新型冠状病毒感染病例诊疗方案（2012年第一版）

自2012年6月以来,近3个月内在沙特和卡塔尔各出现1例严重急性下呼吸道感染病例,表现为类传染性非典型肺炎（severe acute respiratory syndrome．SARS）样的临床过程。经对呼吸道和肺解剖标本进行泛冠状病毒聚合酶链式反应扩增和病毒分离,2株病毒核酸序列具有99．5％的同源性,确定2例病例的感染病原均为同一种新型冠状病毒。     

重症新型冠状病毒肺炎临床和肺部超声影像特点

目的探讨重症新型冠状病毒肺炎（简称"新冠肺炎"）肺部超声影像学特征，为临床诊治提供参考。 方法选择广州市第八人民医院ICU收治的29例重症新冠肺炎患者，其中重型15例，危重型14例，入ICU 24 h内进行肺部超声评分（LUS），同时收集患者性别、年龄、氧合指数（OI）和病程，计算临床肺部感染评分（CPIS）（由体温、OI、胸部X线片或CT、气道分泌物、白细胞计数组成）。 结果29例患者中男性23例（79.3%），年龄（62.59±11.91）岁，LUS（19.28±4.96）分，OI（184.24±66.18）mmHg（1 mmHg=0.133 kPa），CPIS 4（3，4）分，病程（12.48±5.34） d，其中LUS与OI呈显著负相关（r=-0.742，P=0.000），与CPIS呈显著正相关（r=0.504，P=0.005）。危重型患者的LUS及CPIS明显高于重型患者，OI则明显降低，差异均有统计学意义（P<0.05），两组间性别、年龄和病程比较差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。348个肺部超声检查区域中主要表现为B2征象，危重型与重型患者比较，N征象明显减少（9.5% vs 23.3%），C征象明显增多（17.3% vs 4.4%），病变区域比例明显增加（90.5% vs 76.7%），差异均有统计学意义（P<0.01）；前区、侧区、后区肺部病变区域依次增加（63.8%，87.9%，98.3%），相互比较差异均有统计学意义（P<0.01）；左肺与右肺超声征象分布和病变区域比较差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。 结论肺部超声能床旁实时评估重症新冠肺炎患者肺部病变性质、范围，为重症患者的诊断和治疗提供重要参考依据。     

5G远程机器人超声诊断疑似新型冠状病毒感染肺炎一例

患者,老年男性,75岁,因"发热伴咳嗽4 d"于2020年1月30日到浙江省桐乡市第一人民医院就诊.患者4 d前无明显诱因出现发热伴咳嗽,无鼻塞、流涕,无胸痛,无明显咳痰.起初为低热,未予重视,自服感冒药治疗.因4d来持续低热,咳嗽呈进行性加重并感全身乏力伴食欲下降而来院就诊.     

新型冠状病毒（COVID-19）感染的肺炎患者进行 超声影像学检查的应用

新型冠状病毒( 2019-nCoV) 感染的肺炎是由新型冠状病毒引起的以肺部炎性病变为主的疾病,还可引起肠道、肝脏和神经系统的损害和相应症状,严重者可出现多器官功能衰竭、脓毒症、肾功能衰竭、感染性心内炎等危急并发症。2019-nCov肺炎自2019年12起自武汉爆发流行,其病毒传染力强,潜伏期长,至今蔓延到全国,确诊病例已有4万余人。目前检测和排查疑似病例,进行早期治疗和隔离,是眼下的当务之急。而检查手段有患者分泌物的核酸检测,一是对呼吸道标本或血标本实时荧光RT-PCR检测新型冠状病毒核酸阳性,二是呼吸道标本或血液标本病毒基因测序与已知的新型冠状病毒高度同源。而核酸检测假阴性的患者也较多。超声对于2019-nCov重症肺炎患者多出现双侧或单侧胸腔积液、胸膜下出现病灶、肺组织实变等,相对比与CT检查更加便捷快速,也有便于临床上胸腔积液的引流进行实时定位,在检测和排查2019-nCov肺炎患者和处理2019-nCov肺炎患者临床并发症的过程中起到很好的辅助作用。     

新型冠状病毒肺炎危重症患者序贯超声检查价值

摘要：目的：探讨序贯超声检查对2019新型冠状病毒肺炎（Corona Virus Disease 2019,COVID-19）危重症患者的临床价值。方法：筛选2020年1月1日—2020年4月15日间武汉金银潭医院收治的232例行过超声检查的新冠肺炎重症患者,回顾性分析其这段病程内超声检查的项目及检查结果。结果：新冠肺炎重症患者做过的超声检查项目包括：床旁心脏心功能彩超（181例）、胸腔超声（131例）、肝胆胰脾、门静脉超声（134例）、双肾、输尿管超声（125例）、双下肢动脉、深静脉超声（75例）、腹部大血管超声（51例）、颈部血管超声（14例）、子宫及其附件超声（4例）、颌下腺超声（2例）、膀胱、前列腺超声（2例）、甲状腺超声（24例）、肾上腺超声（22例）、睾丸及附睾超声（1例）。阳性率分别是： 92%、100%、87%、68%、81%、61%、43%、75%、50%、50%、75%、9%、100%。结论：序贯超声对COVID-19危重症患者的诊治具有重要作用,贯穿危重症患者诊治全程,临床－序贯超声将以COVID-19为契机,拉开超声医学的新篇章。     

Early identification of novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pneumonia using clinical and radiographic findings

IntroductionThe Japanese Respiratory Society (JRS) scoring system is a useful tool for identifying Mycoplasma pneumoniae pneumonia. Most COVID-19 pneumonia in non-elderly patients (aged <60 years) are classified as atypical pneumonia using the JRS scoring system. We evaluated whether physicians could distinguish between COVID-19 pneumonia and M. pneumoniae pneumonia using chest computed tomography (CT) findings. In addition, we investigated chest CT findings if there is a difference between the variant and non-variant strain.MethodsThis study was conducted at five institutions and assessed a total of 823 patients with COVID-19 pneumonia (335 had lineage B.1.1.7.) and 100 patients with M. pneumoniae pneumonia.ResultsIn COVID-19 pneumonia, at the first CT examination, peripheral, bilateral ground-glass opacity (GGO) with or without consolidation or crazy-paving pattern was observed frequently. GGO frequently had a round morphology (39.2%). No differences were observed in the radiological findings between the non-B.1.1.7 groups and B.1.1.7 groups. The frequency of pleural effusion, lymphadenopathy, bronchial wall thickening and nodules (tree-in-bud and centrilobular) was low. In contrast to COVID-19 pneumonia, bronchial wall thickening (84%) was observed most frequently, followed by nodules (81%) in M. pneumoniae pneumonia. These findings were significantly higher in M. pneumoniae pneumonia than COVID-19 pneumonia.ConclusionsOur results demonstrated that a combination of the JRS scoring system and chest CT findings is useful for the rapid presumptive diagnosis of COVID-19 pneumonia in patients aged <60 years. However, this clinical and radiographic diagnosis is not adapted to elderly people.     

感染性肺炎超声诊断专家建议

正感染性肺炎(infectious pneumonia)在各年龄组人群中均系常见呼吸道疾病,严重者可导致患者死亡。尤其是近期暴发流行的新型冠状病毒,具有传染性强的特点,给人民生命健康带来极大危害。影像学检查是感染性肺炎诊断的必要手段。超声可应用于各种肺部疾病的诊断与鉴别诊断,且已达成国际共识~([1-3])。床旁肺部超声检查便于患者病情的动态观察评估,且简便易学,无放射线损害,是未来肺部疾病影像学诊断技术发展的重要方向~([4-12])。为抗击新型冠状病毒疫情,中国医药教育协会超声医学专业委员会重症超声学组组织相关领域专家,     

Usefulness of the Legionella Score for differentiating from COVID-19 pneumonia to legionella pneumonia

Legionella pneumophila is a major causative pathogen of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), but recently the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) became the most common causative pathogen of CAP. Because L. pneumophila CAP is clinically distinct from bacterial CAPs, the Japan Society for Chemotherapy (JSC) developed a simple scoring system, the Legionella Score, using six parameters for the presumptive diagnosis of L. pneumophila pneumonia. We investigated the clinical and laboratory differences of L. pneumophila CAP and COVID-19 CAP and validated the Legionella Score in both CAP groups. We analyzed 102 patients with L. pneumophila CAP and 956 patients with COVID-19 CAP. Dyspnea and psychiatric symptoms were more frequently observed and cough was less frequently observed in patients with L. pneumophila CAP than those with COVID-19 CAP. Loss of taste and anosmia were observed in patients with COVID-19 CAP but not observed in those with L. pneumophila CAP. C-reactive protein and lactate dehydrogenase levels in L. pneumophila CAP group were significantly higher than in the COVID-19 CAP group. In contrast, sodium level in the L. pneumophila CAP group was significantly lower than in the COVID-19 CAP group. The median Legionella Score was significantly higher in the L. pneumophila CAP group than the COVID-19 CAP group (score 4 vs 2, p < 0.001). Our results demonstrated that the JSC Legionella Score had good diagnostic ability during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, physicians should consider COVID-19 CAP when loss of taste and/or anosmia are observed regardless of the Legionella Score.     

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.     

Antiviral Chemistry & Chemotherapy's current antiviral agents FactFile 2006 (1st edition)

The number of useful antiviral compounds is rapidly expanding. The current antiviral agents FactFile is a convenient key to the vital statistics of antiviral compounds to be used as an aide mémoire when reading or writing antiviral literature. A mini-portrait is provided for each of the antiviral compounds. The minimum criteria for inclusion of new compounds in the FactFile is the granting of an investigational new drug application with the realistic potential for medical or veterinary application. Several compounds that were subsequently withdrawn from further development are also included because of their historical importance or particular interest. The compounds are listed alphabetically according to their generic names together with systematic chemical names, common names and chemical structures. The compounds are grouped by virus targets; thus, the list is sub-divided into inhibitors of DNA viruses, RNA viruses, and retroviruses. The authors welcome comments and suggestions to be incorporated in future editions of the FactFile.