COVID‐19 infection in a paucisymptomatic infant: Raising the index of suspicion in epidemic settings

Few children have been reported to have been affected by novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19); it is unclear whether children are less likely to be infected or rather display fewer symptoms. We present the case of a 32‐day‐old boy infected by COVID‐19 that presented with an upper air way infection which resolved spontaneously and did not require any therapy. We argue that in epidemic settings children presenting with any mild symptom potentially attributable to COVID‐19 should be considered contagious until proven otherwise, and that management must be guided by clinical conditions.     

Ten key points about COVID‐19 in children: The shadows on the wall

The pandemic of the new coronavirus disease‐2019 (COVID‐19) caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2), initially described in China, is challenging the health care systems of all countries. Every emerging disease raises many questions with a scarcity of answers since all its characteristics are still being discovered. In the case of SARS‐CoV‐2, most of the literature comes from adult patients. Children seem to be less affected. Pediatric patients diagnosed with COVID‐19 disease usually suffer a mild illness, with a low risk of complications, or mortality. Defining the role of children in the transmission of SARS‐CoV‐2 is critical as some national infection control decisions involving children, such as school closures or social distancing, will probably impact the dynamics of the virus. To aid in the knowledge of COVID‐19 in children, this study presents an expert review of the literature published from 1 January to 28 May 2020, including peer‐reviewed and preprint nonpeer‐reviewed studies, along with some relevant articles afterward, summarizing ten key points that characterize the disease in children.     

COVID‐19 of dialysis patients in Japan: Current status and guidance on preventive measures

In Japan, the first case of COVID‐19 in dialysis patients was reported on March 1, 2020. A total of 31 cases were reported by April 10, and it increased to 95 by May 15. Thereafter, with the rapid increase in the number of COVID‐19 cases in the general population since late March, there was a not surprising increase in the number of COVID‐19 cases in dialysis patients. The mortality rate is 16.2% (16/99 cases) in dialysis patients, which is higher than 5.3% (874/16 532 cases) in the general population. This higher mortality rate in dialysis patients with COVID‐19 might be related to their age; the majority of COVID‐19 cases are aged between 70 and 90 years old in dialysis patients, compared with between 20 and 60 years old in the general population. As COVID‐19 presents with severe symptoms and is associated with a high mortality rate in dialysis patients, dialysis patients who have contracted severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection confirmed by polymerase chain reaction testing are required to be hospitalized under Japanese government policy. In cases of COVID‐19 hospitalizations, it is essential to prevent nosocomial infection. Therefore, patients must be sufficiently instructed in infection prevention and robust measures to prevent contraction and spread of the infection must be taken at dialysis facilities.     

Dissecting the interaction between COVID‐19 and diabetes mellitus

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) is a global pandemic that is caused by a novel coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus‐2. Data from several countries have shown higher morbidity and mortality among individuals with chronic metabolic diseases, such as diabetes mellitus. In this review, we explore the contributing factors for poorer prognosis in these individuals. As a significant proportion of patients with COVID‐19 also have diabetes mellitus, this adds another layer of complexity to their management. We explore potential interactions between antidiabetic medications and renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system inhibitors with COVID‐19. Suggested recommendations for the use of antidiabetic medications for COVID‐19 patients with diabetes mellitus are provided. We also review pertinent clinical considerations in the management of diabetic ketoacidosis in COVID‐19 patients. In addition, we aim to increase clinicians’ awareness of the metabolic effects of promising drug therapies for COVID‐19. Finally, we highlight the importance of timely vaccinations for patients with diabetes mellitus.     

COVID‐19 diagnosis and management: a comprehensive review

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS‐CoV)‐2, a novel coronavirus from the same family as SARS‐CoV and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus, has spread worldwide leading the World Health Organization to declare a pandemic. The disease caused by SARS‐CoV‐2, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19), presents flu‐like symptoms which can become serious in high‐risk individuals. Here, we provide an overview of the known clinical features and treatment options for COVID‐19. We carried out a systematic literature search using the main online databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, MEDLINE, UpToDate, Embase and Web of Science) with the following keywords: ‘COVID‐19’, ‘2019‐nCoV’, ‘coronavirus’ and ‘SARS‐CoV‐2’. We included publications from 1 January 2019 to 3 April 2020 which focused on clinical features and treatments. We found that infection is transmitted from human to human and through contact with contaminated environmental surfaces. Hand hygiene is fundamental to prevent contamination. Wearing personal protective equipment is recommended in specific environments. The main symptoms of COVID‐19 are fever, cough, fatigue, slight dyspnoea, sore throat, headache, conjunctivitis and gastrointestinal issues. Real‐time PCR is used as a diagnostic tool using nasal swab, tracheal aspirate or bronchoalveolar lavage samples. Computed tomography findings are important for both diagnosis and follow‐up. To date, there is no evidence of any effective treatment for COVID‐19. The main therapies being used to treat the disease are antiviral drugs, chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine and respiratory therapy. In conclusion, although many therapies have been proposed, quarantine is the only intervention that appears to be effective in decreasing the contagion rate. Specifically designed randomized clinical trials are needed to determine the most appropriate evidence‐based treatment modality.     

Myocardial localization of coronavirus in COVID‐19 cardiogenic shock

We describe the first case of acute cardiac injury directly linked to myocardial localization of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) in a 69‐year‐old patient with flu‐like symptoms rapidly degenerating into respiratory distress, hypotension, and cardiogenic shock. The patient was successfully treated with venous‐arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and mechanical ventilation. Cardiac function fully recovered in 5 days and ECMO was removed. Endomyocardial biopsy demonstrated low‐grade myocardial inflammation and viral particles in the myocardium suggesting either a viraemic phase or, alternatively, infected macrophage migration from the lung.     

Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among 925 staff members in an urban hospital accepting COVID-19 patients in Osaka prefecture,Japan: A cross-sectional study

The subclinical severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection rate in hospitals during the pandemic remains unclear. To evaluate the effectiveness of our hospital''s current nosocomial infection control measures, we conducted a serological survey of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies (immunoglobulin [Ig] G) among the staff of our hospital, which is treating coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients.The study design was cross-sectional. We measured anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG in the participants using a laboratory-based quantitative test (Abbott immunoassay), which has a sensitivity and specificity of 100% and 99.6%, respectively. To investigate the factors associated with seropositivity, we also obtained some information from the participants with an anonymous questionnaire. We invited 1133 staff members in our hospital, and 925 (82%) participated. The mean age of the participants was 40.0 ± 11.8 years, and most were women (80.0%). According to job title, there were 149 medical doctors or dentists (16.0%), 489 nurses (52.9%), 140 medical technologists (14.2%), 49 healthcare providers (5.3%), and 98 administrative staff (10.5%). The overall prevalence of seropositivity for anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgG was 0.43% (4/925), which was similar to the control seroprevalence of 0.54% (16/2970) in the general population in Osaka during the same period according to a government survey conducted with the same assay. Seropositive rates did not significantly differ according to job title, exposure to suspected or confirmed COVID-19 patients, or any other investigated factors.The subclinical SARS-CoV-2 infection rate in our hospital was not higher than that in the general population under our nosocomial infection control measures.     

Clinical,laboratory, and imaging features of pediatric COVID-19: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Pediatric cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been reported. This meta-analysis was aimed at describing the clinical, laboratory, and imaging characteristics of children with COVID-19 based on published data of pediatric COVID-19 cases.Search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Sciences, Science Direct, and Google Scholar for articles published until December 14, 2020, that described the clinical, laboratory, and imaging features of children with COVID-19. Data were extracted independently by 2 authors. Random-effects meta-analysis models were used to report pooled results.Clinical data from 2874 children with COVID-19 from 37 articles were finally included for quantitative analyses. Fever (48.5%, 95% CI: 41.4%–55.6%) and cough (40.6%, 95% CI: 33.9%–47.5%) were the most common symptoms; asymptomatic infection and severe cases, respectively, accounted for 27.7% (95% CI: 19.7%–36.4%) patients and 1.1% of the 1933 patients included. Laboratory tests showed 5.5% (95% CI: 2.8%–8.9%) of the patients had lymphopenia. The pooled prevalence of leukopenia was 7.3% (95% CI: 3.4%–12.2%), and the C-reactive protein level was high in 14.0% (95% CI: 6.8%–22.8%). Chest computed tomography showed unilateral and bilateral lesions, and ground-glass opacity in 29.4% (95% CI: 24.8%–34.3%) and 24.7% (95% CI: 18.2%–31.6%), and 32.9% (95% CI: 25.3%–40.9%), respectively, and normal in approximately 36.0% (95% CI: 27.7%–44.7%).We found that children with COVID-19 had relatively mild disease, with quite a lot of asymptomatic infections and low rate of severe illness. Data from more regions are needed to determine the prevention and treatment strategies for children with COVID-19.     

Co-infections of SARS-CoV-2 with multiple common respiratory pathogens in infected children: A retrospective study

Since the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Wuhan, considerable attention has been paid on its epidemiology and clinical characteristics in children patients. However, it is also crucial for clinicians to summarize and investigate the co-infection of SARS-CoV-2 in children.We retrospectively reviewed the clinical manifestations, laboratory findings, and imaging characteristics of COVID-19 patients in co-infection group (CI, n = 27) and single infection group (SI, n = 54). Samples were tested for multiple pathogens.A high incidence (27/81, 33%) of co-infection in children with COVID-19 was revealed. The most frequent co-infected pathogen was mycoplasma pneumoniae (MP, 20/81, 25%), followed by virus (6/81, 7%), and bacteria (4/81, 5%). No significant difference in clinical characteristics, laboratory examinations, or hospital stay was observed between the patients with co-infections and those with monomicrobial, only lower in white blood cell counts (CI: 5.54 ± 0.36 vs SI: 7.38 ± 0.37, P = .002), neutrophil counts (CI: 2.20 ± 0.20 vs SI: 2.92 ± 0.23, P = .024) and lymphocyte counts (CI: 2.72 ± 0.024 vs SI: 3.87 ± 0.28, P = .006). Compared with the patients with monomicrobial, chest imaging of those with co-infections showed consolidation in more cases (CI: 29.6% vs SI: 11.1%, P = .038) and duration of positive in nucleic acid was shorter (CI: 6.69 ± 0.82 vs SI: 9.69 ± 0.74, P = .015).Co-infection was relatively common in children with COVID-19, almost 1/3 had co-infection, most commonly caused by MP. Co-infection did not cause a significant exacerbation in clinical manifestations.     

Overview: The history and pediatric perspectives of severe acute respiratory syndromes: Novel or just like SARS

Many respiratory viral infections such as influenza and measles result in severe acute respiratory symptoms and epidemics. In the spring of 2003, an epidemic of coronavirus pneumonia spread from Guangzhou to Hong Kong and subsequently to the rest of the world. The WHO coined the acronym SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) and subsequently the causative virus as SARS‐CoV. In the summer of 2012, epidemic of pneumonia occurred again in Saudi Arabia which was subsequently found to be caused by another novel coronavirus. WHO coined the term MERS (Middle East respiratory syndrome) to denote the Middle East origin of the novel virus (MERS‐CoV). In the winter of 2019, another outbreak of pneumonia occurred in Wuhan, China which rapidly spread globally. Yet another novel coronavirus was identified as the culprit and has been named SARS‐CoV‐2 due to its similarities with SARS‐CoV, and the disease as coronavirus disease‐2019. This overview aims to compare and contrast the similarities and differences of these three major episodes of coronavirus outbreak, and conclude that they are essentially the same viral respiratory syndromes caused by similar strains of coronavirus with different names. Coronaviruses have caused major epidemics and outbreaks worldwide in the last two decades. From an epidemiological perspective, they are remarkably similar in the mode of spread by droplets. Special focus is placed on the pediatric aspects, which carry less morbidity and mortality in all three entities.     

Differences in clinical characteristics and liver injury between suspected and confirmed COVID-19 patients in Jingzhou,Hubei Province of China

To evaluate the clinical characteristics and liver injury in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients, and analyze the differences between suspected and confirmed COVID-19 patients, this retrospective study was performed on 157 COVID-19 patients and 93 suspected patients who were ultimately excluded from COVID-19 (control patients). Differences in clinical characteristics and liver injury between suspected and confirmed COVID-19 patients were analyzed. Age, male sex, fever, chest tightness and dyspnea were related to the severity of COVID-19. C-reactive protein (CRP) and D-dimer may be predictors of the severity of COVID-19. Computed tomography (CT) played an important role in the screening of COVID-19 and the evaluation of disease severity. Multiple factors may cause liver injury in COVID-19 patients. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) may be more likely to cause liver injury than common respiratory infectious diseases. Age, temperature (T), white blood cell (WBC), lymphocytes (LY), hematocrit (HCT), CRP, and finger pulse oxygen saturation (SpO₂₎ may correlate with liver function impairment and may predict the occurrence and severity of liver function impairment. Some therapeutic drugs (like glucocorticoid) may be involved in the liver function impairment of COVID-19 patients. Most liver function indices improved significantly after active treatment. Although COVID-19 and other common respiratory infectious diseases share some clinical characteristics, COVID-19 has its own characteristics.     

Ensuring trust in COVID-19 data: A retrospective cohort study

There are no standardized methods for collecting and reporting coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) data. We aimed to compare the proportion of patients admitted for COVID-19-related symptoms and those admitted for other reasons who incidentally tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).Retrospective cohort studyData were sampled twice weekly between March 26 and June 6, 2020 from a “COVID-19 dashboard,” a system-wide administrative database that includes the number of hospitalized patients with a positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction test. Patient charts were subsequently reviewed and the principal reason for hospitalization abstracted.Data collected during a statewide lockdown revealed that 92 hospitalized patients had positive SARS-CoV-2 test results. Among these individuals, 4.3% were hospitalized for reasons other than COVID-19-related symptoms but were incidentally found to be SARS-CoV-2-positive. After the lockdown was suspended, the total inpatient census of SARS-CoV-2-positive patients increased to 128, 20.3% of whom were hospitalized for non-COVID-19-related complaints.In the absence of a statewide lockdown, there was a significant increase in the proportion of patients admitted for non-COVID-19-related complaints who were incidentally found to be SARS-CoV-2-positive. In order to ensure data integrity, coding should distinguish between patients with COVID-19-related symptoms and asymptomatic patients carrying the SARS-CoV-2 virus.