AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Review article
*Corresponding Author: Scarduelli Cleante, Pulmonology and Sleep Breathing Disorders Center Suzzara Hospital SPA Mantova.
Citation: Scarduelli Cleante, Scarduelli Sara and Borghi Claudio (2022). Pulmonary Embolism in Patients with COVID-19. J. Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, 5(1); DOI:10.31579/2641-0419/236
Copyright: © 2022 Scarduelli Cleante, This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Received: 02 December 2021 | Accepted: 22 December 2021 | Published: 07 January 2022
Keywords: anticoagulation; COVID-19; heparins; pulmonary embolism; VTE
Infection with the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV-2) and the resulting syndrome, COVID-19, have been associated with inflammation and a prothrombotic state, with increases in fibrin, fibrinogen, fibrin degradation products and D-dimers. In some studies, elevations in these markers have been associated with worse clinical outcomes.
Several studies have demonstrated a high prevalence of venous thromboembolism (VTE), and pulmonary embolism (PE), particularly in patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), even in those receiving prophylactic anticoagulation.
The high rate of thrombosis in COVID-19 is driven by at least two interrelated processes: a hypercoagulable state responsible for large-vessel thrombosis and thromboembolism and direct vascular and endothelial injury responsible for in situ microvascular thrombosis. The presence of PE and pulmonary thrombosis may explain why hypoxemia is out of proportion to impairment in lung compliance in some patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Diagnosing PE in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia may be challenging, because the two pathologies share many signs and symptoms.
It has been demonstrated that the administration of prophylactic anticoagulation within 24 h of admission in patients with COVID-19 was associated with decreased mortality when compared with no prophylactic anticoagulation.
Given the antithrombotic, anti-inflammatory and possibly antiviral properties of heparins, it has been hypothesized that anticoagulation with heparin administered at doses higher than conventionally used for venous thromboprophylaxis may improve outcomes. In non-critically ill patients hospitalized with COVID-19, therapeutic-dose anticoagulants with heparin (most commonly, low-molecular-weight heparin) increased the probability of survival until hospital discharge with a reduced need for ICU-level organ support at 21 days as compared with usual-care thromboprophylaxis.
In Critically ill patients with confirmed COVID-19, therapeutic-dose anticoagulation did not increase the probability of survival to hospital discharge or the number of days free of cardiovascular o respiratory organ support and had a 95% probability of being inferior to usual-care pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis.
Currently, randomized trials evaluating the use of tissue plasminogen activator and Tenecteplase in patients with COVID-19 ARDS are underway.
In December 2019, a novel coronavirus, now known as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), quickly began to spread across Wuhan, China. Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) then triggered a global pandemic [1-4]. Since then, this highly transmissible and virulent disease has devastated the world, overwhelming its healthcare systems. By November 16, 2021, there were 252.826.527 patients diagnosed with COVID 19 in the world with 5.092.761 deaths [5].
The spectrum of illness can range from asymptomatic infection to severe pneumonia with acute respiratory distress syndrome and death. Most patients (81%) with COVID-19 present with mild symptoms (such as fever, cough, chills, muscle pain, and a loss of taste or smell, no pneumonia or mild pneumonia), about 14% are severe (defined as dyspnea, respiratory frequency ≥30 breath/min, oxygen saturation [SpO2] ≤93%, a ratio of arterial partial pressure of oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen [PaO2/FiO2]< 300> 50% within 24 to 48 hours), and 5% are critical (defined as respiratory failure, septic shock, and/or multiorgan dysfunction or failure) [6]. A significant proportion (10–29 %) of hospitalized patients develop severe respiratory failure (SRF) and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) requiring admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) [1,2]. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is now recognized as one of the predominant cardiovascular hazards in patients with COVID-19 [6-18]. Many patients with COVID-19 have markedly abnormal coagulation parameters, particularly D-dimer elevation which correlates with mortality [7].
In this review the epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis and treatment of COVID-19 pulmonary thrombosis and thromboembolism are discussed.
Epidemiology
Accurate assessment of the true incidence of VTE in hospitalized patients with COVID -19 remain elusive, with estimates ranging from 4,8% to 85%. [16]
The significant variability in the reported incidence is likely the consequence of multiple factors: assessment setting (ICU vs non-ICU), type of event counted (symptomatic vs asymptomatic), testing strategies (eg clinical suspicion vs systematic screening), and degree of thromboprophylaxis. [17]
Several studies have demonstrated a high prevalence of VTE in patients with COVID‑19 admitted to ICU, particularly lower leg deep vein thromboses (DVTs) in 25 % of 81 patients and pulmonary embolisms (PEs) in 20.6 % of 107 patients. [10-15] The frequency of symptomatic VTE in patients in ICU with COVID-19 has been reported to be 27 %. [10].
In a meta-analysis comprising 36 studies and more than 11000 patients the pooled incidence of VTE in patients with COVID-19 was 17% (12% for DVT and 7,1% for PE). [14]
In a recent Spanish, retrospective, case-control, multicenter study, PE incidence in COVID-19 patients at emergency department presentation was approximately ninefold (310 pe 100000 person-year) than that observed in the non COVID-19 population (35 per 100000 person-year) [18]
A Study using a French National database compared 89530 patients admitted to the hospital with COVID-19 in France over a 2-month period with 45819 patients admitted with influenza over a similar 2-month period during the prior year. [19]
VTE and PE rates were 4,9% and 3,4% respectively for patients with COVID-19 , but only 1,7% and 0,9% respectively, for patients with influenza. [19]
Poissy et al. noted a PE incidence of 20,6% in 107 consecutive patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU during a 1-month period in 2020, which was significantly higher than the 6,1% incidence of PE for the 196 patients admitted to the ICU during the same interval in 2019 , despite similar severity of illness scores. [15]
Systematic screening for VTE has been shown to increase detection rates in patients without COVID-19. Voicu et al. [20] reported that 36% of mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19 were diagnosed with DVT within 3 days after intubation when screened with compression ultrasonography. Mirsadraee et al. performed systematic whole-body CT scanning on 72 patients with COVID-19 on admission to the ICU, noting that 34 patients (47%) demonstrated PE, which was suspected clinically in only 7%. [21]
The presence of VTE in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 is associated with greater disease severity and increased mortality. Patients with PE more frequently require mechanical ventilation and ICU admission and have increased overall hospital length of stay. [22]
In more than 3000 consecutive hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in a New York City Hospital ,after multivariate adjustment, both venous and arterial thrombosis were associated with increased mortality. [23] It is unclear whether thrombosis is a direct cause of worse outcome or merely a marker of more severe disease. [17]
Pathophysiology
Considering that VTE rates in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 are significantly higher than in historical control participants, probably other thrombotic mechanisms, beyond the classic VTE risk factors, contribute. [24]
The high rate of thrombosis in COVID-19 is driven by at least two interrelated processes: a hypercoagulable state responsible for large-vessel thrombosis and thromboembolism and direct vascular and endothelial injury responsible for in situ microvascular thrombosis. [25]
Early in the pandemic it became evident that patients with COVID-19 showed a high release of inflammatory mediators, increased levels of factor VIII, von Willbrand factor, fibrinogen and local fibrinolysis with increased D-dimer. [7] A study of 2,377 hospitalized patients with COVID-19 showed that 76% of them had elevated D-dimer at presentation. [26]
Although a multitude of inflammatory processes can increase D-dimer levels, to some extent its elevation is a sign of excessive activation of coagulation and hyperfibrinolysis. Thus D-dimer levels are often used to detect the presence of an active thrombus, despite having a high sensitivity but a low specificity. [11]
It has been reported that a D-dimer cut-off value of 3000 ng/ml has a sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive value for PE of 76,9%, 94,9%, and 92,5%, respectively. [11]
Other authors reported that a D-dimer of > 2,590 ng/ml was associated with a 17-fold increase in adjusted risk of PE in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. [27]
Elevated D-dimer levels also are associated independently with more severe disease and increased mortality. [28,29]
COVID-19 coagulopathy is characterized by increased levels of D-dimer, fibrinogen, thrombin, Factor VIII, Factor V, von Willebrand factor, and neutrophil extracellular traps. [17]
Additionally, platelets from patients with COVID-19 are activated more efficiently than are platelets from both healthy controls and patients with non-COVID-19 ARDS. [17]
In patients with COVID-19, are commonly observed elevated markers of systemic inflammation, particularly C-reactive protein and IL-6. [30]
Immune and coagulation systems cross talk to provide effective host defense. [31]
Immune cells and inflammatory cytokines promote the development of immunothrombi consisting of fibrin, monocytes, neutrophils, and platelets, which create a barrier against further pathogen invasion. [32] However excess inflammation and thrombosis can lead to exuberant thrombosis and organ dysfunction. [33] Neutrophil extracellular traps are expelled from neutrophils to capture and immobilize pathogens and also can activate immunothrombosis. [34]
Autopsy studies have shown diffuse endothelial inflammation in many organs, including lung, heart, liver, and kidney, with evidence of direct viral infection of endothelial cells by the SARS-COV2 virus.[35] Endothelial injury, particularly in the context of a hypercoagulable condition, likely is responsible for the high rates of microthrombosis observed in the pulmonary vasculature. [35]
It has been noted that autopsies from patients with COVID-19 showed nine times more alveolar capillary microthrombi compared with autopsies from patients with ARDS secondary to H1N1 influenza. [36]
High rates of microthrombosis have also been reported in the heart and skin. [17]
Imaging studies have shown that thrombotic lesions in COVID-19 are smaller and more peripherally located compared with those in non-COVID-19 acute PE, suggesting that some filling defects on CTPA, particularly isolated subsegmental PE, may reflect in situ pulmonary thrombosis instead of the typical embolization of thrombi from peripheral DVT. [14,21]
Early in the pandemic it has been reported that although many patients with COVID-19 technically fulfilled the Berlin criteria for ARDS, many showed marked hypoxemia and elevated shunt fraction with only minimally affected lung compliance, particularly early in the course of disease. [37]
Many non-intubated patients with COVID-19 demonstrate dramatic hypoxemia but lack proportional signs of respiratory distress, a condition coined “happy hypoxemia”. [38]
It has been hypothesized that the presence of pulmonary microthrombi and macrothrombi, may explain the mismatch between gas exchange and lung compliance in severe COVID -.19. [39]
Surprisingly, patients with COVID-19 requiring mechanical ventilation are characterized by low, not high pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR). [40] This finding is surprising given the high prevalence of PE in patients with COVID-19 in the ICU, as well as the high prevalence of elevated PVR in non-COVID ARDS. [41]
Probably the hemodynamic effect of pulmonary thrombosis is mitigated by a primary pulmonary vasodilatory process in some patients with COVID-19, as demonstrated with dual-energy CT imaging in COVID-19 pneumonia. [42]
In addition together with high rates of pulmonary microthrombosis, high rates of angiogenesis have been described in COVID-19. [36]
Pulmonary macrothrombi and microthrombi increase PVR, whereas pulmonary vasodilation decreases PVR, so when both processes occur simultaneously, each can counterbalance the hemodynamic effect of the other. [43]
The coexistence of vasodilatory and obliterative processes may offset each other hemodynamically, but their coexistence may amplify hypoxemia in COVID-19. [17]
Diagnosis
The diagnosis of pulmonary embolism begins with clinical suspicion. Clinical suspicion of PE in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia is diminished because the signs and symptoms of COVID-19 pneumonia mimic those of PE. Although clinical probability scores, such as Wells score, are helpful in raising clinical suspicion of PE, they have not been validated in patients with COVID-19 and probably underestimate the probability of PE in COVID-19. [44]
D-dimer together with clinical probability assessment, has great usefulness in ruling out PE in patients with low or intermediate probability of PE. D-dimer levels in COVID-19 correlate with rates of thrombosis, but it is not clear whether a particular D-dimer value “rules in” or “rules out” PE. [21]
It has been reported that the D-dimer cut-off value of 3000 ng/mL has a sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive value for PE of 76.9 %, 94.9 %, and 92.5 %, respectively. [11]
A study in which screening computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) was performed in patients with COVID-19 on admission to the ICU, D-dimer levels didn’t discriminate between patients with and without PE. [21]
CTPA is the first-choice and the gold standard method for PE diagnosis. [45]
The reported rate of positive CTPA in patients with COVID-19 and suspected PE varies widely with estimates ranging from 23% to 50%. [46-49] This significant variability of the rate of positive CTPA in patients with COVID-19 is likely the consequence of multiple factors: -criteria used to request CTPA, assessment setting, patient’s clinical status (critically ill patients who are not stable enough for transfer to the radiology department), degree of thromboprophylaxis. [48, 49].
Prophylaxis and Treatment
Several studies have demonstrated a high prevalence of VTE and PE in patients hospitalized with COVID-19, particularly in those admitted to the ICU. [10-15, 20-23]
PE is one of the most common preventable causes of hospital death, and thromboprophylaxis is crucial in the care of hospitalized patients. [50]
A retrospective study demonstrated that the administration of prophylactic anticoagulation within 24 h of admission in patients with COVID-19 was associated with decreased mortality when compared with no prophylactic anticoagulation. [51]
Critically ill patients with COVID-19 are at high risk for thrombosis and PE despite receiving standard-dose thromboprophylaxis. [15,21]
Given the antithrombotic, anti-inflammatory and possibly antiviral properties of heparins, it has been hypothesized that anticoagulation with heparin administered at doses higher than conventionally used for venous thromboprophylaxis may improve outcomes. [23, 52-55]
We studied, retrospectively, 92 patients with COVID-19 and severe respiratory failure, admitted to an Italian respiratory intensive care unit for non-invasive mechanical ventilation, PE was diagnosed by CTPA in 11 (12 %) patients despite treatment with intermediate- to full-dose enoxaparin. [56]
However, the frequency of PE in our patient population was lower than that previously reported in similar patients. [15]
Although our study probably underestimated the real frequency of PE, because only a small portion, (24 %) of patients underwent CTPA, it is possible to assume that the reduced PE incidence may have been due to the use of a higher-than-prophylactic dose of enoxaparin. [49]
Our patients underwent CTPA only if there was a clinical suspicion of PE and/or in the presence of elevated D-dimer levels (> 3000 ng/ml), and if a patient’s clinical status allowed for a safe transfer to the radiology department. Considering these assumptions, 50 % of our patients who underwent CTPA had confirmed PE. [49]
Our report had several limitations. First, this was a retrospective, single-center study with a small sample size. Second, our study probably underestimated the actual frequency of PE because only a small portion (24 %) of patients underwent CTPA, which is the gold standard for PE diagnosis. [45]
In more than 4000 patients with COVID-19 at a New York Hospital with an aggressive anticoagulation protocol it was noted a trend toward a mortality reduction with therapeutic anticoagulation compared with prophylactic anticoagulation, but the difference wasn’t statistically significant. [56]
In an open label, adaptive, multiplatform, controlled trial, patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and who were not critically ill (defined as absence of oxygen delivery by high-flow nasal cannula, non-invasive or invasive mechanical ventilation, or the use of vasopressors or inotropes) were randomly assigned to receive pragmatically defined regimens of either therapeutic - dose anticoagulation with heparin or usual-care pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. [57] The trial was stopped when prespecified criteria for the superiority of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation were met. In non-critically ill patients hospitalized with COVID-19, therapeutic-dose anticoagulants with heparin (most commonly, low-molecular-weight heparin) increased the probability of survival until hospital discharge with a reduced need for ICU-level organ support at 21 days as compared with usual-care thromboprophylaxis. [57]
In another open label, adaptive, multiplatform, randomized clinical trial, of the same group, critically ill patients with severe COVID-19 were randomly assigned to a pragmatically defined regimen of either therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin or pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis in accordance with local usual care. [58] The trial was stopped when the prespecified criterion for futility was met for therapeutic-dose anticoagulation. In this multiplatform, randomized trial involving more than 1000 critically ill patients with confirmed COVID-19, therapeutic-dose anticoagulation did not increase the probability of survival to hospital discharge or the number of days free of cardiovascular o respiratory organ support and had a 95% probability of being inferior to usual-care pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis.[58] It is possible that therapeutic-dose heparin cannot influence the cascade of inflammation, thrombosis, and organ injury in patients with advanced disease. [57] In Contrast in non-critically ill patients with COVID-19 an initial strategy of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation with heparin increased the probability of survival until hospital discharge with reduced use of ICU-level organ support as compared with usual-care thromboprophylaxis. [57]
The mainstay of the treatment of PE in patients with and without COVID-19, to prevent further thrombosis and thromboembolism is Anticoagulation. [45] Initial treatment options include heparin, low-molecular-weight heparin, fondaparinux and in low-risk patients, direct oral anticoagulants. [45] In hospitalized critically ill patients with COVID-19 low-molecular-weight heparin or unfractionated heparin are preferred. [59]
Guidelines about coagulopathy and prevention and management of VTE in patients with COVID-19 have been released by multiple organizations. [59] All guidelines agree that hospitalized patients with COVID-19 should receive prophylactic dose anticoagulation for VTE.[59] Some guidelines report that intermediate dose anticoagulation can be considered for critically ill patients. [59] Several randomized trials have been developed to evaluate the risks and benefits of anticoagulation in patients with COVID-19 (visit ClinicalTrials.gov for the current list of trials). [58]
Risk stratification of patients with PE is the central tool used to identify patients at increased risk of early death, who may benefit from reperfusion therapy, mechanical circulatory support, or both. [45]
As described in European Society of Cardiology Guidelines, high risk PE is characterized by cardiac arrest, systolic BP < 90>
If possible, patients with high-risk PE should undergo reperfusion therapy, mechanical circulatory support, or both. [45] Patients with intermediate-risk PE should be monitored closely for signs of clinical deterioration, and selected patients should undergo reperfusion therapy. [45]
Given the potential pathophysiologic role of pulmonary microthrombosis, thrombolysis has been used in small case series of COVID-19 ARDS. [17]
Currently, randomized trials evaluating the use of tissue plasminogen activator and Tenecteplase (ClinicalTrail.gov Identifier: NCT04357730; and Identifier: NCT045055920 respectively) in patients with COVID-19 ARDS are underway. [17]
COVID-19 has been associated with inflammation and a prothrombotic state.
Several studies have demonstrated an high prevalence of VTE, and PE, particularly in patients admitted to the ICU, even in those receiving prophylactic anticoagulation.
COVID-19 is characterized by a hypercoagulable state responsible for large-vessel thrombosis and thromboembolism and direct vascular and endothelial injury responsible for in situ microvascular thrombosis. Diagnosing PE in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia may be challenging, because the two pathologies share many signs and symptoms.
Guidelines released by multiple organizations, agree that hospitalized patients with COVID-19 should receive prophylactic dose anticoagulation for VTE.
In non-critically ill patients hospitalized with COVID-19, therapeutic-dose anticoagulants with heparin increased the probability of survival until hospital discharge with a reduced need for ICU-level organ support at 21 days as compared with usual-care thromboprophylaxis. Several randomized trials have been developed to evaluate the risks and benefits of anticoagulation in patients with COVID-19.
Clearly Auctoresonline and particularly Psychology and Mental Health Care Journal is dedicated to improving health care services for individuals and populations. The editorial boards' ability to efficiently recognize and share the global importance of health literacy with a variety of stakeholders. Auctoresonline publishing platform can be used to facilitate of optimal client-based services and should be added to health care professionals' repertoire of evidence-based health care resources.
Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Intervention The submission and review process was adequate. However I think that the publication total value should have been enlightened in early fases. Thank you for all.
Journal of Women Health Care and Issues By the present mail, I want to say thank to you and tour colleagues for facilitating my published article. Specially thank you for the peer review process, support from the editorial office. I appreciate positively the quality of your journal.
Journal of Clinical Research and Reports I would be very delighted to submit my testimonial regarding the reviewer board and the editorial office. The reviewer board were accurate and helpful regarding any modifications for my manuscript. And the editorial office were very helpful and supportive in contacting and monitoring with any update and offering help. It was my pleasure to contribute with your promising Journal and I am looking forward for more collaboration.
We would like to thank the Journal of Thoracic Disease and Cardiothoracic Surgery because of the services they provided us for our articles. The peer-review process was done in a very excellent time manner, and the opinions of the reviewers helped us to improve our manuscript further. The editorial office had an outstanding correspondence with us and guided us in many ways. During a hard time of the pandemic that is affecting every one of us tremendously, the editorial office helped us make everything easier for publishing scientific work. Hope for a more scientific relationship with your Journal.
The peer-review process which consisted high quality queries on the paper. I did answer six reviewers’ questions and comments before the paper was accepted. The support from the editorial office is excellent.
Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. I had the experience of publishing a research article recently. The whole process was simple from submission to publication. The reviewers made specific and valuable recommendations and corrections that improved the quality of my publication. I strongly recommend this Journal.
Dr. Katarzyna Byczkowska My testimonial covering: "The peer review process is quick and effective. The support from the editorial office is very professional and friendly. Quality of the Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on cardiology that is useful for other professionals in the field.
Thank you most sincerely, with regard to the support you have given in relation to the reviewing process and the processing of my article entitled "Large Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of The Prostate Gland: A Review and Update" for publication in your esteemed Journal, Journal of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics". The editorial team has been very supportive.
Testimony of Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology: work with your Reviews has been a educational and constructive experience. The editorial office were very helpful and supportive. It was a pleasure to contribute to your Journal.
Dr. Bernard Terkimbi Utoo, I am happy to publish my scientific work in Journal of Women Health Care and Issues (JWHCI). The manuscript submission was seamless and peer review process was top notch. I was amazed that 4 reviewers worked on the manuscript which made it a highly technical, standard and excellent quality paper. I appreciate the format and consideration for the APC as well as the speed of publication. It is my pleasure to continue with this scientific relationship with the esteem JWHCI.
This is an acknowledgment for peer reviewers, editorial board of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. They show a lot of consideration for us as publishers for our research article “Evaluation of the different factors associated with side effects of COVID-19 vaccination on medical students, Mutah university, Al-Karak, Jordan”, in a very professional and easy way. This journal is one of outstanding medical journal.
Dear Hao Jiang, to Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing We greatly appreciate the efficient, professional and rapid processing of our paper by your team. If there is anything else we should do, please do not hesitate to let us know. On behalf of my co-authors, we would like to express our great appreciation to editor and reviewers.
As an author who has recently published in the journal "Brain and Neurological Disorders". I am delighted to provide a testimonial on the peer review process, editorial office support, and the overall quality of the journal. The peer review process at Brain and Neurological Disorders is rigorous and meticulous, ensuring that only high-quality, evidence-based research is published. The reviewers are experts in their fields, and their comments and suggestions were constructive and helped improve the quality of my manuscript. The review process was timely and efficient, with clear communication from the editorial office at each stage. The support from the editorial office was exceptional throughout the entire process. The editorial staff was responsive, professional, and always willing to help. They provided valuable guidance on formatting, structure, and ethical considerations, making the submission process seamless. Moreover, they kept me informed about the status of my manuscript and provided timely updates, which made the process less stressful. The journal Brain and Neurological Disorders is of the highest quality, with a strong focus on publishing cutting-edge research in the field of neurology. The articles published in this journal are well-researched, rigorously peer-reviewed, and written by experts in the field. The journal maintains high standards, ensuring that readers are provided with the most up-to-date and reliable information on brain and neurological disorders. In conclusion, I had a wonderful experience publishing in Brain and Neurological Disorders. The peer review process was thorough, the editorial office provided exceptional support, and the journal's quality is second to none. I would highly recommend this journal to any researcher working in the field of neurology and brain disorders.
Dear Agrippa Hilda, Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, Editorial Coordinator, I trust this message finds you well. I want to extend my appreciation for considering my article for publication in your esteemed journal. I am pleased to provide a testimonial regarding the peer review process and the support received from your editorial office. The peer review process for my paper was carried out in a highly professional and thorough manner. The feedback and comments provided by the authors were constructive and very useful in improving the quality of the manuscript. This rigorous assessment process undoubtedly contributes to the high standards maintained by your journal.
International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. I strongly recommend to consider submitting your work to this high-quality journal. The support and availability of the Editorial staff is outstanding and the review process was both efficient and rigorous.
Thank you very much for publishing my Research Article titled “Comparing Treatment Outcome Of Allergic Rhinitis Patients After Using Fluticasone Nasal Spray And Nasal Douching" in the Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology. As Medical Professionals we are immensely benefited from study of various informative Articles and Papers published in this high quality Journal. I look forward to enriching my knowledge by regular study of the Journal and contribute my future work in the field of ENT through the Journal for use by the medical fraternity. The support from the Editorial office was excellent and very prompt. I also welcome the comments received from the readers of my Research Article.
Dear Erica Kelsey, Editorial Coordinator of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics Our team is very satisfied with the processing of our paper by your journal. That was fast, efficient, rigorous, but without unnecessary complications. We appreciated the very short time between the submission of the paper and its publication on line on your site.
I am very glad to say that the peer review process is very successful and fast and support from the Editorial Office. Therefore, I would like to continue our scientific relationship for a long time. And I especially thank you for your kindly attention towards my article. Have a good day!
"We recently published an article entitled “Influence of beta-Cyclodextrins upon the Degradation of Carbofuran Derivatives under Alkaline Conditions" in the Journal of “Pesticides and Biofertilizers” to show that the cyclodextrins protect the carbamates increasing their half-life time in the presence of basic conditions This will be very helpful to understand carbofuran behaviour in the analytical, agro-environmental and food areas. We greatly appreciated the interaction with the editor and the editorial team; we were particularly well accompanied during the course of the revision process, since all various steps towards publication were short and without delay".
I would like to express my gratitude towards you process of article review and submission. I found this to be very fair and expedient. Your follow up has been excellent. I have many publications in national and international journal and your process has been one of the best so far. Keep up the great work.
We are grateful for this opportunity to provide a glowing recommendation to the Journal of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy. We found that the editorial team were very supportive, helpful, kept us abreast of timelines and over all very professional in nature. The peer review process was rigorous, efficient and constructive that really enhanced our article submission. The experience with this journal remains one of our best ever and we look forward to providing future submissions in the near future.
I am very pleased to serve as EBM of the journal, I hope many years of my experience in stem cells can help the journal from one way or another. As we know, stem cells hold great potential for regenerative medicine, which are mostly used to promote the repair response of diseased, dysfunctional or injured tissue using stem cells or their derivatives. I think Stem Cell Research and Therapeutics International is a great platform to publish and share the understanding towards the biology and translational or clinical application of stem cells.
I would like to give my testimony in the support I have got by the peer review process and to support the editorial office where they were of asset to support young author like me to be encouraged to publish their work in your respected journal and globalize and share knowledge across the globe. I really give my great gratitude to your journal and the peer review including the editorial office.
I am delighted to publish our manuscript entitled "A Perspective on Cocaine Induced Stroke - Its Mechanisms and Management" in the Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. The peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal are excellent. The manuscripts published are of high quality and of excellent scientific value. I recommend this journal very much to colleagues.
Dr.Tania Muñoz, My experience as researcher and author of a review article in The Journal Clinical Cardiology and Interventions has been very enriching and stimulating. The editorial team is excellent, performs its work with absolute responsibility and delivery. They are proactive, dynamic and receptive to all proposals. Supporting at all times the vast universe of authors who choose them as an option for publication. The team of review specialists, members of the editorial board, are brilliant professionals, with remarkable performance in medical research and scientific methodology. Together they form a frontline team that consolidates the JCCI as a magnificent option for the publication and review of high-level medical articles and broad collective interest. I am honored to be able to share my review article and open to receive all your comments.
“The peer review process of JPMHC is quick and effective. Authors are benefited by good and professional reviewers with huge experience in the field of psychology and mental health. The support from the editorial office is very professional. People to contact to are friendly and happy to help and assist any query authors might have. Quality of the Journal is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on mental health that is useful for other professionals in the field”.
Dear editorial department: On behalf of our team, I hereby certify the reliability and superiority of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews in the peer review process, editorial support, and journal quality. Firstly, the peer review process of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is rigorous, fair, transparent, fast, and of high quality. The editorial department invites experts from relevant fields as anonymous reviewers to review all submitted manuscripts. These experts have rich academic backgrounds and experience, and can accurately evaluate the academic quality, originality, and suitability of manuscripts. The editorial department is committed to ensuring the rigor of the peer review process, while also making every effort to ensure a fast review cycle to meet the needs of authors and the academic community. Secondly, the editorial team of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is composed of a group of senior scholars and professionals with rich experience and professional knowledge in related fields. The editorial department is committed to assisting authors in improving their manuscripts, ensuring their academic accuracy, clarity, and completeness. Editors actively collaborate with authors, providing useful suggestions and feedback to promote the improvement and development of the manuscript. We believe that the support of the editorial department is one of the key factors in ensuring the quality of the journal. Finally, the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is renowned for its high- quality articles and strict academic standards. The editorial department is committed to publishing innovative and academically valuable research results to promote the development and progress of related fields. The International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is reasonably priced and ensures excellent service and quality ratio, allowing authors to obtain high-level academic publishing opportunities in an affordable manner. I hereby solemnly declare that the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews has a high level of credibility and superiority in terms of peer review process, editorial support, reasonable fees, and journal quality. Sincerely, Rui Tao.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions I testity the covering of the peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, we deeply appreciate the interest shown in our work and its publication. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you. The peer review process, as well as the support provided by the editorial office, have been exceptional, and the quality of the journal is very high, which was a determining factor in our decision to publish with you.
The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews journal clinically in the future time.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I would like to express my sincerest gratitude for the trust placed in our team for the publication in your journal. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you on this project. I am pleased to inform you that both the peer review process and the attention from the editorial coordination have been excellent. Your team has worked with dedication and professionalism to ensure that your publication meets the highest standards of quality. We are confident that this collaboration will result in mutual success, and we are eager to see the fruits of this shared effort.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I hope this message finds you well. I want to express my utmost gratitude for your excellent work and for the dedication and speed in the publication process of my article titled "Navigating Innovation: Qualitative Insights on Using Technology for Health Education in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients." I am very satisfied with the peer review process, the support from the editorial office, and the quality of the journal. I hope we can maintain our scientific relationship in the long term.
Dear Monica Gissare, - Editorial Coordinator of Nutrition and Food Processing. ¨My testimony with you is truly professional, with a positive response regarding the follow-up of the article and its review, you took into account my qualities and the importance of the topic¨.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, The review process for the article “The Handling of Anti-aggregants and Anticoagulants in the Oncologic Heart Patient Submitted to Surgery” was extremely rigorous and detailed. From the initial submission to the final acceptance, the editorial team at the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” demonstrated a high level of professionalism and dedication. The reviewers provided constructive and detailed feedback, which was essential for improving the quality of our work. Communication was always clear and efficient, ensuring that all our questions were promptly addressed. The quality of the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” is undeniable. It is a peer-reviewed, open-access publication dedicated exclusively to disseminating high-quality research in the field of clinical cardiology and cardiovascular interventions. The journal's impact factor is currently under evaluation, and it is indexed in reputable databases, which further reinforces its credibility and relevance in the scientific field. I highly recommend this journal to researchers looking for a reputable platform to publish their studies.
Dear Editorial Coordinator of the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing! "I would like to thank the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing for including and publishing my article. The peer review process was very quick, movement and precise. The Editorial Board has done an extremely conscientious job with much help, valuable comments and advices. I find the journal very valuable from a professional point of view, thank you very much for allowing me to be part of it and I would like to participate in the future!”
Dealing with The Journal of Neurology and Neurological Surgery was very smooth and comprehensive. The office staff took time to address my needs and the response from editors and the office was prompt and fair. I certainly hope to publish with this journal again.Their professionalism is apparent and more than satisfactory. Susan Weiner
