on admission, the mortality was as follows: group I (normal) 9.8%, group II (mild) 22.1%, group III (moderate) 40.9%, and group IV (severe) 50.5%, respectively (p < 0.001). It was a significantly better mortality predictor than CRP on admission (AUC 0.7053 vs. 0.6053). Conclusions: Mortality in patients with abnormal renal function was 3 times higher compared to patients with normal renal function. Also, patients with renal damage had a worse and longer hospitalization course. Lastly, eGFR on admission, independently of renal damage type, was an excellent tool for predicting mortality. Further, the change in s-Cr levels during hospitalization reflected the mortality prognosis.

High‐powered magnets are a preventable cause of serious gastrointestinal injury in children, with ingestion often resulting in hospitalization and occasionally surgery. We report six classmates, aged 5–6 years, who ingested high‐powered magnets during a single school day after mistaking them for candy. All presented to our emergency department within 12 h of ingestion. Three underwent endoscopy and three were managed with serial imaging; all magnets were retrieved or passed spontaneously, with no obstruction, perforation, or surgery. The near‐simultaneous presentations strained endoscopy resources and required coordinated triage by magnet number, configuration, and symptoms. The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission defines these magnets for users ≥14 years, yet all patients were under 7, underscoring age‐based labeling limitations. To our knowledge, this is the first reported cluster of simultaneous classroom magnet ingestion, highlighting persistent exposure despite regulation and the need for standardized triage protocols and national surveillance.

Introduction: The main objective of this study was to identify the best combination of admission day parameters for predicting COVID-19 mortality in hospitalized patients. Furthermore, we sought to compare the predictive capacity of pulmonary parameters to that of renal parameters for mortality from COVID-19. Methods: In this retrospective study, all patients admitted to a tertiary hospital between September 1st, 2020, and December 31st, 2020, who were clinically symptomatic and tested positive for COVID-19, were included. We gathered extensive data on patient admissions, including laboratory results, comorbidities, chest X-ray (CXR) images, and SpO2 levels, to determine their role in predicting mortality. Experienced radiologists evaluated the CXR images and assigned a score from 0 to 18 based on the severity of COVID-19 pneumonia. Further, we categorized patients into two independent groups based on their renal function using the RIFLE and KDIGO criteria to define the acute kidney injury (AKI) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) groups. The first group (“AKI&CKD”) was subdivided into six subgroups: normal renal function (A); CKD grade 2+3a (B); AKI-DROP (C); CKD grade 3b (D); AKI-RISE (E); and grade 4 + 5 CKD (F). The second group was based only on estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) at the admission, and thus it was divided into four grades: grade 1, grade 2+3a, grade 3b, and grade 4 + 5. Results: The cohort comprised 619 patients. Patients who died during hospitalization had a significantly higher mean radiological score compared to those who survived, with a p value <0.01. Moreover, we observed that the risk for mortality was significantly increased as renal function deteriorated, as evidenced by the AKI&CKD and eGFR groups (p < 0.001 for each group). Regarding mortality prediction, the area under the curve (AUC) for renal parameters (AKI&CKD group, eGFR group, and age) was found to be superior to that of pulmonary parameters (age, radiological score, SpO2, CRP, and D-dimer) with an AUC of 0.8068 versus 0.7667. However, when renal and pulmonary parameters were combined, the AUC increased to 0.8813. Optimal parameter combinations for predicting mortality from COVID-19 were identified for three medical settings: Emergency Medical Service (EMS), the Emergency Department, and the Internal Medicine Floor. The AUC for these settings was 0.7874, 0.8614, and 0.8813, respectively. Conclusions: Our study demonstrated that selected renal parameters are superior to pulmonary parameters in predicting COVID-19 mortality for patients requiring hospitalization. When combining both renal and pulmonary factors, the predictive ability of mortality significantly improved. Additionally, we identified the optimal combination of factors for mortality prediction in three distinct settings: EMS, Emergency Department, and Internal Medicine Floor.