Streptokinase vs heparin for deep venous thrombosis. Can lytic therapy be justified?

Lytic therapy, most notably streptokinase, holds great promise in the treatment of acute deep venous thrombosis. In 19 published trials, this form of lytic therapy has been shown to be associated with greater venous valvular and venous patency preservation, implying better short-term and long-term outcome. Unfortunately, closer examination of the data reveals several flaws, including overreliance on venogram data and lack of adequate long-term follow-up. Streptokinase, as well as other forms of lytic therapy, has not gained widespread acceptance in the treatment of acute deep venous thrombosis, and, until better data become available, such reluctance seems justified.     

Antibodies to hepatitis E virus among several populations in Greece: increased prevalence in an hemodialysis unit

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis E virus (HEV) has been found to be the causative agent of enterically transmitted non-A, non-B hepatitis in tropical and subtropical countries. Several investigators, however, have indicated that HEV could be endemic in Europe, albeit at a low prevalence. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: The purpose of this study was to estimate the prevalence of anti-HEV in various populations in northwestern Greece (Epirus region). Healthy blood donors (2636), refugees from southern Albania (350), children (165), injecting drug users (IDUs) (65), multiply transfused patients (62), patients with chronic viral hepatitis (75), and chronic hemodialysis patients (149) were investigated for anti-HEV by enzyme immunoassay and confirmatory Western blot assay. In addition, 380 consecutive healthy blood donors and 62 hemodialysis patients from a neighboring area (Agrinion, Greece) were investigated. RESULTS: A very low presence of anti-HEV antibody was found among healthy blood donors from Epirus (0.23%) and Agrinion (0.53%). Anti-HEV was not detected in children, IDUs, or multiply transfused patients. In contrast, a low but significant prevalence of anti-HEV was found among refugees (4.85%), patients with chronic viral hepatitis (5.3%), and hemodialysis patients from Epirus (1.34%), as compared with healthy blood donors from Epirus: p < 0.0001, p < 0.00001, and p < 0.10, respectively. A high prevalence (9.7%) of anti- HEV was revealed in patients at the hemodialysis unit of the General Hospital of Agrinion (p < 0.00005, compared to healthy blood donors from Agrinion). No significant association was found between anti-HEV positivity and the age or sex of donors, the duration of hemodialysis, positivity for hepatitis B or C virus infection markers, history of hepatitis, increased alanine aminotransferase, renal transplantation, a history of transfusion, or the number of units transfused. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated a high prevalence of anti-HEV in a separate hemodialysis unit, without an association with the known routes of transmission of blood-borne viruses. This observation suggests that a still-undefined intra-unit factor or other factors are associated with HEV transmission.     

A comparison of five Illumina,Ion Torrent,and nanopore sequencing technology-based approaches for whole genome sequencing of SARS-CoV-2

Rapid identification of the rise and spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants of concern remains critical for monitoring of the efficacy of diagnostics, therapeutics, vaccines, and control strategies. A wide range of SARS-CoV-2 next-generation sequencing (NGS) methods have been developed over the last years, but cross-sequence technology benchmarking studies have been scarce. In the current study, 26 clinical samples were sequenced using five protocols: AmpliSeq SARS-CoV-2 (Illumina), EasySeq RC-PCR SARS-CoV-2 (Illumina/NimaGen), Ion AmpliSeq SARS-CoV-2 (Thermo Fisher), custom primer sets (Oxford Nanopore Technologies (ONT)), and capture probe-based viral metagenomics (Roche/Illumina). Studied parameters included genome coverage, depth of coverage, amplicon distribution, and variant calling. The median SARS-CoV-2 genome coverage of samples with cycle threshold (Ct) values of 30 and lower ranged from 81.6 to 99.8% for, respectively, the ONT protocol and Illumina AmpliSeq protocol. Correlation of coverage with PCR Ct values varied per protocol. Amplicon distribution signatures differed across the methods, with peak differences of up to 4 log₁₀ at disbalanced positions in samples with high viral loads (Ct values ≤ 23). Phylogenetic analyses of consensus sequences showed clustering independent of the workflow used. The proportion of SARS-CoV-2 reads in relation to background sequences, as a (cost-)efficiency metric, was the highest for the EasySeq protocol. The hands-on time was the lowest when using EasySeq and ONT protocols, with the latter additionally having the shortest sequence runtime. In conclusion, the studied protocols differed on a variety of the studied metrics. This study provides data that assist laboratories when selecting protocols for their specific setting.