Quantitative Detection and Viral Load Analysis of SARS-CoV-2 in Infected Patients

SARS-CoV-2 Dissemination Through Peripheral Nerves Explains Multiple Organ Injury

Coronavirus disease (CoVID-19), caused by recently identified severe acute respiratory distress syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is characterized by inconsistent clinical presentations. While many infected individuals remain asymptomatic or show mild respiratory symptoms, others develop severe pneumonia or even respiratory distress syndrome. SARS-CoV-2 is reported to be able to infect the lungs, the intestines, blood vessels, the bile ducts, the conjunctiva, macrophages, T lymphocytes, the heart, liver, kidneys, and brain. More than a third of cases displayed neurological involvement, and many severely ill patients developed multiple organ infection and injury. However, less than 1% of patients had a detectable level of SARS-CoV-2 in the blood, raising a question of how the virus spreads throughout the body. We propose that nerve terminals in the orofacial mucosa, eyes, and olfactory neuroepithelium act as entry points for the brain invasion, allowing SARS-CoV-2 to infect the brainstem. By exploiting the subcellular membrane compartments of infected cells, a feature common to all coronaviruses, SARS-CoV-2 is capable to disseminate from the brain to periphery via vesicular axonal transport and passive diffusion through axonal endoplasmic reticula, causing multiple organ injury independently of an underlying respiratory infection. The proposed model clarifies a wide range of clinically observed phenomena in CoVID-19 patients, such as neurological symptoms unassociated with lung pathology, protracted presence of the virus in samples obtained from recovered patients, exaggerated immune response, and multiple organ failure in severe cases with variable course and dynamics of the disease. We believe that this model can provide novel insights into CoVID-19 and its long-term sequelae, and establish a framework for further research.

Molecular Diagnosis of COVID-19: Challenges and Research Needs

Molecular diagnosis of COVID-19 primarily relies on the detection of RNA of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, the causative infectious agent of the pandemic. Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) enables sensitive detection of specific sequences of genes that encode the RNA dependent RNA polymerase (RdRP), nucleocapsid (N), envelope (E), and spike (S) proteins of the virus. Although RT-PCR tests have been widely used and many alternative assays have been developed, the current testing capacity and availability cannot meet the unprecedented global demands for rapid, reliable, and widely accessible molecular diagnosis. Challenges remain throughout the entire analytical process, from the collection and treatment of specimens to the amplification and detection of viral RNA and the validation of clinical sensitivity and specificity. We highlight the main issues surrounding molecular diagnosis of COVID-19, including false negatives from the detection of viral RNA, temporal variations of viral loads, selection and treatment of specimens, and limiting factors in detecting viral proteins. We discuss critical research needs, such as improvements in RT-PCR, development of alternative nucleic acid amplification techniques, incorporating CRISPR technology for point-of-care (POC) applications, validation of POC tests, and sequencing of viral RNA and its mutations. Improved assays are also needed for environmental surveillance or wastewater-based epidemiology, which gauges infection on the community level through analyses of viral components in the community's wastewater. Public health surveillance benefits from large-scale analyses of antibodies in serum, although the current serological tests do not quantify neutralizing antibodies. Further advances in analytical technology and research through multidisciplinary collaboration will contribute to the development of mitigation strategies, therapeutics, and vaccines. Lessons learned from molecular diagnosis of COVID-19 are valuable for better preparedness in response to other infectious diseases.

Use of Whole Genome Sequencing Data for a First in Silico Specificity Evaluation of the RT-qPCR Assays Used for SARS-CoV-2 Detection

The current COronaVIrus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic started in December 2019. COVID-19 cases are confirmed by the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in biological samples by RT-qPCR. However, limited numbers of SARS-CoV-2 genomes were available when the first RT-qPCR methods were developed in January 2020 for initial in silico specificity evaluation and to verify whether the targeted loci are highly conserved. Now that more whole genome data have become available, we used the bioinformatics tool SCREENED and a total of 4755 publicly available SARS-CoV-2 genomes, downloaded at two different time points, to evaluate the specificity of 12 RT-qPCR tests (consisting of a total of 30 primers and probe sets) used for SARS-CoV-2 detection and the impact of the virus' genetic evolution on four of them. The exclusivity of these methods was also assessed using the human reference genome and 2624 closely related other respiratory viral genomes. The specificity of the assays was generally good and stable over time. An exception is the first method developed by the China Center for Disease Control and prevention (CDC), which exhibits three primer mismatches present in 358 SARS-CoV-2 genomes sequenced mainly in Europe from February 2020 onwards. The best results were obtained for the assay of Chan et al. (2020) targeting the gene coding for the spiking protein (S). This demonstrates that our user-friendly strategy can be used for a first in silico specificity evaluation of future RT-qPCR tests, as well as verifying that the former methods are still capable of detecting circulating SARS-CoV-2 variants.

Clinical Samples for SARS-CoV-2 Detection: Review of the Early Literature

In January 2020, a cluster of pneumonia cases was reported in Wuhan, China. A global pandemic followed. The infection, called novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Common symptoms of COVID-19 illness included fever, cough, and abnormal findings on chest computed tomography. Nucleic acid testing, in the form of real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction, is essential for diagnosing COVID-19 from respiratory samples from infected patients. Still, many questions remain surrounding the optimization of pre-analytical factors, such as specimen selection, collection, and transport. This review summarizes the current publications that describe viral density and specimen suitability for molecular detection methods. Of note, many of the reports represent studies with small sample sizes, and information may change as more is learned about specimen types as the pandemic continues.

Histopathology and ultrastructural findings of fatal COVID-19 infections in Washington State: a case series

BACKGROUND

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of an ongoing pandemic, with increasing deaths worldwide. To date, documentation of the histopathological features in fatal cases of the disease caused by SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) has been scarce due to sparse autopsy performance and incomplete organ sampling. We aimed to provide a clinicopathological report of severe COVID-19 cases by documenting histopathological changes and evidence of SARS-CoV-2 tissue tropism.

METHODS

In this case series, patients with a positive antemortem or post-mortem SARS-CoV-2 result were considered eligible for enrolment. Post-mortem examinations were done on 14 people who died with COVID-19 at the King County Medical Examiner's Office (Seattle, WA, USA) and Snohomish County Medical Examiner's Office (Everett, WA, USA) in negative-pressure isolation suites during February and March, 2020. Clinical and laboratory data were reviewed. Tissue examination was done by light microscopy, immunohistochemistry, electron microscopy, and quantitative RT-PCR.

FINDINGS

The median age of our cohort was 73·5 years (range 42-84; IQR 67·5-77·25). All patients had clinically significant comorbidities, the most common being hypertension, chronic kidney disease, obstructive sleep apnoea, and metabolic disease including diabetes and obesity. The major pulmonary finding was diffuse alveolar damage in the acute or organising phases, with five patients showing focal pulmonary microthrombi. Coronavirus-like particles were detected in the respiratory system, kidney, and gastrointestinal tract. Lymphocytic myocarditis was observed in one patient with viral RNA detected in the tissue.

INTERPRETATION

The primary pathology observed in our cohort was diffuse alveolar damage, with virus located in the pneumocytes and tracheal epithelium. Microthrombi, where observed, were scarce and endotheliitis was not identified. Although other non-pulmonary organs showed susceptibility to infection, their contribution to the pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 infection requires further examination.

FUNDING

None.

Diagnosing COVID-19 in the Emergency Department: A Scoping Review of Clinical Examinations, Laboratory Tests, Imaging Accuracy, and Biases

Objective

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) emerged as a global pandemic in early 2020 with rapidly evolving approaches to diagnosing the clinical illness called coronavirus disease (COVID‐19). The primary objective of this scoping review is to synthesize current research of the diagnostic accuracy of history, physical examination, routine laboratory tests, real‐time reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction (rRT‐PCR), immunology tests, and computed tomography (CT) for the emergency department (ED) diagnosis of COVID‐19. Secondary objectives included a synopsis of diagnostic biases likely with current COVID‐19 research as well as corresponding implications of false‐negative and false‐positive results for clinicians and investigators.

Methods

A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses–Scoping Review (PRISMA‐ScR)–adherent synthesis of COVID‐19 diagnostic accuracy through May 5, 2020, was conducted. The search strategy was designed by a medical librarian and included studies indexed by PubMed and Embase since January 2020.

Results

A total of 1,907 citations were screened for relevance. Patients without COVID‐19 are rarely reported, so specificity and likelihood ratios were generally unavailable. Fever is the most common finding, while hyposmia and hypogeusia appear useful to rule in COVID‐19. Cough is not consistently present. Lymphopenia is the mostly commonly reported laboratory abnormality and occurs in over 50% of COVID‐19 patients. rRT‐PCR is currently considered the COVID‐19 criterion standard for most diagnostic studies, but a single test sensitivity ranges from 60% to 78%. Multiple reasons for false‐negatives rRT‐PCR exist, including sample site tested and disease stage during which sample was obtained. CT may increase COVID‐19 sensitivity in conjunction with rRT‐PCR, but guidelines for imaging patients most likely to benefit are emerging. IgM and IgG serology levels are undetectable in the first week of COVID‐19, but sensitivity (range = 82% to 100%) and specificity (range = 87% to 100%) are promising. Whether detectable COVID‐19 antibodies correspond to immunity remains unanswered. Current studies do not adhere to accepted diagnostic accuracy reporting standards and likely report significantly biased results if the same tests were to be applied to general ED populations with suspected COVID‐19.

Conclusions

With the exception of fever and disorders of smell/taste, history and physical examination findings are unhelpful to distinguish COVID‐19 from other infectious conditions that mimic SARS‐CoV‐2 like influenza. Routine laboratory tests are also nondiagnostic, although lymphopenia is a common finding and other abnormalities may predict severe disease. Although rRT‐PCR is the current criterion standard, more inclusive consensus‐based criteria will likely emerge because of the high false‐negative rate of PCR tests. The role of serology and CT in ED assessments remains undefined.

Current Evidence for Minimally Invasive Surgery During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Risk Mitigation Strategies: A Narrative Review

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to review the literature surrounding the risks of viral transmission during laparoscopic surgery and propose mitigation measures to address these risks.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has caused surgeons the world over to re-evaluate their approach to surgical procedures given concerns over the risk of aerosolization of viral particles and exposure of operating room staff to infection. International society guidelines advise against the use of laparoscopy; however, the evidence on this topic is scant and recommendations are based on the perceived most cautious course of action.

METHODS

We conducted a narrative review of the existing literature surrounding the risks of viral transmission during laparoscopic surgery and balance these risks against the benefits of minimally invasive approaches. We also propose mitigation measures to address these risks that we have adopted in our institution.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

While it is currently assumed that open surgery minimizes operating room staff exposure to the virus, our findings reveal that this may not be the case. A well-informed, evidence-based opinion is critical when making decisions regarding which operative approach to pursue, for the safety and well-being of the patient, the operating room staff, and the healthcare system at large. Minimally invasive surgical approaches offer significant advantages with respect to both patient care, and the mitigation of the risk of viral transmission during surgery, provided the appropriate equipment and expertise are present.

Histopathology and ultrastructural findings of fatal COVID-19 infections in Washington State: a case series

BACKGROUND

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of an ongoing pandemic, with increasing deaths worldwide. To date, documentation of the histopathological features in fatal cases of the disease caused by SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) has been scarce due to sparse autopsy performance and incomplete organ sampling. We aimed to provide a clinicopathological report of severe COVID-19 cases by documenting histopathological changes and evidence of SARS-CoV-2 tissue tropism.

METHODS

In this case series, patients with a positive antemortem or post-mortem SARS-CoV-2 result were considered eligible for enrolment. Post-mortem examinations were done on 14 people who died with COVID-19 at the King County Medical Examiner's Office (Seattle, WA, USA) and Snohomish County Medical Examiner's Office (Everett, WA, USA) in negative-pressure isolation suites during February and March, 2020. Clinical and laboratory data were reviewed. Tissue examination was done by light microscopy, immunohistochemistry, electron microscopy, and quantitative RT-PCR.

FINDINGS

The median age of our cohort was 73·5 years (range 42-84; IQR 67·5-77·25). All patients had clinically significant comorbidities, the most common being hypertension, chronic kidney disease, obstructive sleep apnoea, and metabolic disease including diabetes and obesity. The major pulmonary finding was diffuse alveolar damage in the acute or organising phases, with five patients showing focal pulmonary microthrombi. Coronavirus-like particles were detected in the respiratory system, kidney, and gastrointestinal tract. Lymphocytic myocarditis was observed in one patient with viral RNA detected in the tissue.

INTERPRETATION

The primary pathology observed in our cohort was diffuse alveolar damage, with virus located in the pneumocytes and tracheal epithelium. Microthrombi, where observed, were scarce and endotheliitis was not identified. Although other non-pulmonary organs showed susceptibility to infection, their contribution to the pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 infection requires further examination.

FUNDING

None.

The potential of JAK/STAT pathway inhibition by ruxolitinib in the treatment of COVID-19

Ruxolitinib is the first approved JAK1 and JAK2 inhibitor, and is known to interfere with the JAK / STAT signaling pathway, one of the critical cellular signaling pathways involved in the inflammatory response. This review presents an overview of SARS-CoV-2 and the COVID-19 pandemic, and then focuses on the potential efficacy of ruxolitinib in this infection. The potential targets of ruxolitinib were determined by using genetic alterations that have been reported in COVID-19 patients. The potential effectiveness of ruxolitinib is suggested by evaluating the interactions of these potential targets with ruxolitinib or JAK/STAT pathway.

Ultrastructural Evidence for Direct Renal Infection with SARS-CoV-2

BACKGROUND

A significant fraction of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) display abnormalities in renal function. Retrospective studies of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China, report an incidence of 3%-7% progressing to ARF, a marker of poor prognosis. The cause of the renal failure in COVID-19 is unknown, but one hypothesized mechanism is direct renal infection by the causative virus, SARS-CoV-2.

METHODS

We performed an autopsy on a single patient who died of COVID-19 after open repair of an aortic dissection, complicated by hypoxic respiratory failure and oliguric renal failure. We used light and electron microscopy to examine renal tissue for evidence of SARS-CoV-2 within renal cells.

RESULTS

Light microscopy of proximal tubules showed geographic isometric vacuolization, corresponding to a focus of tubules with abundant intracellular viral arrays. Individual viruses averaged 76 µm in diameter and had an envelope studded with crown-like, electron-dense spikes. Vacuoles contained double-membrane vesicles suggestive of partially assembled virus.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of viral particles in the renal tubular epithelium that were morphologically identical to SARS-CoV-2, and with viral arrays and other features of virus assembly, provide evidence of a productive direct infection of the kidney by SARS-CoV-2. This finding offers confirmatory evidence that direct renal infection occurs in the setting of AKI in COVID-19. However, the frequency and clinical significance of direct infection in COVID-19 is unclear. Tubular isometric vacuolization observed with light microscopy, which correlates with double-membrane vesicles containing vacuoles observed with electronic microscopy, may be a useful histologic marker for active SARS-CoV-2 infection in kidney biopsy or autopsy specimens.

How We Manage Patients With Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia During the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic

Infections are a major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). These can be exacerbated by anti-leukemic treatments. In addition, the typical patients with CLL already have fragilities and background risk factors that apply to the general population for severe COVID-19. On these bases, patients with CLL may experience COVID-19 morbidity and mortality. Recurrent seasonal epidemics of SARS-CoV-2 are expected, and doctors taking care of patients with CLL must be prepared for the possibility of substantial resurgences of infection and adapt their approach to CLL management accordingly. In this Guideline Article, we aim at providing clinicians with a literature-informed expert opinion on the management of patients with CLL during SARS-CoV-2 epidemic.

Risk Assessment and Prevention of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Transmission for Hospitalized Urological Patients After the COVID-19 Pandemic in Wuhan, China

Background

Emerging asymptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections were detected and multiple cases were found to be SARS-CoV-2 positive again, which raised an alarm for the patients hospitalized after the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

Objective

We investigated the risk and prevention of hospital transmission of SARS-CoV-2 to hospitalized urological patients.

Design, setting, and participants

This is a retrospective study of 319 hospitalized urological patients enrolled between April 20, 2020 and May 11, 2020 from two tertiary hospitals in Wuhan, China.

Intervention

Chest computed tomography (CT) images, nucleic acid tests (NATs), and serum antibody were examined at the outpatient department and 1 wk after admission for all patients.

Outcome measurements and statistical analysis

The chest CT images, NATs, serum antibody results, and clinical data were collected and analyzed.

Results and limitations

None of the 319 patients was found to be SARS-CoV-2 NAT positive. Ten and four patients were detected to be immunoglobulin (Ig)G and IgM positive, respectively. The chest CT features of 116 patients showed abnormal lung findings. During the 1-wk isolation, one patient initially being IgG positive only was found to be IgM positive, and another initially IgM-positive patient had a rising IgG level. Through risk assessment, we identified seven patients with very high and high risk for hospital transmission, and delayed the surgery while maintaining close follow-up. Five intermediate-risk patients were operated on successfully under paravertebral block or epidural anesthesia to avoid opening the airway with endotracheal intubation. The remaining 104 low-risk and 203 normal patients underwent normal surgery.

Conclusions

Of the 319 patients, seven were identified as very high and high risk, which reinforced the importance of epidemic surveillance of discharged COVID-19 patients and asymptomatic infections. Five intermediate-risk patients were operated on successfully under regional anesthesia.

Patient summary

Our experience of risk assessment and management practice may provide a strategy to prevent severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 transmission to hospitalized urological patients after the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

SARS-CoV-2 RNA detected in blood products from patients with COVID-19 is not associated with infectious virus

Background: Laboratory diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection (the cause of COVID-19) uses PCR to detect viral RNA (vRNA) in respiratory samples. SARS-CoV-2 RNA has also been detected in other sample types, but there is limited understanding of the clinical or laboratory significance of its detection in blood. Methods: We undertook a systematic literature review to assimilate the evidence for the frequency of vRNA in blood, and to identify associated clinical characteristics. We performed RT-PCR in serum samples from a UK clinical cohort of acute and convalescent COVID-19 cases (n=212), together with convalescent plasma samples collected by NHS Blood and Transplant (NHSBT) (n=462 additional samples). To determine whether PCR-positive blood samples could pose an infection risk, we attempted virus isolation from a subset of RNA-positive samples. Results: We identified 28 relevant studies, reporting SARS-CoV-2 RNA in 0-76% of blood samples; pooled estimate 10% (95%CI 5-18%). Among serum samples from our clinical cohort, 27/212 (12.7%) had SARS-CoV-2 RNA detected by RT-PCR. RNA detection occurred in samples up to day 20 post symptom onset, and was associated with more severe disease (multivariable odds ratio 7.5). Across all samples collected ≥28 days post symptom onset, 0/494 (0%, 95%CI 0-0.7%) had vRNA detected. Among our PCR-positive samples, cycle threshold (ct) values were high (range 33.5-44.8), suggesting low vRNA copy numbers. PCR-positive sera inoculated into cell culture did not produce any cytopathic effect or yield an increase in detectable SARS-CoV-2 RNA. Conclusions: vRNA was detectable at low viral loads in a minority of serum samples collected in acute infection, but was not associated with infectious SARS-CoV-2 (within the limitations of the assays used). This work helps to inform biosafety precautions for handling blood products from patients with current or previous COVID-19.

Test, test, test - a complication of testing for coronavirus disease 2019 with nasal swabs

Background

Coronavirus disease 2019, a highly transmissible respiratory infection, has created a public health crisis of global magnitude. The mainstay of diagnostic testing for coronavirus disease 2019 is molecular polymerase chain reaction testing of a respiratory specimen, obtained with a viral swab. As the incidence of new cases of coronavirus disease 2019 increases exponentially, the use of viral swabs to collect nasopharyngeal specimens is anticipated to increase drastically.

Case report

This paper draws attention to a complication of viral swab testing in the nasopharynx and describes the premature engagement of a viral swab breakpoint, resulting in impaction in the nasal cavity.

Conclusion

This case highlights a possible design flaw of the viral swab when used to collect nasopharyngeal specimens, which then requires an aerosol-generating procedure in a high-risk patient to be performed. The paper outlines a safe technique of nasal foreign body removal in a suspected coronavirus disease 2019 patient and suggests alternative testing materials.

Gastrointestinal and hepatic abnormalities in patients with confirmed COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Although not common, gastrointestinal and liver symptoms have reportedly been the initial presentation of coronavirus disease‐2019 (COVID‐19) in a large group of patients. Therefore, knowing the frequency and characteristics of these manifestations of COVID‐19 is important for both clinicians and health policy makers. A systematic review and meta‐analysis of the available data on the gastrointestinal and liver manifestations of patients with COVID‐19 was performed. PubMed and Scopus databases and Google Scholar search engine were searched for published and unpublished preprint articles up to 10 April 2020. Original studies providing information on clinical digestive symptoms or biomarkers of liver function in patients with polymerase chain reaction confirmed diagnosis of COVID‐19 were included. After quality appraisal, data were extracted. Prevalence data from individual studies were pooled using a random‐effects model. Overall, 67 studies were included in this systematic review and meta‐analysis, comprising a pooled population of 13 251 patients with confirmed COVID‐19. The most common gastrointestinal symptoms were anorexia (10.2%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 6.2%‐16.4%), diarrhea (8.4%, 95% CI = 6.2%‐11.2%), and nausea (5.7%, 95% CI = 3.7%‐8.6%), respectively. Decreased albumin levels (39.8%, 95% CI = 15.3%‐70.8%), increased aspartate aminotransferase (22.8%, 95% CI = 18.1%‐28.4%), and alanine aminotransferase (20.6%, 95% CI = 16.7%‐25.1%) were common hepatic findings. After adjusting for preexisting gastrointestinal (5.9%) and liver diseases (4.2%), the most common gastrointestinal findings were diarrhea (8.7%, 95% CI = 5.4%‐13.9%), anorexia (8.0%, 95% CI = 3.0%‐19.8%), and nausea (5.1%, 95% CI = 2.2%‐14.3%). Gastrointestinal and liver manifestations are not rare in patients with COVID‐19, but their prevalence might be affected by preexisting diseases. Diarrhea and mild liver abnormalities seem to be relatively common in COVID‐19, regardless of comorbidities

Anorexia (10.2%), diarrhea (8.4%), and nausea (5.7%) were the most common gastrointestinal manifestations in confirmed COVID‐19 patients.

Serum albumin reduction (39.8%), AST elevation (22.8%), and ALT elevation (20.6%) were the most common hepatic abnormalities in confirmed COVID‐19 patients.

Preexisting gastrointestinal and liver diseases were present in 5.9% and 4.2% of COVID‐19 patients. After adjusting for these illnesses, diarrhea (8.7%) became the most prevalent gastrointestinal finding.

The prevalence of gastrointestinal and hepatic abnormalities were markedly higher in patients with severe COVID‐19 infection, compared to non‐severe cases.

SARS-CoV-2 detection in different respiratory sites: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The accurate detection of SARS-CoV-2 through respiratory sampling is critical for the prevention of further transmission and the timely initiation of treatment for COVID-19. There is a diverse range of SARS-CoV-2 detection rates in reported studies, with uncertainty as to the optimal sampling strategy for COVID-19 diagnosis and monitoring.

Methods

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing respiratory sampling strategies for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA. The inclusion criteria were studies that assessed at least two respiratory sampling sites (oropharyngeal swab, nasopharyngeal swab, and sputum) in participants with COVID-19. The percentage positive tests were compared between sampling modalities by constructing a Z-test assuming independence and using the standard errors obtained from the random effects meta-analysis.

Findings

From 1039 total studies, we identified 11 studies that met our inclusion criteria, with SARS-CoV-2 testing results from a total of 3442 respiratory tract specimens. Compared to nasopharyngeal swab sampling, sputum testing resulted in significantly higher rates of SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection while oropharyngeal swab testing had lower rates of viral RNA detection. Earlier sampling after symptom onset was associated with improved detection rates, but the differences in SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection by sampling method was consistent regardless of the duration of symptoms.

Interpretation

The results support sputum sampling as a valuable method of COVID-19 diagnosis and monitoring, and highlight the importance of early testing after symptom onset to increase the rates of COVID-19 diagnosis.

Funding

This study was funded in part by the NIH grants U01AI106701 and by the Harvard University for AIDS Research (NIAID 5P30AI060354).

Multicenter Evaluation of the Cepheid Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 Test

Nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) are the primary means of identifying acute infections caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Accurate and fast test results may permit more efficient use of protective and isolation resources and allow rapid therapeutic interventions. We evaluated the analytical and clinical performance characteristics of the Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 (Xpert) test, a rapid, automated molecular test for SARS-CoV-2. Analytical sensitivity and specificity/interference were assessed with infectious SARS-CoV-2; other infectious coronavirus species, including SARS-CoV; and 85 nasopharyngeal swab specimens positive for other respiratory viruses, including endemic human coronaviruses (hCoVs).

Nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) are the primary means of identifying acute infections caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Accurate and fast test results may permit more efficient use of protective and isolation resources and allow rapid therapeutic interventions. We evaluated the analytical and clinical performance characteristics of the Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 (Xpert) test, a rapid, automated molecular test for SARS-CoV-2. Analytical sensitivity and specificity/interference were assessed with infectious SARS-CoV-2; other infectious coronavirus species, including SARS-CoV; and 85 nasopharyngeal swab specimens positive for other respiratory viruses, including endemic human coronaviruses (hCoVs). Clinical performance was assessed using 483 remnant upper- and lower-respiratory-tract specimens previously analyzed by standard-of-care (SOC) NAATs. The limit of detection of the Xpert test was 0.01 PFU/ml. Other hCoVs, including Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus, were not detected by the Xpert test. SARS-CoV, a closely related species in the subgenus Sarbecovirus, was detected by a broad-range target (E) but was distinguished from SARS-CoV-2 (SARS-CoV-2-specific N2 target). Compared to SOC NAATs, the positive agreement of the Xpert test was 219/220 (99.5%), and the negative agreement was 250/261 (95.8%). A third tie-breaker NAAT resolved all but three of the discordant results in favor the Xpert test. The Xpert test provided sensitive and accurate detection of SARS-CoV-2 in a variety of upper- and lower-respiratory-tract specimens. The high sensitivity and short time to results of approximately 45 min may impact patient management.

Novel One-Step Single-Tube Nested Quantitative Real-Time PCR Assay for Highly Sensitive Detection of SARS-CoV-2

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has become a public health emergency. The reverse transcriptase real-time quantitative PCR (qRT-PCR) test is currently considered as the gold standard in the laboratory for the etiological detection of COVID-19. However, qRT-PCR results could be false-negative due to the inadequate sensitivity of qRT-PCR. In this study, we have developed and evaluated a novel one-step single-tube nested quantitative real-time PCR (OSN-qRT-PCR) assay for the highly sensitive detection of SARS-CoV-2 targeting the ORF1ab and N genes. The sensitivity of the OSN-qRT-PCR assay was 1 copy/reaction and 10-fold higher than that of the commercial qRT-PCR kit (10 copies/reaction). The clinical performance of the OSN-qRT-PCR assay was evaluated using 181 clinical samples. Among them, 14 qRT-PCR-negative samples (7 had no repetitive results and 7 had no cycle threshold (CT) values) were detected by OSN-qRT-PCR. Moreover, the 7 qRT-PCR-positives in the qRT-PCR gray zone (CT values of ORF1ab ranged from 37.48 to 39.07, and CT values of N ranged from 37.34 to 38.75) were out of the gray zone and thus were deemed to be positive by OSN-qRT-PCR, indicating that the positivity of these samples is confirmative. Compared to the qRT-PCR kit, the OSN-qRT-PCR assay revealed higher sensitivity and specificity, showing better suitability to clinical applications for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in patients with low viral load.

The optimal diagnostic methods for COVID-19

As the world continues to study and understand coronavirus disease (COVID-19), existing investigations and tests have been used to try and detect the virus to slow viral transmission and its global spread. A ‘gold-standard’ investigation has not yet been identified for detection and monitoring. Initially, computed tomography (CT) was the mainstay investigation as it shows the disease severity and recovery, and its images change at different stages of the disease. However, CT has been found to have limited sensitivity and negative predictive value in the early stages of the disease, and the value of its use has come under debate due to whether its images change the treatment plan, the risk of radiation, as well as its practicality with infection control. Therefore, there has been a shift to the use of other imaging modalities and tests, such as chest X-rays and ultrasound. Furthermore, the use of nucleic acid-based testing such as reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) have proven useful with direct confirmation of COVID-19 infection. In this study, we aim to review and analyse current literature to compare RT-PCR, immunological biomarkers, chest radiographs, ultrasound and chest CT scanning as methods of diagnosing COVID-19.

False negative SARS-CoV-2 PCR - A case report and literature review

The first case of the novel Coronavirus Diseases (COVID-19) caused by the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was detected in Wuhan, China in December 2019. On January 30, 2020, the World Health Organization declared a global health emergency. Countries around the world advised social distancing, businesses and schools closed, while health care workers faced a viral war. With the declaration of a global emergency, a test to rapidly detect the SARS-CoV-2 was developed to ensure swift isolation of infected persons to prevent spread of disease. Currently, the gold standard for test is Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR); however, patients with a high clinical suspicion for COVID-19 can sometimes have multiple negative tests. We discuss a patient under investigation (PUI) who had classic findings of COVID-19 but repeatedly tested negative from nasopharyngeal swabs until a fifth sample obtained from a deep suctioning was tested.

Oropharyngeal Secretion as Alternative for SARS-CoV-2 Detection

This study aimed to determine if sampling of oropharyngeal secretions (OSs) helps improves detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA by nucleic acid amplification testing of potential patients with COVID-19. The first prospective study consisted of 75 patients with COVID-19 who were ready for discharge and who had 2 consecutive negative results per nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) of viral samples retrieved with nasopharyngeal swabs (NPSs). Because of detection of potential false negatives in that cohort, the NAAT results of paired OS and NPS samples from 50 additional recruits with COVID-19 during their recovery stage were used in a second prospective study to compare the diagnostic values of the 2 viral RNA sampling methods. For identification of the frequency of inconsistency between the sampling methods, the McNemar's test was used for difference analysis and the kappa statistic for consistency analysis. OSs obtained from 2 of the 75 participants in the first study yielded positive results for SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid. Both were male and aged >60 y. Subsequent chemiluminescence enzyme immunoassays indicated that they were positive for the SARS-CoV-2 IgM and IgG antibodies. For parallel NAAT of OS and NPS samples in the second study, McNemar's test indicated that the difference between the frequencies of inconsistent parts of OS and NPS was statistically significant (P = 0.021). Cohen's kappa coefficient for OS and NPS was 0.244, which is indicative of fair consistency. The NPS test has a risk of sending home more patients (59%) who still have the infection, while the OS test will make such an error in fewer patients (14%). Although OS sampling improves the accuracy of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid testing, it has to be emphasized that this conclusion is based on a very small sample size. Detection of viral RNA from a patient's secretions is not confirmative of viral infectivity.

A Collaborative Multidisciplinary Approach to the Management of Coronavirus Disease 2019 in the Hospital Setting

The novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which presents an unprecedented challenge to medical providers worldwide. Although most SARS-CoV-2-infected individuals manifest with a self-limited mild disease that resolves with supportive care in the outpatient setting, patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 will require a multidisciplinary collaborative management approach for optimal care in the hospital setting. Laboratory and radiologic studies provide critical information on disease severity, management options, and overall prognosis. Medical management is mostly supportive with antipyretics, hydration, oxygen supplementation, and other measures as dictated by clinical need. Among its medical complications is a characteristic proinflammatory cytokine storm often associated with end-organ dysfunction, including respiratory failure, liver and renal insufficiency, cardiac injury, and coagulopathy. Specific recommendations for the management of these medical complications are discussed. Despite the issuance of emergency use authorization for remdesivir, there are still no proven effective antiviral and immunomodulatory therapies, and their use in COVID-19 management should be guided by clinical trial protocols or treatment registries. The medical care of patients with COVID-19 extends beyond their hospitalization. Postdischarge follow-up and monitoring should be performed, preferably using telemedicine, until the patients have fully recovered from their illness and are released from home quarantine protocols.

Successful Outcomes of Severe COVID-19 in Patient with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia: Diagnostic Challenges in Immunocompromised Hosts

The emergence and spread of 2019 novel coronavirus have led to an unprecedented public health crisis around the globe, threatening the lives of millions of people. We report a severe case of COVID-19 in a patient with chronic lymphocytic leukemia and describe primarily the clinical presentation and the challenges encountered in the COVID-19 diagnosis, treatment, and specimens sampling pitfalls. This case highlights the importance of a comprehensive diagnostic approach of pneumonia in immunocompromised hosts, including timely and safe bronchoscopy, because of the broad differential diagnosis, more challenging with the current outbreak of COVID-19.

[Surgery during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic : Recommendations on operative procedures]

BACKGROUND

In February 2020 Germany was also hit by the SARS-CoV‑2 pandemic. Even patients infected by SARS-CoV‑2 or COVID-19 may need operative procedures. Currently, no uniform recommendations exist on precautions to be taken when operating on these patients. Furthermore, they may differ from one hospital to another.

METHODS

The task force COVID-19 of the emergency, intensive and severely injured section of the German Trauma Society (DGU e. V.) has developed consensus-based recommendations on surgical treatment of patients with SARS-CoV‑2 infections. Great importance is placed on the implementation in hospitals at all levels of care.

RESULTS

The indications for surgical interventions in patients with COVID-19 infections require an extremely critical evaluation. When indicated these surgical intervention should ideally be performed in a separate operating theater. All personnel involved should wear personal protective equipment with FFP2 masks, face shields and double gloves. The emergency team in the resuscitation bay should generally wear the same personal protective equipment. Special training is mandatory and the exposure of team members should be minimized.

CONCLUSION

The recommendations are principally used for all kinds of surgery and comply with the currently available knowledge. Nevertheless, all recommendations represent a compromise between maximum safety of all medical staff and practicability in the routine hospital workflow.

The Strategic Alliance between Clinical and Molecular Science in the War against SARS-CoV-2, with the Rapid-Diagnostics Test as an Indispensable Weapon for Front Line Doctors

Our work concerns the actual problem of spread of SARS- CoV-2 outbreak which requires fast and correct as possible answer. In current scenario, the need of rapid answer put away the imperative of proper methodology. We focus on the serogical immunoassay for diagnosis of Covid-19 as an important weapon not only for diagnostic purpose, but also for epidemiologic one. The right equilibrium between high speed, low cost and accuracy is obtained with easy-to-use decentralized point-of-care test as the colloidal gold-based immunochromatographic strip assay which detects IgM and IgG antibodies directed against SARS-CoV-2. As our aim is to evaluate the efficacy of Covid-19 rapid tests and of serological assays in real-life settings, we designed a research protocol aimed to establish how to use correctly these diagnostics, taking into account the different possible clinical and epidemiological scenarios.

Positive results for patients with COVID-19 discharged form hospital in Chongqing, China

BACKGROUND

Since December 2019, over 80,000 patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been confirmed in China. With the increasing number of recovered patients, more attention should be paid to the follow-up of these patients.

METHODS

In the study, 576 patients with COVID-19 discharged from hospital in Chongqing, China from January 24, 2020, to March 10, 2020 were evaluated by viral nucleic acid tests for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2(SARS-CoV-2) to determine if they could be released from quarantine. Among the 576 patients, 61 patients (10.6%) had positive RT-PCR test results of SARS-CoV-2. We aimed to analyze the demographics, clinical characteristics and treatment of 61 patients.

RESULTS

These positive patients were characterized by older age, chronic medical illness and mild conditions. 38 (62.3%) patients who were asymptomatic without abnormalities on chest radiographs were found in the positive with COVID-19. Also, they showed positive results of stool or sputum specimens with negative results of nasal and pharyngeal swab specimens. The median duration of positive result of SARS-CoV-2 was varied from 3 days to 35 days in the patients discharged from hospital with no family member infection.

CONCLUSIONS

Multi-site screening of SARS-CoV-2 including nasal and pharyngeal swabs, stool and sputum specimens could be considered to improve the diagnosis, treatment and infection control in patients with COVID-19. Our findings provide the important information and clinical evidence for the improved management of patients recovered from COVID-19.

Personal protective equipment (PPE) during the COVID-19 pandemic for oculofacial plastic and orbital surgery

Purpose: To review the current literature on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) virology and transmission; to present a decision tree for risk stratifying oculofacial plastic and orbital surgeries; and to generate personal protective equipment (PPE) recommendations by risk category.Methods: A comprehensive literature review on COVID-19 was conducted. A two-stage modified Delphi technique involving 18 oculofacial plastic and orbital surgeons across Canada was used to determine consensus risk-stratification criteria and PPE recommendations for surgeries performed in the North American context.Results: COVID-19 is an infectious disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We summarize COVID-19 virology and transmission, as well as practice considerations for oculofacial plastic and orbital surgeons. Although SARS-CoV-2 is known to be transmitted predominantly by droplet mechanisms, some studies suggest that transmission is possible through aerosols. Among common procedures performed by oculofacial and plastic surgeons, some are likely to be considered aerosol-generating. Risk of transmission increases when manipulating structures known to harbor high viral loads. We present an algorithm for risk-stratification based on the nature of surgery and the anatomical sites involved and offer recommendations for PPE.Conclusions: Although universal droplet precautions are now recommended in most healthcare settings, some clinical situations require more stringent infection control measures. By highlighting high-risk scenarios specific to oculofacial plastic and orbital surgery, as well as PPE recommendations, we hope to enhance the safety of continued care during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines on the Diagnosis of COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Accurate molecular diagnostic tests are necessary for confirming a diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Direct detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) nucleic acids in respiratory tract specimens informs patient, healthcare institution and public health level decision-making. The numbers of available SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid detection tests are rapidly increasing, as is the COVID-19 diagnostic literature. Thus, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) recognized a significant need for frequently updated systematic reviews of the literature to inform evidence-based best practice guidance.

OBJECTIVE

The IDSA's goal was to develop an evidence-based diagnostic guideline to assists clinicians, clinical laboratorians, patients and policymakers in decisions related to the optimal use of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid amplification tests. In addition, we provide a conceptual framework for understanding molecular diagnostic test performance, discuss the nuance of test result interpretation in a variety of practice settings, and highlight important unmet research needs in the COVID-19 diagnostic testing space.

METHODS

IDSA convened a multidisciplinary panel of infectious diseases clinicians, clinical microbiologists, and experts in systematic literature review to identify and prioritize clinical questions and outcomes related to the use of SARS-CoV-2 molecular diagnostics. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make testing recommendations.

RESULTS

The panel agreed on 15 diagnostic recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

Universal access to accurate SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid testing is critical for patient care, hospital infection prevention and the public response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Information on the clinical performance of available tests is rapidly emerging, but the quality of evidence of the current literature is considered low to very low. Recognizing these limitations, the IDSA panel weighed available diagnostic evidence and recommends nucleic acid testing for all symptomatic individuals suspected of having COVID-19. In addition, testing is recommended for asymptomatic individuals with known or suspected contact with a COVID-19 case. Testing asymptomatic individuals without known exposure is suggested when the results will impact isolation/quarantine/personal protective equipment (PPE) usage decisions, dictate eligibility for surgery, or inform administration of immunosuppressive therapy. Ultimately, prioritization of testing will depend on institutional-specific resources and the needs of different patient populations.

Review of Viral Testing (Polymerase Chain Reaction) and Antibody/Serology Testing for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus-2 for the Intensivist

Objective:

As the severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 pandemic develops, assays to detect the virus and infection caused by it are needed for diagnosis and management. To describe to clinicians how each assay is performed, what each assay detects, and the benefits and limitations of each assay.

Data Sources:

Published literature and internet.

Study Selection:

As well done, relevant and recent as possible.

Data Extraction:

Sources were read to extract data from them.

Data Synthesis:

Was synthesized by all coauthors.

Conclusions:

Available assays test for current or previous severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 infection. Nucleic acid assays such as quantitative, or real-time, polymerase chain reaction and loop-mediated isothermal amplification are ideal for acute diagnosis with polymerase chain reaction testing remaining the “gold standard” to diagnose acute infection by severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2, specifically the presence of viral RNA. Assays that detect serum antibodies can theoretically diagnose both acute and remote infection but require time for the patient to develop immunity and may detect nonspecific antibodies. Antibody assays that quantitatively measure neutralizing antibodies are needed to test efficacy of convalescent plasma therapy but are more specialized.

COVID-19 diagnostics in context

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has highlighted the need for different types of diagnostics, comparative validation of new tests, faster approval by federal agencies, and rapid production of test kits to meet global demands. In this Perspective, we discuss the utility and challenges of current diagnostics for COVID-19.

Use of Tracheostomy During the COVID-19 Pandemic: American College of Chest Physicians/American Association for Bronchology and Interventional Pulmonology/Association of Interventional Pulmonology Program Directors Expert Panel Report

Background

The role of tracheostomy during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic remains unknown. The goal of this consensus statement is to examine the current evidence for performing tracheostomy in patients with respiratory failure from COVID-19 and offer guidance to physicians on the preparation, timing, and technique while minimizing the risk of infection to health care workers (HCWs).

Methods

A panel including intensivists and interventional pulmonologists from three professional societies representing 13 institutions with experience in managing patients with COVID-19 across a spectrum of health-care environments developed key clinical questions addressing specific topics on tracheostomy in COVID-19. A systematic review of the literature and an established modified Delphi consensus methodology were applied to provide a reliable evidence-based consensus statement and expert panel report.

Results

Eight key questions, corresponding to 14 decision points, were rated by the panel. The results were aggregated, resulting in eight main recommendations and five additional remarks intended to guide health-care providers in the decision-making process pertinent to tracheostomy in patients with COVID-19-related respiratory failure.

Conclusion

This panel suggests performing tracheostomy in patients expected to require prolonged mechanical ventilation. A specific timing of tracheostomy cannot be recommended. There is no evidence for routine repeat reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction testing in patients with confirmed COVID-19 evaluated for tracheostomy. To reduce the risk of infection in HCWs, we recommend performing the procedure using techniques that minimize aerosolization while wearing enhanced personal protective equipment. The recommendations presented in this statement may change as more experience is gained during this pandemic.

Epidemiological characteristics of COVID-19 patients in convalescence period

This study aimed to investigate the clinical characteristics and to analyse the epidemiological features of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients during convalescence. In this study, we enrolled 71 confirmed cases of COVID-19 who were discharged from hospital and transferred to isolation wards from 6 February to 26 March 2020. They were all employees of Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University or their family members of which three cases were <18 years of age. Clinical data were collected and analysed statistically. Forty-one cases (41/71, 57.7%) comprised medical faculty, young and middle-aged patients (aged ⩽60 years) accounted for 81.7% (58/71). The average isolation time period for all adult patients was 13.8 ± 6.1 days. During convalescence, RNA detection results of 35.2% patients (25/71) turned from negative to positive. The longest RNA reversed phase time was 7 days. In all, 52.9% of adult patients (36/68) had no obvious clinical symptoms, and the remaining ones had mild and non-specific clinical symptoms (e.g. cough, sputum, sore throat, disorders of the gastrointestinal tract etc.). Chest CT signs in 89.7% of adult patients (61/68) gradually improved, and in the others, the lesions were eventually absorbed and improved after short-term repeated progression. The main chest CT manifestations of adult patients were normal, GGO or fibre streak shadow, and six patients (8.8%) had extrapulmonary manifestations, but there was no significant correlation with RNA detection results (r = −0.008, P > 0.05). The drug treatment was mainly symptomatic support therapy, and antibiotics and antiviral drugs were ineffective. It is necessary to re-evaluate the isolation time and standard to terminate isolation for discharged COVID-19 patients.

Rhinologic Practice Special Considerations During COVID-19: Visit Planning, Personal Protective Equipment, Testing, and Environmental Controls

As rhinologists return to practice amid SARS-CoV-2, special considerations are warranted given the unique features of their subspecialty. Rhinologist manipulation of nasal tissue, proximity, and frequent aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs) create high risk for infection transmission. There are 4 areas of special consideration to mitigate risk: (1) previsit planning for risk stratification/mitigation, (2) appropriate personal protective equipment, (3) preprocedural testing, and (4) environmental controls. During previsit planning, risk factors of the patient and procedures are considered. High-risk AGPs are identified by duration, proximity, manipulation of high-viral load tissue, and use of powered instrumentation. Appropriate personal protective equipment includes selection of respiratory and eye protection. COVID-19 testing can screen for asymptomatic carriers prior to high-risk procedures; however, alternative testing methods are required in rhinologic patients not eligible for nasopharyngeal testing due to nasal obstruction or skull base defects. Last, AGPs in rhinologic practices require considerations of room air handling and environmental controls.

Asymptomatic carriage and transmission of SARS-CoV-2: What do we know?

Purpose

Risk to healthcare workers treating asymptomatic patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in the operating room depends on multiple factors. This review examines the evidence for asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic carriage of SARS-CoV-2, the risk of transmission from asymptomatic patients, and the specific risks associated with aerosol-generating procedures. Protective measures, such as minimization of aerosols and use of personal protective equipment in the setting of treating asymptomatic patients, are also reviewed.

Source

We examined the published literature as well as Societal guidelines.

Principal findings

There is evidence that a proportion of those infected with SARS-CoV-2 have detectable viral loads prior to exhibiting symptoms, or without ever developing symptoms. The degree of risk of transmission from asymptomatic patients to healthcare providers will depend on the prevalence of disease in the population, which is difficult to assess without widespread population screening. Aerosol-generating procedures increase the odds of viral transmission from infected symptomatic patients to healthcare providers, but transmission from asymptomatic patients has not been reported. Techniques to minimize aerosolization and appropriate personal protective equipment may help reduce the risk to healthcare workers in the operating room. Some societal guidelines recommend the use of airborne precautions during aerosol-generating procedures on asymptomatic patients during the coronavirus disease pandemic, although evidence supporting this practice is limited.

Conclusion

Viral transmission from patients exhibiting no symptoms in the operating room is plausible and efforts to reduce risk to healthcare providers include reducing aerosolization and wearing appropriate personal protective equipment, the feasibility of which will vary based on geographic risk and equipment availability.

Viral RNA load as determined by cell culture as a management tool for discharge of SARS-CoV-2 patients from infectious disease wards

In a preliminary clinical study, we observed that the combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin was effective against SARS-CoV-2 by shortening the duration of viral load in Covid-19 patients. It is of paramount importance to define when a treated patient can be considered as no longer contagious. Correlation between successful isolation of virus in cell culture and Ct value of quantitative RT-PCR targeting E gene suggests that patients with Ct above 33-34 using our RT-PCR system are not contagious and thus can be discharged from hospital care or strict confinement for non-hospitalized patients.

The influenza virus, SARS-CoV-2, and the airways: Clarification for the otorhinolaryngologist

The influenza virus and SARS-CoV-2 cause trivial upper and severe lower respiratory infections (Influenza virus 290,000 to 650,000 deaths/year). These viruses come into contact with the airways either by direct projection, by secondary inhalation of airborne droplets, or by handling (fomites). The objective of this article is to clarify the mechanisms of production and penetration of droplets of secretions emitted during all expiratory phenomena likely to transport these viruses and come into contact with the respiratory mucosa. The droplets>5μm follow the laws of ballistics, those<5μm follow Brownian motion and remain suspended in the air. The aerosols of droplets are very heterogeneous whether the subject is healthy or sick. During an infectious period, not all droplets contain viral RNA. If these RNAs are detectable around patients, on surfaces, and in the ambient air at variable distances according to the studies (from 0.5m to beyond the patient's room), this is without prejudice to the infectious nature (viability) of the virus and the minimum infectious dose. There is a time lag between the patient's infectious period and that of RNA detection for both viruses. Subsequently, the inhaled particles must meet the laws of fluid dynamics (filtration) to settle in the respiratory tree. All of this partly explains the contagiousness and the clinical expression of these two viruses from the olfactory cleft to the alveoli.

What every orthopaedic surgeon should know about COVID-19: A review of the current literature

The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has severely affected the medical community and stopped the world in its tracks. This review aims to provide the basic information necessary for us, orthopaedic surgeons to prepare ourselves to face this pandemic together. Herein, we cover the background of COVID-19, presentation, investigations, transmission, infection control and touch upon emerging treatments. It is of paramount importance that we should stay vigilant for our patients, our families and ourselves. Adequate infection control measures are necessary during day-to-day clinical work.

A systematic review on COVID-19: urological manifestations, viral RNA detection and special considerations in urological conditions

Purpose and objective

We performed a systematic review on COVID-19 and its potential urological manifestations.

Methods

A literature search was performed using combination of keywords (MeSH terms and free text words) relating to COVID-19, urology, faeces and stool on multiple databases. Primary outcomes were the urological manifestations of COVID-19, and SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA detection in urine and stool samples. Meta-analyses were performed when there were two or more studies reporting on the same outcome. Special considerations in urological conditions that were relevant in the pandemic of COVID-19 were reported in a narrative manner.

Results

There were a total of 21 studies with 3714 COVID-19 patients, and urinary symptoms were absent in all of them. In patients with COVID-19, 7.58% (95% CI 3.30–13.54%) developed acute kidney injury with a mortality rate of 93.27% (95% CI 81.46–100%) amongst them. 5.74% (95% CI 2.88–9.44%) of COVID-19 patients had positive viral RNA in urine samples, but the duration of viral shedding in urine was unknown. 65.82% (95% CI 45.71–83.51%) of COVID-19 patients had positive viral RNA in stool samples, which were detected from 2 to 47 days from symptom onset. 31.6% of renal transplant recipients with COVID-19 required non-invasive ventilation, and the overall mortality rate was 15.4%.

Conclusions

Acute kidney injury leading to mortality is common amongst COVID-19 patients, likely as a result of direct viral toxicity. Viral RNA positivity was detected in both urine and stool samples, so precautions are needed when we perform transurethral or transrectal procedures.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00345-020-03246-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Laboratory Diagnosis of COVID-19: Current Issues and Challenges

The COVID-19 outbreak has had a major impact on clinical microbiology laboratories in the past several months. This commentary covers current issues and challenges for the laboratory diagnosis of infections caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). In the preanalytical stage, collecting the proper respiratory tract specimen at the right time from the right anatomic site is essential for a prompt and accurate molecular diagnosis of COVID-19. Appropriate measures are required to keep laboratory staff safe while producing reliable test results.

The COVID-19 outbreak has had a major impact on clinical microbiology laboratories in the past several months. This commentary covers current issues and challenges for the laboratory diagnosis of infections caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). In the preanalytical stage, collecting the proper respiratory tract specimen at the right time from the right anatomic site is essential for a prompt and accurate molecular diagnosis of COVID-19. Appropriate measures are required to keep laboratory staff safe while producing reliable test results. In the analytic stage, real-time reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR) assays remain the molecular test of choice for the etiologic diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection while antibody-based techniques are being introduced as supplemental tools. In the postanalytical stage, testing results should be carefully interpreted using both molecular and serological findings. Finally, random-access, integrated devices available at the point of care with scalable capacities will facilitate the rapid and accurate diagnosis and monitoring of SARS-CoV-2 infections and greatly assist in the control of this outbreak.

Urologic Surgery and COVID-19: How the Pandemic Is Changing the Way We Operate

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a global impact on all aspects of health care, including surgical procedures. For urologists, it has affected and will continue to influence how we approach the care of patients preoperatively, intraoperatively, and postoperatively. A risk-benefit assessment of each patient undergoing surgery should be performed during the COVID-19 pandemic based on the urgency of the surgery and the risk of viral illness and transmission. Patients with advanced age and comorbidities have a higher incidence of mortality. Routine preoperative testing and symptom screening is recommended to identify those with COVID-19. Adequate personal protective equipment (PPE) for the surgical team is essential to protect health care workers and ensure an adequate workforce. For COVID-19 positive or suspected patients, the use of N95 respirators is recommended if available. The anesthesia method chosen should attempt to minimize aerosolization of the virus. Negative pressure rooms are strongly preferred for intubation/extubation and other aerosolizing procedures for COVID-19 positive patients or when COVID status is unknown. Although transmission has not yet been shown during laparoscopic and robotic procedures, efforts should be made to minimize the risk of aerosolization. Ultra-low particulate air filters are recommended for use during minimally invasive procedures to decrease the risk of viral transmission. Thorough cleaning and sterilization should be performed postoperatively with adequate time allowed for the operating room air to be cycled after procedures. COVID-19 patients should be separated from noninfected patients at all levels of care, including recovery, to decrease the risk of infection. Future directions will be guided by outcomes and infection rates as social distancing guidelines are relaxed and more surgical procedures are reintroduced. Recommendations should be adapted to the local environment and will continue to evolve as more data become available, the shortage of testing and PPE is resolved, and a vaccine and therapeutics for COVID-19 are developed.

What Do We Need to Know to Improve Diagnostic Testing Methods for the 2019 Novel Coronavirus?

There is widespread agreement that reliable, fast, and easy-to-produce diagnostic testing methods that have high sensitivity and specificity are essential for guiding appropriate responses to the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) outbreak. At the present time, there are important unanswered questions about testing methods for SARS-CoV-2. This review article interprets recent findings related to the principal testing methods used to diagnose SARS-CoV-2, including reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), chest imaging, and immunoassay. We discuss the value and limitations of these approaches and suggest directions for future research that can advance the understanding of diagnostic methods. Addressing areas of uncertainty will improve clinical outcomes and allow more effective policies to be implemented to control the disease.

Clinical Characteristics of Patients Infected With the Novel 2019 Coronavirus (SARS-Cov-2) in Guangzhou, China

Background

The clinical manifestations and factors associated with the severity of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections outside of Wuhan are not clearly understood.

Methods

All laboratory-confirmed cases with SARS-Cov-2 infection who were hospitalized and monitored in Guangzhou Eighth People’s Hospital were recruited from January 20 to February 10.

Results

A total of 275 patients were included in this study. The median patient age was 49 years, and 63.6% had exposure to Wuhan. The median virus incubation period was 6 days. Fever (70.5%) and dry cough (56.0%) were the most common symptoms. A decreased albumin level was found in 51.3% of patients, lymphopenia in 33.5%, and pneumonia based on chest computed tomography in 86%. Approximately 16% of patients (n = 45) had severe disease, and there were no deaths. Compared with patients with nonsevere disease, those with severe disease were older, had a higher frequency of coexisting conditions and pneumonia, and had a shorter incubation period (all P < .05). There were no differences between patients who likely contacted the virus in Wuhan and those who had no exposure to Wuhan. Multivariate logistic regression analysis indicated that older age, male sex, and decreased albumin level were independently associated with disease severity.

Conclusions

Most of the patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 in Guangzhou, China are not severe cases and patients with older age, male, and decreased albumin level were more likely to develop into severe ones.

Tracheostomy time-out: New safety tool in the setting of COVID-19

Tracheostomy procedures have a high risk of aerosol generation. Airway providers have reflected on ways to mitigate the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) transmission risks when approaching a surgical airway. To standardize institutional safety measures with tracheostomy, we advocate using a dedicated tracheostomy time‐out applicable to all patients including those suspected of having COVID‐19. The aim of the tracheostomy time‐out is to reduce preventable errors that may increase the risk of transmission of SARS‐CoV‐2.

COVID-19 - Toward a comprehensive understanding of the disease

The evidence on the pathophysiology of the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 infection is rapidly growing. Understanding why some patients suffering from COVID-19 are getting so sick, while others are not, has become an informal imperative for researchers and clinicians around the globe. The answer to this question would allow rationalizing the fear surrounding this pandemic. Understanding of the pathophysiology of COVID-19 relies on an understanding of interplaying mechanisms, including SARS-CoV-2 virulence, human immune response, and complex inflammatory reactions with coagulation playing a major role. An interplay with bacterial co-infections, as well as the vascular system and microcirculation affected throughout the body should also be examined. More importantly, a compre-hensive understanding of pathological mechanisms of COVID-19 will increase the efficacy of therapy and decrease mortality. Herewith, presented is the current state of knowledge on COVID-19: beginning from the virus, its transmission, and mechanisms of entry into the human body, through the pathological effects on the cellular level, up to immunological reaction, systemic and organ presentation. Last but not least, currently available and possible future therapeutic and diagnostic options are briefly commented on.

Development of clinical care guidelines for faculty and residents in the era of COVID-19

Background

The global COVID‐19 pandemic brings new challenges to otolaryngology resident education. Surgical volume and clinic visits are curtailed, personal protective equipment for operating room participation is restricted, and the risk of COVID‐19 disease transmission during heretofore routine patient care is the new norm.

Methods

We describe a small‐team “cohorting” protocol including guidelines for faculty and resident in common clinical scenarios with attention paid to the risk of common otolaryngologic procedures.

Results

A rotating small‐team approach was implemented at each clinical site, limiting interaction between department members but providing comprehensive coverage. Faculty were involved at the earliest phase of clinical interactions. Guidelines delineated faculty and resident roles based on risk stratification by patient COVID status and anticipated procedures. Special consideration was given to high‐risk procedures such as endoscopy and tracheotomy.

Conclusions

A small‐team‐based approach with guidelines for faculty/resident roles may mitigate risk while optimizing patient care and maximizing education.