Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
Gogus-Kalp-Damar Anestezi ve Yogun Bakim Dernegi Dergisi ; 28(3):201-205, 2022.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-2257382

ABSTRACT

The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic reminded once again that microbiological diagnostic methods are irreplaceable in both diagnosing and detecting asymptomatic persons. At present, real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is the gold standard method for diagnosing COVID-19, but the test's accuracy varies in sample quality. Especially in the last stages of the disease, negative results of nasopharyngeal or oropharyngeal swab samples or rapid antigen tests do not necessarily mean that these patients do not carry the virus. Considering that a significant number of COVID-19 patients need intensive care and mechanical ventilation in the late period, which sample should be taken from where and when should be evaluated. Lower respiratory tract samples have a more significant chance of finding viral RNA than upper respiratory tract samples. Technical recommendations and the virological diagnostic methodologies and used in the intensive care unit of patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 are summarized in this article. We aimed to emphasize the need to get a sample from the right place at the right time for a reliable virological diagnosis.Copyright © 2022 by The Cardiovascular Thoracic Anaesthesia and Intensive Care.

4.
Journal of Istanbul Faculty of Medicine-Istanbul Tip Fakultesi Dergisi ; 84(3):293-300, 2021.
Article in English | Web of Science | ID: covidwho-1389969

ABSTRACT

Objective: The SARS-CoV-2 virus, which unexpectedly has affected the whole world, continues to infect millions of people and causes the death of hundreds of thousands of people. There has been no consensus on the pediatric age group yet. For this reason, it was aimed to share the pediatric group experience of our center. Material and Method: After the pandemic announcement, 1076 pediatric cases admitted to our center with suspected COVID-19 disease were discussed. Eighty-five children who were positive in the SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction test, were evaluated retrospectively with epidemiological, clinical, laboratory and imaging data. Results: Half of the patients were male and about half of them were between 60-179 months. The household contact/exposure was 80% of the patients. The most common complaints were cough and fever, with the rates of 51.8% and 47.1%, respectively. There was a milder clinic 72.9% of patients and critical illness only 2.4% of the patients. The most striking laboratory finding was lymphopenia. Imaging results showed that abnormal thorax CT rate was 10.6%. Isolation at home was administered on 80% of the patients. Various specific treatments were used only in 4.7% of the hospitalized patients. One of these patients who received hydroxychloroquine, intravenous immunglobuline and tocilizumab died. The mortality rate was 1.5%. Conclusion: In the absence of reliable diagnostic tests and specific antiviral treatments appropriate for children, it was concluded that we need more virological, epidemiological, clinical, laboratory and imaging studies to better understand and manage COVID-19 infection.

5.
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases ; 80(SUPPL 1):191-192, 2021.
Article in English | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-1358821

ABSTRACT

Background: COVID-19 runs a severe disease associated with acute respiratory distress syndrome in a subset of patients, and a hyperinflammatory response developing in the second week contributes to the worse outcome. Inflammatory features are mostly compatible with macrophage activation syndrome (MAS) observed in other viral infections despite resulting in milder changes. Early detection and treatment of MAS may be associated with a better outcome. However, available criteria for MAS associated with other causes have not been helpful. Objectives: To identify distinct features of MAS associated with COVID-19 using a large database enabling to assess of dynamic changes. Methods: PCR-confirmed hospitalized COVID-19 patients followed between March and September 2020 constituted the discovery set. Patients considered to have findings of MAS by experienced physicians and given anakinra or tocilizumab were classified as the MAS group and the remaining patients as the non-MAS group. The MAS group was then re-grouped as the cases with exact-MAS and borderline-MAS cases by the study group. Clinical and laboratory data including the Ct values of the PCR test were obtained from the database, and dynamic changes were evaluated especially for the first 14 days of the hospitalization. The second set of 162 patients followed between September-December 2020 were used as the replication group to test the preliminary criteria. In the second set, hospitalization rules were changed, and all patients required oxygen support and received dexamethasone 6mg/day or equivalent glucocorticoids. Daily changes were calculated for the laboratory items in MAS, borderline, and non-MAS groups to see the days differentiating the groups, and ROC curves and lower and upper limits (10-90%) of the selected parameters were calculated to determine the cutoff values. Results: A total of 769 PCR-confirmed hospitalized patients were analysed, and 77 of them were classified as MAS and 83 as borderline MAS patients. There was no statistically significant difference in the baseline viral loads of MAS patients compared to the non-MAS group according to the Ct values. Daily dynamic changes in the MAS group differed from the non-MAS group especially around the 6th day of hospitalization, and more than a twofold increase in ferritin and a 1.5-fold increase in D-dimer levels compared to the baseline values help to define the MAS group. Twelve items selected for the criteria are given in Table 1 below. The total score of 45 provided 79.6% sensitivity for the MAS (including borderline cases) and 81.3% specificity around days 5 and 6 in the discovery set, and a score of 60 increased the specificity to 94.9% despite a decrease in sensitivity to 40.8%. The same set provided a similar sensitivity (80.3%) in the replication, but a lower specificity (47.4-66% on days 6 to 9) due to a group of control patients with findings of MAS possibly masked by glucocorticoids. Conclusion: This study defined a set of preliminary criteria using the most relevant items of MAS according to the dynamic changes in the parameters in a group of COVID-19 patients. A score of 45 would be helpful to define a possible MAS group with reasonable sensitivity and specificity to start necessary treatments as early as possible.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL