(1) Background: The pandemic wave produced by SARS-CoV-2 Omicron was characterized by milder clinical forms and high contagiousness. The vaccination rate against COVID-19 in Romania was approximately 42%. (2) Objectives: Comparison of the clinical severity in vaccinated patients compared to unvaccinated ones. (3) Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on a group of 699 adult patients confirmed with COVID-19 who presented in the “Sf. Cuvioasa Parascheva” Infectious Diseases Clinical Hospital of Galati, Romania, between 1 January 2022 and 30 June 2022. The study compared the need for hospitalization, reinfections, demographic and comorbidity data, clinical and paraclinical parameters from the initial evaluation, and the ratio of unfavorable developments on subgroups chosen according to the vaccination status. (4) Results and Conclusions: Our study reveals that unvaccinated patients required hospitalization in 54.68% of cases, while fully vaccinated patients had a hospitalization rate of 40.72%, which was significantly lower than that of the unvaccinated group (p = 0.01); patients who received a booster dose had a hospitalization rate of 27.84% (p < 0.01, significantly lower than unvaccinated individuals; p = 0.01, significantly lower than fully vaccinated individuals); and among the four patients who received four doses, none required hospitalization. From the analysis of the two subgroups of hospitalized patients, we observed a significantly higher prevalence of radiological lesions, such as pulmonary opacities in the group of unvaccinated patients and a higher average duration of hospitalization, and serum values of D-dimers and blood-sugar at admission were significantly higher in unvaccinated patients. The higher presence of these parameters, which are indicators of severe progression in clinical studies, in the group of unvaccinated patients suggests the need to include them in the initial evaluation of the unvaccinated patients with COVID-19.The cumulative share of deaths and transfers in the ICU was higher in the group of unvaccinated patients, but the difference between the groups had no statistical significance. This study draws attention to the possibility of severe clinical forms among both vaccinated and unvaccinated populations, especially in the elderly and in patients with multiple comorbidities.

Background/Objectives: The newly emergent COVID-19 pandemic involved primarily the respiratory system and had also major cardiovascular system (CVS) implications, revealed by acute myocardial infarction (AMI), arrhythmias, myocardial injury, and thromboembolism. CVS involvement is done through main mechanisms—direct and indirect heart muscle injury, with high mortality rates, worse short-term outcomes, and severe complications. AMI is the echo of myocardial injury (revealed by increases in CK, CK-MB, and troponin serum markers—which are taken into consideration as possible COVID-19 risk stratification markers). When studying myocardial injury, physicians can make use of imaging studies, such as cardiac MRI, transthoracic (or transesophageal) echocardiography, coronary angiography, cardiac computed tomography, and nuclear imaging (which have been used in cases where angiography was not possible), or even endomyocardial biopsy (which is not always available or feasible). Two-case-series presentations: We present the cases of two COVID-19 positive male patients who were admitted into the Clinical Department of Cardiology in “Sfântul Apostol Andrei” Emergency Clinical Hospital of Galați (Romania), who presented with acute cardiac distress symptoms and have been diagnosed with ST elevation AMI. The patients were 82 and 57 years old, respectively, with moderate and severe forms of COVID-19, and were diagnosed with anteroseptal left ventricular AMI and extensive anterior transmural left ventricular AMI (with ventricular fibrillation at presentation), respectively. The first patient was a non-smoker and non-drinker with no associated comorbidities, and was later discharged, while the second one died due to AMI complications. Conclusions: From this two-case series, we extract the following: old age alone is not a significant risk factor for adverse outcomes in COVID-19-related CVS events, and that the cumulative effects of several patient-associated risk factors (be it either for severe forms of COVID-19 and/or acute cardiac injury) will most probably lead to poor patient prognosis (death). At the same time, serum cardiac enzymes, dynamic ECG changes, along with newly developed echocardiographic modifications are indicators for poor prognosis in acute cardiac injury in COVID-19 patients with acute myocardial injury, regardless of the presence of right ventricular dysfunction (due to pulmonary hypertension).

Purpose: This article aims to harmonize the current data from the literature, describe baseline severity, and discuss potential treatment considerations for cases of triple infection. Patients and Methods: We undertook a retrospective, observational study on 1244 patients with viral hepatitis study subgroups: chronic replicative hepatitis with HCV—679 patients, HBV—98 patients, HBV/HCV—25 patients, HBV/HDV—14 patients, and 2 patients with triple-infection (HBV, HCV, and HDV), hospitalized in the Second Department of “Sf. Cuv. Parascheva” Infectious Diseases Clinical Hospital of Galați, Romania, between 1 April 2017 and 1 March 2025. Results: Comparative analysis of biochemical parameters and liver fibrosis—at the initial testing—i.e., at the beginning of the specific antiviral therapy—with direct-acting antivirals on HCV (DAAs) or nucleos(t)ide analogues (NUCs): Entecavir (ETV) or Tenofovir Disoproxyl fumarate (TDF), for HBV, Bulevirtide (BLV) for HDV—revealed clinical forms with higher severity in the case of triple and double infections, in comparison to individuals who have had only one hepatotropic virus infection. Conclusions: Compared to patients with a single hepatotropic viral infection, those with a double or triple infection had more severe hepatic damage. Concomitant therapy with Bulevirtide, DAAs, and NUCs is possible and the therapeutic results from clinical studies, with single-infection patients showing great potential for improving the prognosis of these patients.

Background/Objectives: The objective of the study is to analyze the impact of cardiovascular history on mortality in COVID-19 patients, hospitalized in the intensive care unit with indications for continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and subsequently mechanical ventilation, without oncological disease. Methods: A retrospective observational study was carried out on a group of 108 critical COVID-19 patients. We compared demographic data, paraclinical and clinical parameters, days of hospitalization, and mortality rate between two groups of patients, one group with a history of cardiovascular disease (81 patients) and a group without a history of cardiovascular disease (27 patients). Results: Patients with cardiovascular antecedents had a higher mortality rate than those without cardiovascular antecedents, presenting severe forms with shorter survival time in the intensive care unit and increased inflammatory evidence. Compared to patients without a history of cardiovascular illness, those with cardiovascular disease had a lower average age, and developed a severe form of COVID-19. Conclusions: Cardiovascular antecedents can worsen the prognosis of patients with COVID-19, requiring a careful screening and multidisciplinary approach.