ABSTRACT
Objective:To summarize our experience in prevention of COVID-19 infection in emergency and confined operations during the first 3 weeks after Spring Festival in 2020.Methods:From February 3rd to 23rd, 2020, 151 patients were admitted to Department of Orthopaedic Trauma, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital for emergency and confined operations. In this cohort, 125 patients were admitted to ordinary wards. They were 70 males and 55 females with an age of 51.1 years ± 14.9 years. Of them, 2 were subjected to emergency operation and 123 to confined operation. The mean time from injury to operation was 9.9 days ± 6.1 days. There were 26 cases in the senile wards, 7 males and 19 females with an age of 80.8 years ± 7.0 years all of whom underwent confined operations. The mean time from injury to operation was 8.4 days ± 6.3 days. The protocols for emergency diagnosis, admission, emergency and confined operations, postoperative rehabilitation and management of suspects with COVID-19 during the epidemic of COVID-19 were optimized according to Diagnosis and Treatment Protocols for Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia (Trial version 5), emergency responding pre-plans of our hospital, and our experience in Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) as well.Results:The patients in the ordinary wards had a hospital stay of 6.8 days ± 4.6 days while those in the senile wards 5.1 days ± 2.0 days. Abnormal temperature (≥37.3 ℃) was observed perioperatively in 17 cases in the ordinary wards. It was absorption fever in all and appeared in 4 cases upon admission. Fever appeared in 11 patients in the senile wards and upon admission in 3 of them. One senile patient who had been diagnosed of normal pneumonia returned to normal temperature and remained stable conditions after antibiotic therapy. The other patients were free of complications related to COVID-19 during their hospital stay.Conclusion:The first-line medical staff working at emergency department, wards and surgical theaters must heighten their vigilance against COVID-19 infection and rigorously follow protocols for prevention of COVID-19 infection in their daily clinical practice.
ABSTRACT
Objective To compare the performance of four commercial anti-dsDNA antibody assays,i.e,BioPlex 2200 (BioPlex),Farr radioimmunoassay (Farr),MESACUP DNA-Ⅱ TEST ds [MBL-enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)] and Anti-dsDNA-NcX ELISA (IgG) (EURO-ELISA),Antoantibodies Profile Assay Kit (HOB-Chemiluminescent Immunoassay) in disease activity assessment of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE).Methods SLE patients (n=119) as well as healthy controls (n=200) and disease controls (n=100) were recruited and their serum anti-dsDNA antibodies were detected by BioPlex,Farr,MBL-ELISA,EURO-ELISA,and a standard Crithidia luciliae indirect immunofluorescence test (CLIFT).The consistency between above four methods to CLIFT was analyzed.The correlation of anti-dsDNA antibody level of these four methods to SLE disease activity was assessed.All data analyses were performed with Statistical product and service solutions (SPSS) 16.0 (SPSS.Inc) and GraphPad Prism 4.0.3 (GraphPad).Unless otherwise specified,all data in this study were expressed as mean±standard deviation.Cut-off values of the anti-dsDNA quantification methods were set by the manufacturers.Chi square and kappa coefficients were adopted to assess the agreement determination and correlation analysis between anti-dsDNA level and SLE disease activity (SLEDAI).Receiver-operator characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to compare the specificity and sensitivity of the anti-dsDNA assays.Student's t test was adopted for the comparison of anti-dsDNA levels by different methods between SLE and SLE+LN groups.A p value small than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.Results Using cut-off values set by the manufacturers,BioPlex demonstrated the highest overall agreement with CLIFT,while MBL-ELISA and EURO-ELISA showed the highest positive agreement with CLIFT.Disease activity correlation analysis showed that SLEDAI score correlated poorly with anti-dsDNA level in Farr assay,but strongly with the other three assays.Bioplex had a better performance in terms of SLE activity index corelation (r=0.297 6,P=0.001 2).Moreover,anti-dsDNA level differed in SLE patients with renal lupus nephritis in BioPlex assay (P=0.026 8),but not in the other assays.In ROC curve analysis,BioPlex showed the largest area under the curve (AUC) over other assays.Conclusion Bio Plex assay has better sensitivity and specificity than Farr,MBL-ELISA and EURO-ELISA and correlates well with SLE disease activity.