Cardiovascular complications in COVID-19

BackgroundThe coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) is caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). While systemic inflammation and pulmonary complications can result in significant morbidity and mortality, cardiovascular complications may also occur.ObjectiveThis brief report evaluates cardiovascular complications in the setting of COVID-19 infection.DiscussionThe current COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in over one million infected worldwide and thousands of death. The virus binds and enters through angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2). COVID-19 can result in systemic inflammation, multiorgan dysfunction, and critical illness. The cardiovascular system is also affected, with complications including myocardial injury, myocarditis, acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, dysrhythmias, and venous thromboembolic events. Current therapies for COVID-19 may interact with cardiovascular medications.ConclusionsEmergency clinicians should be aware of these cardiovascular complications when evaluating and managing the patient with COVID-19.     

COVID-19 in gastroenterology and hepatology: Lessons learned and questions to be answered

BACKGROUNDAlthough coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) presents primarily as a lower respiratory tract infection, increasing data suggests multiorgan, including the gastrointestinal (GI) tract and liver, involvement in patients who are infected by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).AIMTo provide a comprehensive overview of COVID-19 in gastroenterology and hepatology.METHODSRelevant studies on COVID-19 related to the study aim were undertaken through a literature search to synthesize the extracted data.RESULTSWe found that digestive symptoms and liver injury are not uncommon in patients with COVID-19 and varies in different individuals. The most common GI symptoms reported are diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, and abdominal discomfort. Other atypical GI symptoms, such as loss of smell and taste and GI bleeding, have also been reported along with the evolvement of COVID-19. Liver chemistry abnormalities mainly include elevation of aspartate transferase, alanine transferase, and total bilirubin. It is postulated to be related to the binding of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus to the angiotensin converting enzyme-2 receptor located on several different human cells. CONCLUSIONStandardized criteria should be established for diagnosis and grading of the severity of GI symptoms in COVID-19 patients. Gastroenterology and hepatology in special populations, such as children and elderly, should be the focus of further research. Future long-term data regarding GI symptoms should not be overlooked.     

Coeliac disease in the COVID-19 pandemic: does HLA have a protective effect?

BackgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), an acute respiratory disease caused by a novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), is emerging as a worldwide public health emergency. Several scientific contributions reported the potential relevance of human leukocyte antigen (HLA) polymorphism and susceptibility to viruses, such as SARS-CoV. In our study, we examined a population of coeliac subjects presenting the HLA haplotype DQ2 and/or DQ8. Our aim was to evaluate whether HLA DQ2 and/or DQ8 haplotype play a role in SARS-CoV-2-infection. The aim was also to evaluate the difficulty in following the gluten-free diet due to all the adversities produced by the pandemic, such as the food supply disruption, and the difficulties in managing the clinical follow-up.Methods191 consecutive coeliac patients completed a questionnaire on their current clinical status, psychological effects, and management of the gluten-free diet experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic and questions regarding possible SARS-CoV-2 infection.ResultsOut of the 191 patients who participated in the study, 42 were full-blown coeliac and 149 were in remission. From the answers provided, 84.8% of patients declared that they no longer consider themselves vulnerable to COVID-19 as they suffer from coeliac disease; 94.2% of patients did not encounter any difficulties in managing the gluten-free diet or in acquiring specific foods and 64.9% of patients in our study underwent diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2. Out of this number, 31.5% did so due to contacts with subjects affected by COVID-19, 26.6% for work related reasons, 11.3% due to flu-like symptoms and 30.6% for other reasons. Only 5.8% of the enrolled patients received a diagnosis of COVID-19. Out of all the patients in our population who were diagnosed with COVID-19, 94.8% developed no symptoms and none of them needed hospitalization or intensive care.ConclusionThe hypothesis that the HLADQ2 and/or DQ8 haplotype plays a protective role against SARS-CoV-2 infection, as against other viral infections, is intriguingly suggestive.

KEY MESSAGES

• COVID-19 as a public health emergency;
• SARS-CoV-2 and possible complications in coeliac disease;
• Role of HLA DQ2 and/or DQ8 in SARS-CoV-2 infection.

     

Duration of infectious viral shedding in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 treated with REGN-CoV2

IntroductionNew treatment methods, such as REGN-CoV2, have been approved for patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). However, the effect of the drug on the duration of infectious viral shedding and viral mutations is unknown. In this study, we investigated the clinical efficacy of REGN-CoV2 treatment in patients with mild to moderate disease and compared its antiviral effects against different strains of SARS-CoV-2.MethodsViral culture and PCR testing were performed on the pharyngeal swabs collected from 28 patients with COVID-19 who were admitted and treated at Hiroshima University Hospital during the study period. Of these, 23 patients were treated with REGN-CoV2. The patients were classified into the REGN-CoV2(+) and REGN-CoV2(?) groups, and the clinical course was compared between the groups. The 50% inhibitory concentrations (IC₅₀) of REGN-CoV2 against the isolated virus strains were determined.ResultsAfter treatment with REGN-CoV2, the virus culture positivity rate was greatly reduced. The time to negative viral culture was significantly shorter in the REGN-CoV2(+) group than in the REGN-CoV2(?) group. In vitro evaluation of REGN-CoV2 against isolated virus strains also showed efficacy.ConclusionsREGN-CoV2 treatment was effective in patients with mild COVID-19 and could shorten the period of infectious viral shedding. This may be an important factor in preventing the spread of infection. It may be possible to revise the isolation period for patients with mild disease treated with REGN-CoV2.     

Efficacy of convalescent plasma therapy for COVID-19 in Japan: An open-label,randomized, controlled trial

BackgroundConvalescent plasma is a potential therapeutic option for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Despite its use for treating several viral infections, we lack comprehensive data on its efficacy against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).MethodsWe conducted a multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled trial of convalescent plasma therapy with high neutralizing activity against SARS-CoV-2 in high-risk patients within five days after the onset of COVID-19 symptoms. The primary endpoint was the time-weighted average change in the SARS-CoV-2 viral load in nasopharyngeal swabs from days 0–5.ResultsBetween February 24, 2021, and November 30, 2021, 25 patients were randomly assigned to either convalescent plasma (n = 14) or standard of care (n = 11) groups. Four patients discontinued their allocated convalescent plasma, and 21 were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. The median interval between the symptom onset and plasma administration was 4.5 days (interquartile range, 3–5 days). The primary outcome of the time-weighted average change in the SARS-CoV-2 viral load in nasopharyngeal swabs did not significantly differ between days 0–5 (1.2 log₁₀ copies/mL in the convalescent plasma vs. 1.2 log₁₀ copies/mL in the standard of care (effect estimate, 0.0 [95% confidence interval, −0.8–0.7]; P = 0.94)). No deaths were observed in either group.ConclusionsThe early administration of convalescent plasma with high neutralizing activity did not contribute to a decrease in the viral load within five days compared with the standard of care alone.     

Epidemiological features and dynamic changes in blood biochemical indices for COVID-19 patients in Hebi

BACKGROUNDMillions of people have died of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) due to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, and retrospective studies of the disease in local regions are necessary.AIMTo characterize the epidemiological features and dynamic changes in blood biochemical indices for SARS-CoV-2-infected patients in Hebi, a representative city with a large floating population in North China.METHODSFrom January 25 to February 10, 2020, the clinical data of patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction in Hebi city (China) were evaluated at admission, and laboratory data for hematologic parameters, inflammatory indices, coagulation function indices, liver function indices, blood lipid indices, renal function indices, myocardial enzyme activities and five blood biochemical markers of immunity were evaluated at admission, upon hospitalization and before discharge.RESULTSSixteen confirmed COVID-19 patients developed pneumonia but were cured after adequate treatment. Fever and fatigue were the common symptoms. The most common laboratory abnormalities of patients at admission were leukopenia, eosinopenia, decreased percentage of eosinophils, elevated high sensitivity C-reactive protein and fibrinogen levels, hypoalbuminemia, mildly increased aspartate transferase activity and levels of bilirubin, and increased levels of β2-microglobulin. Importantly, aggravated liver dysfunction was detected in most patients, which may be partially attributed to virus infection as well as medicinal treatment.CONCLUSIONThis study provides several potential diagnostic markers and dynamic biochemical indices of disease progression to better prevent, diagnose and treat COVID-19 infection.     

Does common cold coronavirus infection protect against severe SARS-CoV-2 disease?

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to cause morbidity and mortality. Since SARS coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was identified as the cause for COVID-19, some have questioned whether exposure to seasonal common cold coronaviruses (CCCs) could provide tangible protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection or disease. In this issue of the JCI, Sagar et al. examined SARS-CoV-2 infections and outcomes of patients who had previously tested positive or negative for CCC infection (CCC⁺ or CCC^–) by a comprehensive respiratory panel using PCR. No differences were seen between groups in terms of susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, hospitalized patients with a documented history of CCC infection had lower rates of intensive care unit (ICU) admissions and higher rates of survival than hospitalized CCC^– patients. While these findings are associative and not causative, they highlight evidence suggesting that previous CCC infection may influence the disease course of SARS-CoV-2 infection.     

Successful treatment of a centenarian with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) using convalescent plasma

BackgroundBecause treatment options for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are very limited, the use of convalescent plasma has bee explored.Case presentation and treatmentA male centenarian with cough and dyspnea for 2 months was diagnosed with COVID-19. Without effective treatments and with the increased risks of antiviral therapy for the elderly, this patient was given convalescent plasma. The viral load, complete blood count, inflammatory indicators, vital signs, and clinical symptoms were observed before and after COVID-19 convalescent plasma transfusion.ResultsAfter convalescent plasma transfusion, significant improvement was observed on laboratory indicators and clinical symptoms of the patient. Concurrently, SARS-CoV-2 viral load decreased sharply after the first transfusion (from 2.55 × 104 to 1.39 × 103 copies/mL) and became undetectable after the second transfusion.ConclusionsWith the substantial increase of COVID-19 in recent months,treatment for elderly patients has become restricted in some countries. The successful treatment of this 100-year-old patient using convalescent plasma suggests that we should consider adding convalescent plasma in th management of the elderly.     

Healthy neonate born to a SARS-CoV-2 infected woman: A case report and review of literature

BACKGROUNDSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a newly discovered coronavirus that has generated a worldwide outbreak of infections. Many people with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) have developed severe illness, and a significant number have died. However, little is known regarding infection by the novel virus in pregnant women. We herein present a case of COVID-19 confirmed in a woman delivering a neonate who was negative for SARS-CoV-2 and related it to a review of the literature on pregnant women and human coronavirus infections.CASE SUMMARYThe patient was a 36-year-old pregnant woman in her third trimester who had developed progressive clinical symptoms when she was confirmed as infected with SARS-CoV-2. Given the potential risks for both the pregnant woman and the fetus, an emergency cesarean section was performed, and the baby and his mother were separately quarantined and cared for. As a result, the baby currently shows no signs of SARS-CoV-2 infection (his lower respiratory tract samples were negative for the virus), while the mother completely recovered from COVID-19.CONCLUSIONAlthough we presented a single case, the successful result is of great significance for pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 infection and with respect to fully understanding novel coronavirus pneumonia.     

Evaluation of the QIAstat-Dx Respiratory SARS-CoV-2 panel,a rapid multiplex PCR method for the diagnosis of COVID-19

IntroductionRapid, simple, and accurate methods are required to diagnose coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which is caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). This study aimed to evaluate the performance of the QIAstat-Dx Respiratory SARS-CoV-2 Panel (QIAstat-SARS-CoV-2), a rapid multiplex PCR assay for SARS-CoV-2 detection.MethodsNasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) that were obtained from patients with COVID-19 who were diagnosed at the National Center for Global Health and Medicine were used in this study. When the NPS samples were found to be negative for SARS-CoV-2 after treatment, they were used as negative samples. We evaluated the performance of the QIAstat-SARS-CoV-2 comparing SARS-CoV-2 detection with the National Institute of Infectious Diseases in Japan-recommended real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) method (NIID-RT-PCR).ResultsIn total, 45 NPS samples were analyzed. The proportion of overall agreement between QIAstat-SARS-CoV-2 and NIID-RT-PCR on 45 samples was 91.0% with a sensitivity of 84.0% (21/25), specificity at 100% (20/20), negative predictive value at 83.3% (20/24), and positive predictive value at 100% (21/21). There were no patients with co-infections with pathogens other than SARS-CoV-2.ConclusionsQIAstat-SARS-CoV-2 showed a high agreement in comparison with the NIID-RT-PCR for the detection of SARS-CoV-2. The QIAstat-SARS-CoV-2 also provided a rapid and accurate diagnosis for COVID-19, even when the concurrent detection of other respiratory pathogens was desired, and therefore, has the potential to direct appropriate therapy and infection control precautions.     

No SARS-CoV-2 RNA detected in the convalescent plasma of COVID-19 patients with different disease severity

IntroductionConvalescent plasma transfusion (CPT), a potential therapy for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), requires strict quality control of the donor blood. Whether to confirm the disappearance of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RNA (RNAemia) in convalescent donor blood or not is unclear. Reports recommending the proof of viral disappearance from the blood are controversial. Foreseeing CPT in treating COVID-19 patients in Japan, we investigated RNAemia in 100 convalescent donors with mild, moderate, and severe COVID-19.MethodsBetween April 30 and July 30, 2020, we measured RNAemia in the plasma samples of donors with resolved COVID-19. Data on patients’ demographics, comorbidities, pneumonia, treatment, and real-time polymerase chain reaction results for SARS-CoV-2 were collected. Date of onset of initial symptoms or date of positive testing (for asymptomatic patients) were self-reported by the patients. Disease severity was defined as: no, mild, moderate oxygen demand, or severe (requiring mechanical ventilation).ResultsOf 100 donors (58 males [58.0%]; median age, 47 [range 22–69] years) screened as of July 30, 2020, 77 (77.0%); 19 (19.0%); and 4 (4.0%) had mild, moderate, and severe disease, respectively. Median time between onset and testing was 68.5 (range, 21–167) days. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was not detected in any of the plasma samples.ConclusionRNAemia was not found in recovered COVID-19 patients at least 21, 27, and 57 days after the onset of mild, moderate, and severe symptoms. Our study may contribute to determining a suitable time for collecting convalescent plasma from COVID-19 patients and to future CPT use.     

Immunochromatography and chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay for COVID-19 diagnosis

IntroductionThe rapid and accurate detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is required to prevent the spread of COVID-19. This study evaluated the utility of two SARS-CoV-2 antigen detection methods.MethodsWe evaluated two types of antigen detection methods using immunochromatography (Espline) and quantitative chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay (Lumipulse). RT-PCR was performed as a standard procedure for COVID-19 diagnosis. Lumipulse and RT-PCR were performed for all 486 nasopharyngeal swabs and 136 saliva samples, and the Espline test was performed for 271 nasopharyngeal swabs and 93 saliva samples.ResultsThe sensitivity and specificity of the Espline test were 10/11 and 260/260 (100%), respectively for the nasopharyngeal swabs and 3/9 and 84/84 (100%), respectively for the saliva samples. High sensitivities for both saliva (8/9) and nasopharyngeal swabs (22/24) were observed in the Lumipulse test. The specificities of the Lumipulse test for nasopharyngeal swabs and saliva samples were 460/462 (99.6%) and 123/127 (96.9%), respectively.ConclusionThe Espline test is not effective for saliva samples but is useful for simple and rapid COVID-19 tests using nasopharyngeal swabs because it does not require special devices. The Lumipulse test is a powerful high-throughput tool for COVID-19 diagnosis because it has high detection performance for nasopharyngeal swabs and saliva samples.