Raval, Darshankumar

Abstract Background The COVID-19 pandemic saw a worrisome rise in mucormycosis cases in India, especially among those receiving corticosteroid therapy. While corticosteroids are essential for managing severe COVID-19 cases, their immunosuppressive action appears to augment infection risk. Clinically, prolonged steroid use may result in severe forms of mucormycosis; however, this requires rigorous systematic evaluation. Methods We conducted an exhaustive analysis of 327 mucormycosis cases and 596 COVID-19 controls, all of whom were treated during the second wave in India. Exposure to steroids was carefully categorized by duration into three groups: short-term (1-5 days), standard-term (5-10 days), and long-term ( > 10 days). Each case was biopsy-proven, with further radiographic confirmation of disease extent. Special emphasis was laid on intracranial extension as a marker of severity, along with tracking treatment outcomes and survival. Statistical modeling was used to correct for important confounders, including diabetes status, glycemic control, and concurrent use of other immunomodulators. Results The results were striking. Those receiving steroid treatment for more than ten days of duration had a nearly fourfold higher incidence of intracranial mucormycosis compared with short-term-treated patients (38.2% vs. 12.5%, p< 0.001). Each day of steroid use accounted for a 12% increase in associated risk. While mortality rates were equal, patients receiving prolonged treatment had a considerably increased number of surgical procedures (35.3% vs. 16.7%, p=0.02) as well as more complicated hospitalization. Those with diabetes were especially sensitive to such effects of prolonged treatment. Conclusion The study highlights the role of cautious use of corticosteroids in the management of COVID-19. Our work gives strong evidence for the importance of compliance with guideline-based recommendations for corticosteroid duration, especially for high-risk populations. This study empowers healthcare practitioners with unequivocal evidence to provide optimal COVID-19 treatments while avoiding the risk of severe fungal infection. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Objectives Aircrew are subject to thermal stress and heat-related illness (HRI). Published screening methods and safety thresholds remain limited. The objective of this review was to evaluate the available evidence, approaches and guidelines regarding HRI screening tools in aircrew and analogue occupational and athletic cohorts to create a broad compendium of relevant tools for aviation safety decision-makers which establish risk stratification. Design A systematic literature review was conducted through 28 July 2025, of manuscripts and technical documents that reported HRI risk screening approaches. Pairs of independent reviewers selected studies and appraised risk of bias. Data sources Ovid MEDLINE and Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Daily, Ovid EMBASE, Ovid Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Scopus were searched. Eligibility criteria Extrinsic and intrinsic factors checklists, protocols, diagrams, algorithms and screening approaches for HRI risk stratification and safety thresholds within occupational settings were included. Cohorts under 18 years of age and abstracts were excluded. Data extraction and synthesis 3472 reports were identified and 37 were included in the final analysis. Common approaches relied on wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT), workload assessment and personal protective equipment used. WBGT thresholds ranged 27–32°C for extreme risk and 23–31°C for high risk. Identified tools used 19 common domains to establish risk. Data were insufficient to identify a singular ideal screening approach. Conclusions This systematic review addresses knowledge gaps regarding occupational HRI risk screening protocols for use towards aviation workers. Limitations included lack of generalisability, risk definition variability and conflicting published author assumptions regarding intrinsic factors considered.

Background: Mycobacterium nebraskense is a rare, slow growing nontuberculous mycobacterium species with limited documented cases. This systematic review aims to comprehensively analyze the clinical characteristics, presentation, and management of M. nebraskense infections by analyzing the available literature, including a newly reported case that we present in this article. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted using PubMed and Google Scholar to identify relevant cases up to October 2023. Only seven reported cases were found, highlighting the scarcity of information on this pathogen. Results: Our analysis revealed several key findings. First, gender disparities were observed, with females being more susceptible to M. nebraskense infections. Additionally, a significant portion of patients presented with asymptomatic infections. Most affected individuals were over the age of 60, emphasizing potential age-related susceptibility. Comorbidity profiles varied widely among cases, and patients with preexisting lung comorbidities were at an increased risk of infection. The decision to treat or observe depended on clinical presentation, with even immunosuppressed individuals not always requiring treatment. Regarding treatment, we proposed an empirical approach with amikacin, clarithromycin, or rifabutin, considering the reported resistance to doxycycline and minocycline. Combination therapy was commonly employed to minimize resistance development, consistent with mycobacterial infection management. Conclusion: This study underscores the need for further research to validate these findings and enhance our understanding of M. nebraskense infections. As limited data are available, this review aims to provide valuable insights into a rare and emerging pathogen to guide clinical practice and future research endeavors.