Introduction: Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is the second most common autoimmune disease among children. There is evidence suggesting that dysbiosis of some gut colonizing bacteria are associated with the pathogenesis of T1D. However, these studies are still controversial and a systematic review was conducted to evaluate the association between gut microbiota and T1D.Methods: A systematic search was carried out in Medline (Via Pubmed) and Embase from January 2000 to January 2019 for all original cross-sectional, cohort, case–control or nested case–control studies investigating the association between gut microbiota and T1D.Results: Of 568 articles identified, 26 studies met the inclusion criteria. The total population study of these articles consists of 2600 children (under 18 years old) and 189 adults. Among the included studies, 24 articles confirmed the association between gut microbiota dysbiosis and T1D. The most common bacterial alterations in T1D patients includedBacteroidesspp.,Streptococcusspp.,Clostridiumspp.,Bifidobacteriumspp.,Prevotellaspp.,Staphylococcusspp.,Blautiaspp.,Faecalibacteriumspp.,Roseburiaspp., andLactobacillusspp.Conclusion: Our study showed a significant association between alterations in intestinal microbial composition and T1D; however, in some articles, it is not clear which one happens first. Investigation of altered gut microbiota can help in the early detection of T1D before seropositivity. Targeted microbiome modulation can be a novel potential therapeutic strategy.

Introduction: The severity of COVID-19 may be correlated with the risk of liver injury development. An increasing number of studies indicate that degrees of hepatotoxicity has been associated with using some medications in the management of COVID-19 patients. However, limited studies had systematically investigated the evidence of drug-induced liver injury (DILI) in COVID-19 patients. Thus, this study aimed to examine DILI in COVID-19 patients.Methods: A systematic search was carried out in PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, and Web of Science up to December 30, 2020. Search items included “SARS-CoV-2”, “Coronavirus,” COVID-19, and liver injury.Results: We included 22 related articles. Among included studies, there was five case report, five case series, four randomizes control trial (RCT), seven cohort studies, and one cross-sectional study. The drugs included in this systematic review were remdesivir, favipiravir, tocilizumab, hydroxychloroquine, and lopinavir/ritonavir. Among included studies, some studies revealed a direct role of drugs, while others couldn't certainly confirm that the liver injury was due to SARS-CoV-2 itself or administration of medications. However, a significant number of studies reported that liver injury could be attributable to drug administration.Discussion: Liver injury in COVID-19 patients could be caused by the virus itself or the administration of some types of drug. Intensive liver function monitoring should be considered for patients, especially patients who are treated with drugs such as remdesivir, lopinavir/ritonavir, and tocilizumab.

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) poses a significant challenge due to its poorly understood pathogenesis, substantial morbidity, and often inadequate treatment outcomes. The role of fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) in managing IBS symptoms remains inconclusive. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to ascertain the effectiveness of FMT in relieving symptoms in IBS patients. A thorough search was executed on PubMed/Medline and Embase databases until 14 June 2023, including all studies on FMT use in IBS patients. We examined the efficiency of FMT in reducing patients’ symptoms overall and in particular subgroups, classified by placebo preparation, FMT preparation, frequency, and route of administration. Among 1015 identified studies, seven met the inclusion criteria for the meta-analysis. The overall symptomatology of FMT-treated IBS patients did not significantly differ from the control group (Odds Ratio (OR) = 0.99, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.39–2.5). Multiple doses of FMT compared with non-FMT placebo, or single-donor FMT therapy compared with autologous FMT placebo also showed no significant benefit (OR = 0.32, 95%CI (0.07–1.32), p = 0.11, and OR = 1.67, 95%CI (0.59–4.67), p = 0.32, respectively). However, a single dose of multiple-donor FMT administered via colonoscopy (lower gastrointestinal (GI) administration) significantly improved patient symptoms compared with autologous FMT placebo (OR = 2.54, 95%CI (1.20–5.37), p = 0.01, and OR = 2.2, 95%CI (1.20–4.03), p = 0.01, respectively). The studies included in the analysis showed a low risk of bias and no publication bias. In conclusion, lower GI administration of a single dose of multiple-donor FMT significantly alleviates patient complaints compared with the autologous FMT used as a placebo. The underlying mechanisms need to be better understood, and further experimental studies are desired to fill the current gaps.

Objective: The actual impact of the pandemic on COVID-19 specific mortality is still unclear due to the variability in access to diagnostic tools. This study aimed to estimate the excess all-cause mortality in Iran until September 2021 based on the national death statistics.Results: The autoregressive integrated moving average was used to predict seasonal all-cause death in Iran (R-squared = 0.45). We observed a 38.8% (95% confidence interval (CI) 29.7%–40.1%) rise in the all-cause mortality from 22 June 2020 to 21 June 2021. The excess all-cause mortality per 100,000 population were 178.86 (95% CI 137.2–220.5, M:F ratio = 1.3) with 49.1% of these excess deaths due to COVID-19. Comparison of spring 2019 and spring 2021 revealed that the highest percent increase in mortality was among men aged 65–69 years old (77%) and women aged 60–64 years old (86.8%). Moreover, the excess mortality among 31 provinces of Iran ranged from 109.7 (Hormozgan) to 273.2 (East-Azerbaijan) per 100,000 population.In conclusion, there was a significant rise in all-cause mortality during the pandemic. Since COVID-19 fatality explains about half of this rise, the increase in other causes of death and underestimation in reported data should be concerned by further studies.

Objectives: The rapidly evolving coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization on March 11, 2020. It was first detected in the city of Wuhan in China and has spread globally resulting in substantial health and economic crisis in many countries. Observational studies have partially identified the different aspects of this disease. Up to this date, no comprehensive systematic review for the clinical, laboratory, epidemiologic and mortality findings has been published. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis for a better understanding of COVID-19. Methods: We reviewed the scientific literature published from January 1, 2019 to March 3, 2020. Statistical analyses were performed with STATA (version 14, IC; Stata Corporation, College Station, TX, USA). The pooled frequency with 95% confidence intervals (CI) was assessed using random effect model. Publication bias was assessed and p <0.05 was considered a statistically significant publication bias. Results: Out of 1102 studies, 32 satisfied the inclusion criteria. A total of 4789 patients with a mean age of 49 years were evaluated. Fever (83.0%, CI 77.5 to 87.6), cough (65.2%, CI 58.6 to 71.2) and myalgia/fatigue (34.7, CI 26.0 to 44.4) were the most common symptoms. The most prevalent comorbidities were hypertension (18.5 %, CI 12.7 to 24.4) and Cardiovascular disease (14.9 %, CI 6.0 to 23.8). Among the laboratory abnormalities, elevated C-Reactive Protein (CRP) (72.0% (CI 54.3 to 84.6) and lymphopenia (50.1%, CI 38.0 to 62.4) were the most common findings. Bilateral ground-glass opacities (66.0%, CI 51.1 to 78.0) was the most common CT-Scan presentation. Pooled mortality rate was 6.6%, with males having significantly higher mortality compared to females (OR 3.4; 95% CI 1.2 to 9.1, P = 0.01). Conclusion: COVID-19 commonly presented with a progressive course of cough and fever with more than half of hospitalized patients showing leukopenia or a high CRP on their laboratory findings. Mortality associated with COVID19 was higher than that reported in studies in China with Males having a 3-fold higher risk of mortality in COVID19 compared to females.

Background. Lactic acid bacteria (LAB) are among the most important strains of probiotics. Some are normal flora of human mucous membranes in the gastrointestinal system, skin, urinary tract, and genitalia. There is evidence suggesting that LAB has an antiviral effect on viral infections. However, these studies are still controversial; a systematic review was conducted to evaluate the antiviral effects of LAB on viral infections. Methods. The systematic search was conducted until the end of December 17, 2022, using international databases such as Scopus, Web of Science, and Medline (via PubMed). The keywords of our search were lactic acid bacteria, Lactobacillales, Lactobacillus (as well as its species), probiotics, antiviral, inhibitory effect, and virus. Results. Of 15.408 potentially relevant articles obtained, 45 eligible in-vivo human studies were selected for inclusion in the study from databases, registers, and citation searching. We conducted a systematic review of the antiviral effects of the LAB based on the included articles. The most commonly investigated lactobacillus specie were Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG and Lactobacillus casei. Conclusion. Our study indicates that 40 of the selected 45 of the included articles support the positive effect of LAB on viral infections, although some studies showed no significant positive effect of LABs on some viral infections.