Biocompatibility relies essentially on surface phenomena, represented by cell-cell, cell-material and material (polymer)-protein interactions. An in vivo and in vitro experimental investigation was carried out on the biomaterials of two different classes with a good potential for in situ utilisation. Non-resorbable (Polypyrrole, Polyaniline, Polyimide) and resorbable (PLLA-PDXO-PLLA) materials for tissue engineering were studied for their overall tissue tolerance and cellular interactions. These non-resorbable polymers conceived for biosensor applications and implantable drug-delivery systems are intrinsically conductive. The PLLA-PDXO-PLLA triblock copolymer showed interesting tensile properties for bone and cartilage tissue engineering due to the presence of 1,5-dioxepan-2-one. In vitro and in vivo parallel studies showed an interesting correspondence: a) the cells in contact with the resorbable material that appeared to be capable of migratory-regenerative aspects in vitro exhibited good compatibility in vivo; whereas b) the non-resorbable materials, which are designed to remain in situ in vivo, were seen to have the potential to represent an adverse factor (inflammation, fibrotic reactions) that correlated with some aspects of cell behaviour in vitro.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can lead to respiratory failure due to severe immune response. Treatment targeting this immune response might be beneficial but there is limited evidence on its efficacy. The aim of this study was to determine if early treatment of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia with tocilizumab and/or steroids was associated with better outcome. This observational single-center study included patients with COVID-19 pneumonia who were not intubated and received either standard of care (SOC, controls) or SOC plus early (within 3 days from hospital admission) anti-inflammatory treatment. SOC consisted of hydroxychloroquine 400mg bid plus, in those admitted before March 24^th, also darunavir/ritonavir. Anti-inflammatory treatment consisted of either tocilizumab (8mg/kg intravenously or 162mg subcutaneously) or methylprednisolone 1 mg/kg for 5 days or both. Failure was defined as intubation or death, and the endpoints were failure-free survival (primary endpoint) and overall survival (secondary) at day 30. Difference between the groups was estimated as Hazard Ratio by a propensity score weighted Cox regression analysis (HR_OW). Overall, 196 adults were included in the analyses. They were mainly male (67.4%), with comorbidities (78.1%) and severe COVID-19 pneumonia (83.7%). Median age was 67.9 years (range, 30–100) and median PaO₂/FiO₂ 200 mmHg (IQR 133–289). Among them, 130 received early anti-inflammatory treatment with: tocilizumab (n = 29, 22.3%), methylprednisolone (n = 45, 34.6%), or both (n = 56, 43.1%). The adjusted failure-free survival among tocilizumab/methylprednisolone/SOC treated patients vs. SOC was 80.8% (95%CI, 72.8–86.7) vs. 64.1% (95%CI, 51.3–74.0), HR_OW 0.48, 95%CI, 0.23–0.99; p = 0.049. The overall survival among tocilizumab/methylprednisolone/SOC patients vs. SOC was 85.9% (95%CI, 80.7–92.6) vs. 71.9% (95%CI, 46–73), HR_OW 0.41, 95%CI: 0.19–0.89, p = 0.025. Early adjunctive treatment with tocilizumab, methylprednisolone or both may improve outcomes in non-intubated patients with COVID-19 pneumonia.

Background: The efficacy of several prokinetic drugs on dyspeptic symptoms and on gastric emptying rates are well‐established in patients with functional dyspepsia, but formal studies comparing different prokinetic drugs are lacking.Aim: To compare the effects of chronic oral administration of cisapride and levosulpiride in patients with functional dyspepsia and delayed gastric emptying.Methods: In a double‐blind crossover comparison, the effects of a 4‐week administration of levosulpiride (25 mg t.d.s.) and cisapride (10 mg t.d.s.) on the gastric emptying rate and on symptoms were evaluated in 30 dyspeptic patients with functional gastroparesis. At the beginning of the study and after levosulpiride or cisapride treatment, the gastric emptying time of a standard meal was measured by ¹³C‐octanoic acid breath test. Gastrointestinal symptom scores were also evaluated.Results: The efficacy of levosulpiride was similar to that of cisapride in significantly shortening (P < 0.001) the t_1/2 of gastric emptying. No significant differences were observed between the two treatments with regards to improvements in total symptom scores. However, levosulpiride was significantly more effective (P < 0.01) than cisapride in improving the impact of symptoms on the patients’ every‐day activities and in improving individual symptoms such as nausea, vomiting and early postprandial satiety.Conclusion: The efficacy of levosulpiride and cisapride in reducing gastric emptying times with no relevant side‐effects is similar. The impact of symptoms on patients’ everyday activities and the improvement of some symptoms such as nausea, vomiting and early satiety was more evident with levosulpiride than cisapride.

Sepsis is a major cause of death worldwide. Over the past years, prediction of clinically relevant events through machine learning models has gained particular attention. In the present perspective, we provide a brief, clinician-oriented vision on the following relevant aspects concerning the use of machine learning predictive models for the early detection of sepsis in the daily practice: (i) the controversy of sepsis definition and its influence on the development of prediction models; (ii) the choice and availability of input features; (iii) the measure of the model performance, the output, and their usefulness in the clinical practice. The increasing involvement of artificial intelligence and machine learning in health care cannot be disregarded, despite important pitfalls that should be always carefully taken into consideration. In the long run, a rigorous multidisciplinary approach to enrich our understanding in the application of machine learning techniques for the early recognition of sepsis may show potential to augment medical decision-making when facing this heterogeneous and complex syndrome.