ABSTRACT Objectives. To assess the frequency of symptoms in patients with Oropouche fever and compare them with those observed in patients with dengue and other arboviral diseases. Methods. A systematic review was conducted following the MOOSE and PRISMA reporting guidelines. The review included studies on acute clinical manifestations in patients with Oropouche fever. Searches were conducted in PubMed, Virtual Health Library, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar up to September 2024. The symptoms of Oropouche fever were compared to those of dengue and other arboviral diseases. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. Results. A total of 23 studies covering 3648 patients with Oropouche fever were included. The most frequent symptoms in patients with Oropouche virus infection were fever (97%) and headache (86%). There was no difference in frequency of fever or headache between patients with Oropouche and dengue. However, odynophagia (28%) and abdominal pain (15%) were more frequent in Oropouche than in dengue, with odds ratios (ORs) of 3.20 and 2.50, respectively. Myalgia (69%) and arthralgia (57%) were less frequent in Oropouche fever than in dengue. Conclusions. Fever and headache are common in Oropouche virus infection, but do not help discriminate it from dengue. However, odynophagia and abdominal pain are more frequent in patients with Oropouche fever, while myalgia, arthralgia, and rash are more prevalent in dengue. These findings may aid in differential diagnosis in areas of arboviral co-circulation. Further studies on the recurrence and duration of symptoms are needed to improve diagnostic strategies.

RESUMO Objetivos. Avaliar a frequência de sintomas em pacientes com febre do Oropouche e compará-los aos observados na dengue e em outras arboviroses. Métodos. Revisão sistemática, com base nas diretrizes MOOSE e PRISMA, incluindo estudos sobre manifestações clínicas agudas em pacientes com febre do Oropouche. A busca incluiu as bases de dados PubMed, Biblioteca Virtual em Saúde, Cochrane Library e Google Scholar e recuperou documentos publicados até setembro de 2024. Os sintomas da febre do Oropouche foram comparados com os da dengue e de outras arboviroses, e a certeza foi avaliada usando a abordagem GRADE. Resultados. Foram incluídos 23 estudos com 3 648 pacientes com a febre do Oropouche. Os sintomas mais frequentes nesses pacientes foram febre (97%) e cefaleia (86%). Não houve diferença na frequência de febre e cefaleia entre os pacientes com febre do Oropouche e com dengue. No entanto, a odinofagia (28%) e a dor abdominal (15%) foram mais frequentes na febre do Oropouche que na dengue (razões de chances de 3,20 e 2,50, respectivamente). Mialgias (69%) e artralgias (57%) foram menos frequentes em pacientes com febre do Oropouche que em pacientes com dengue. Conclusões. Febre e cefaleia são comuns na febre de Oropouche, mas não ajudam a diferenciá-la da dengue. Por outro lado, odinofagia e dor abdominal são mais frequentes nos pacientes com febre do Oropouche, ao passo que mialgia, artralgia e exantema são mais prevalentes na dengue. Esses achados podem ajudar no diagnóstico diferencial em áreas de cocirculação de arbovírus. São necessários mais estudos sobre a recorrência e a duração dos sintomas para aprimorar as estratégias de diagnóstico.

RESUMEN Objetivos. Evaluar la frecuencia de los síntomas en pacientes con oropouche y compararlos con los observados en el dengue y otras arbovirosis. Métodos. Se realizó una revisión sistemática basada en MOOSE y PRISMA; se incluyeron estudios sobre manifestaciones clínicas agudas en pacientes con oropouche. La búsqueda incluyó las bases de datos PubMed, Biblioteca Virtual en Salud, Cochrane Library y Google Scholar hasta septiembre de 2024. Se compararon los síntomas del oropouche con los del dengue y otras arbovirosis, y se valoró la certeza con el enfoque GRADE. Resultados. Se incluyeron 23 estudios con 3 648 pacientes con oropouche. Los síntomas más frecuentes en pacientes con oropouche fueron fiebre (97%) y cefaleas (86%). No hubo diferencias en la frecuencia de fiebre ni cefaleas entre pacientes con oropouche y dengue. Sin embargo, la odinofagia (28%) y el dolor abdominal (15%) fueron más frecuentes en el oropouche que en el dengue (OR 3,20 y 2,50, respectivamente). Las mialgias (69%) y las artralgias (57%) fueron menos frecuentes en los pacientes con oropouche en comparación con el dengue. Conclusiones. La fiebre y las cefaleas son frecuentes en la fiebre de Oropouche, pero no ayudan a diferenciarlo del dengue. En cambio, la odinofagia y el dolor abdominal son más frecuentes en los pacientes con oropouche, mientras que las mialgias, las artralgias y el exantema prevalecen más en el dengue. Estos hallazgos pueden ayudar en el diagnóstico diferencial en áreas de cocirculación arboviral. Se requieren estudios adicionales sobre la recurrencia y la duración de los síntomas para mejorar las estrategias diagnósticas.

Abstract In COVID-19, there are states of hyperinflammation in severely or critically ill people, where immu nosuppression and blocking of IL-6 receptors could be beneficial. Faced with this situation, with the support of a methods group using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach, about the use of tocilizumab for patients with severe and critical illness coronavirus. This guide fo cuses on making recommendations for the use of tocilizumab in patients with severe and critical COVID-19. This clinical practice guideline was prepared following the WHO guideline development methods. A multidisciplinary development group was formed, with clinical and health policy experts, methodologists and users. Panel and methods group members signed a declaration of conflict of interest. We searched the Epistemonikos Founda tion’s L.OVE database for randomized studies up to April 17, 2021. The synthesis and evidence profiles were prepared using the GRADE approach and an economic model was developed. Among hospitalized adults with progressive severe or critical COVID-19, the guideline panel su ggests tocilizumab. (Conditional recommendation, Moderate certainty of evidence) Implementation considerations. A. Dose: 8 mg/kg of actual weight, single-dose, intravenously), maximum dose 800 mg; B. Administer dexamethasone 8 mg (or equivalent) for 10 days together with tocilizumab; C. The recommendation applies to: 1. patients with severe disease defined as SpO2 ≤ 92% with room air and/or patients receiving supplemental oxygen (including a high-flow nasal cannula and non-invasive ventilation); 2. critically ill patients: requiring invasive mechanical ventilation.

Resumen En COVID-19, existen estados de hiperinflamación, donde la inmunosupresión y bloqueo de receptores de IL-6 podría ser beneficiosa. Se desarrolló una guía de práctica clínica con apoyo del gru po metodológico, utilizando el método GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) acerca del uso de tocilizumab para pacientes con COVID-19 grave y crítica. Siguiendo métodos de elaboración de guías de la OMS, se conformó un grupo multidisciplinario compuesto por expertos temáticos clí nicos y en políticas públicas, metodólogos y usuarios. Todos lo s participantes del panel y del grupo desarrollador firmaron una declaración de conflicto de interés. Se realizaron búsquedas de estudios aleatorizados hasta el 17 de abril de 2021, en la base de datos L.OVE de la fundación Epistemonikos. Se elaboró la síntesis y los perfiles de evidencia utilizando el enfoque GRADE y se desarrolló un modelo para valorar el impacto presupuestario de la incorporación de tociliuzmab. Posteriormente, la recomendación fue graduada en un panel de expertos temáti cos. Se sugiere utilizar tocilizumab en hospitalizados con COVID-19 grave y crítica. Recomendación condicional, certeza en la evidencia moderada. Consideraciones para la implementación. A. Dosis: 8 mg/kg de peso real, única dosis, por vía endovenosa, dosis máxima 800 mg; B. Administrar dexametasona 8 mg (o equivalente) por 10 días conjuntamente con tocilizumab; C. La recomendación aplica a: 1. pacientes con enfermedad grave definida como SpO2 ≤ 92% con aire ambiente y/o pacientes que reciben oxígeno suplementario (incluyendo cánula nasal de alto flujo y ventilación no invasiva); 2. pacientes con enfermedad crítica (ventilación mecánica invasiva).

ABSTRACT Background: Severe pneumonia is the most common cause of intensive care unit (ICU) admission and death due to novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) respiratory disease (COVID-19). Due to its rapid outbreak, units for the evaluation of febrile patients in the pre-hospital setting were created. Objective: The objective of the study was to develop a sensitive and simple tool to assess the risk of pneumonia in COVID-19 patients and thus select which patients would require a chest imaging study. Materials and Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study in a cohort of individuals with suspected COVID-19 evaluated in a public academic healthcare center in Buenos Aires city. All adult patients with positive RT-PCR assay for SARS-COV2 between April 24 and May 19 of 2020 were included in the study. Pneumonia was defined as the presence of compatible signs and symptoms with imaging confirmation. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression was performed. A risk indicator score was developed. Results: One hundred and forty-eight patients were included, 71 (48%) received the diagnosis of pneumonia. The final clinical model included four variables: age ≥ 40 years, cough, absence of sore throat, and respiratory rate ≥ 22. To create the score, we assigned values to the variables according to their ORs: 2 points for respiratory rate ≥ 22 and 1 point to the other variables. The AUC of the ROC curve was 0.80 (CI 95% 0.73-0.86). A cutoff value of 2 showed a sensitivity of 95.7% and a specificity of 43.24%. Conclusion: This sensible score may improve the risk stratification of COVID-19 patients in the pre-hospital setting. (REV INVEST CLIN. 2021;73(1):52-8)