Background: Sepsis/septic shock is a life-threatening and time-dependent condition that requires timely management to reduce mortality. This review aims to update physicians with regard to the main pillars of treatment for this insidious condition. Methods: PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE were searched from inception with special attention paid to November 2021–January 2023. Results: The management of sepsis/septic shock is challenging and involves different pathophysiological aspects, encompassing empirical antimicrobial treatment (which is promptly administered after microbial tests), fluid (crystalloids) replacement (to be established according to fluid tolerance and fluid responsiveness), and vasoactive agents (e.g., norepinephrine (NE)), which are employed to maintain mean arterial pressure above 65 mmHg and reduce the risk of fluid overload. In cases of refractory shock, vasopressin (rather than epinephrine) should be combined with NE to reach an acceptable level of pressure control. If mechanical ventilation is indicated, the tidal volume should be reduced from 10 to 6 mL/kg. Heparin is administered to prevent venous thromboembolism, and glycemic control is recommended. The efficacy of other treatments (e.g., proton-pump inhibitors, sodium bicarbonate, etc.) is largely debated, and such treatments might be used on a case-to-case basis. Conclusions: The management of sepsis/septic shock has significantly progressed in the last few years. Improving knowledge of the main therapeutic cornerstones of this challenging condition is crucial to achieve better patient outcomes.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a newly discovered coronavirus responsible for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. COVID-19 has rapidly become a public health emergency of international concern. Although remarkable scientific achievements have been reached since the beginning of the pandemic, the knowledge behind this novel coronavirus, in terms of molecular and pathogenic characteristics and zoonotic potential, is still relatively limited. Today, there is a vaccine, or rather several vaccines, which, for the first time in the history of highly contagious infectious diseases that have plagued mankind, has been manufactured in just one year. Currently, four vaccines are licensed by regulatory agencies, and they use RNA or viral vector technologies. The positive effects of the vaccination campaign are being felt in many parts of the world, but the disappearance of this new infection is still far from being a reality, as it is also threatened by the presence of novel SARS-CoV-2 variants that could undermine the effectiveness of the vaccine, hampering the immunization control efforts. Indeed, the current findings indicate that SARS-CoV-2 is adapting to transmission in humans more efficiently, while further divergence from the initial archetype should be considered. In this review, we aimed to provide a collection of the current knowledge regarding the molecular, phylogenetic, and pathogenetic insights into SARS-CoV-2. The most recent findings obtained with respect to the impact of novel emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants as well as the development and implementation of vaccines are highlighted.

COVID-19 emerged in late 2019 in China and quickly spread across the globe, causing over 521 million cases of infection and 6.26 million deaths to date. After 2 years, numerous advances have been made. First of all, the preventive vaccine, which has been implemented in record time, is effective in more than 95% of cases. Additionally, in the diagnostic field, there are numerous molecular and antigenic diagnostic kits that are equipped with high sensitivity and specificity. Real Time-PCR-based assays for the detection of viral RNA are currently considered the gold-standard method for SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis and can be used efficiently on pooled nasopharyngeal, or oropharyngeal samples for widespread screening. Moreover, additional, and more advanced molecular methods such as droplet-digital PCR (ddPCR), clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR) and next-generation sequencing (NGS), are currently under development to detect the SARS-CoV-2 RNA. However, as the number of subjects infected with SARS-CoV-2 continuously increases globally, health care systems are being placed under increased stress. Thus, the clinical laboratory plays an important role, helping to select especially asymptomatic individuals who are actively carrying the live replicating virus, with fast and non-invasive molecular technologies. Recent diagnostic strategies, other than molecular methods, have been adopted to either detect viral antigens, i.e., antigen-based immunoassays, or human anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, i.e., antibody-based immunoassays, in nasal or oropharyngeal swabs, as well as in blood or saliva samples. However, the role of mucosal sIgAs, which are essential in the control of viruses entering the body through mucosal surfaces, remains to be elucidated, and in particular the role of the immune response in counteracting SARS-CoV-2 infection, primarily at the site(s) of virus entry that appears to be promising.

Until less than two decades ago, all known human coronaviruses (CoV) caused diseases so mild that they did not stimulate further advanced CoV research. In 2002 and following years, the scenario changed dramatically with the advent of the new more pathogenic CoVs, including Severe Acute Respiratory Syndome (SARS-CoV-1), Middle Eastern respiratory syndrome (MERS)-CoV, and the new zoonotic SARS-CoV-2, likely originated from bat species and responsible for the present coronavirus disease (COVID-19), which to date has caused 15,581,007 confirmed cases and 635,173 deaths in 208 countries, including Italy. SARS-CoV-2 transmission is mainly airborne via droplets generated by symptomatic patients, and possibly asymptomatic individuals during incubation of the disease, although for the latter, there are no certain data yet. However, research on asymptomatic viral infection is currently ongoing worldwide to elucidate the real prevalence and mortality of the disease. From a clinical point of view, COVID-19 would be defined as “COVID Planet “ because it presents as a multifaceted disease, due to the large number of organs and tissues infected by the virus. Overall, based on the available published data, 80.9% of patients infected by SARS-CoV-2 develop a mild disease/infection, 13.8% severe pneumonia, 4.7% respiratory failure, septic shock, or multi-organ failure, and 3% of these cases are fatal, but mortality parameter is highly variable in different countries. Clinically, SARS-CoV-2 causes severe primary interstitial viral pneumonia and a “cytokine storm syndrome”, characterized by a severe and fatal uncontrolled systemic inflammatory response triggered by the activation of interleukin 6 (IL-6) with development of endothelitis and generalized thrombosis that can lead to organ failure and death. Risk factors include advanced age and comorbidities including hypertension, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease. Virus entry occurs via binding the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor present in almost all tissues and organs through the Spike (S) protein. Currently, SARS-CoV-2 infection is prevented by the use of masks, social distancing, and improved hand hygiene measures. This review summarizes the current knowledge on the main biological and clinical features of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, also focusing on the principal measures taken in some Italian regions to face the emergency and on the most important treatments used to manage the COVID-19 pandemic.

Are JC polyomavirus (JCPyV) and BK polyomavirus (BKPyV) infections associated with spontaneous abortion (SA)? There is no association of JCPyV or BKPyV with SA. A large number of risk factors have been associated with SA. The role of polyomaviruses, including JCPyV and BKPyV, in SA remains to be clarified. This is a case-control study including women affected by spontaneous abortion (SA, n = 100, the cases) and women who underwent voluntary interruption of pregnancy (VI, n = 100, the controls). Viral DNAs were investigated by qualitative PCR and quantitative droplet-digital PCR (ddPCR) in matched chorionic villi tissues and peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) from SA (n = 100) and VI (n = 100). Indirect ELISAs with mimotopes/synthetic peptides corresponding to JCPyV and BKPyV viral capsid protein 1 epitopes were then employed to investigate specific IgG antibodies against JCPyV and BKPyV in human sera from SA (n = 80) and VI (n = 80) cohorts. JCPyV DNA was detected in 51% and 61% of SA and VI samples, respectively, with a mean viral DNA load of 7.92 copy/104 cells in SA and 5.91 copy/104 cells in VI (P > 0.05); BKPyV DNA was detected in 11% and 12% of SA and VI specimens, respectively, with a mean viral DNA load of 2.7 copy/104 cells in SA and 3.08 copy/104 cells in VI (P > 0.05). JCPyV was more prevalent than BKPyV in both SA and VI specimens (P < 0.0001). In PBMCs from the SA and VI cohorts, JCPyV DNA was detected with a prevalence of 8% and 12%, respectively, with a mean viral DNA load of 2.29 copy/104 cells in SA and 1.88 copy/104 cells in VI (P > 0.05). The overall prevalence of serum IgG antibodies against JCPyV detected by indirect ELISAs was 52.5% and 48.7% in SA and VI groups, respectively, whereas BKPyV-positive sera were found in 80% SA and 78.7% VI samples. This study did not investigate the presence of viral mRNA and/or proteins, which are indicative of an active viral infection, and these might be taken into consideration in future studies. JCPyV and BKPyV DNA sequences were detected and quantitatively analyzed for the first time by PCR/ddPCR in chorionic villi tissues and PBMCs from SA and VI specimens. Moreover specific immunological approaches detected serum IgG against JCPyV/BKPyV. Statistical analyses, however, do not indicate an association between these polyomaviruses and SA. This work was supported by the University of Ferrara, FAR research grants and the University Hospital of Ferrara/University of Ferrara joint grant. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Purpose. The success of total joint arthroplasty (TJA) has led to consistent growth in the use of arthroplasty in progressively younger patients. However, more than 10 percent of patients require revision surgery due to implant failure caused by aseptic or septic inflammation. Among the latter, surgical site infection (SSI) represents one of the worst complications of TJA, potentially resulting in the removal of the prosthesis. The aim of our study was to identify potential risk factors for SSIs in a population of patients undergoing TJA. Methods. TJA were prospectively recruited at Casa di Cura Santa Maria Maddalena from February 2019 to April 2020. Age, sex, major comorbidities, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class, length of surgery, type of surgical suture, total hospital length of stay, and clinical laboratory data were collected. The study population was then divided into two groups: Group A, normal postoperative course, and Group B, patients who developed SSI at follow-up (17-25 days). Results. 25/760 (3.3%) patients developed SSIs at follow-up. Clinical and demographic parameters were not different between the two groups. Total leucocyte and neutrophil values at discharge resulted to be significatively higher in Group B compared to Group A ( $p=0.025$ and $p=0.016$ , respectively). Values of 7860/μL for total leucocyte and 5185/μL for neutrophil count at discharge significantly predicted the future development of SSI (AUC 0.623 and AUC 0.641, respectively; $p<0.05$ ) independently from confounding factors (total leukocytes: $\text{O}.\text{R}.=3,69$ [95% C.I. 1,63-8,32]; neutrophils: $\text{O}.\text{R}.=3,98$ [95% C.I. 1,76-8,97]). Deep SSIs has been diagnosed significantly before superficial SSIs ( $p=\mathrm{0,008}$ ), with a median advance of 9 days. Conclusion. Total leukocytes and neutrophils at discharge seem useful to identify a population at risk for the development of septic inflammation at the surgical site following TJA. Further studies with larger populations are needed to develop a predictive SSIs risk score that should include those variables.