ABSTRACT
Hemodialysis patients (HDP) and kidney transplant recipients (KTR) have a high risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2 with poor clinical outcomes. Because of this, vaccination of these groups of patients against SARS-CoV-2 is particularly important. However, immune responses may be impaired in immunosuppressed and chronically ill patients. Here, our aim was to compare the efficacy of an mRNA-based vaccine in HDP, KTR, and healthy subjects. DESIGN: In this prospective observational cohort study, the humoral and cellular response of prevalent 192 HDP, 50 KTR, and 28 healthy controls (HC) was assessed 1, 2, and 6 months after the first immunization with the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine. RESULTS: After 6 months, 97.5% of HDP, 37.9% of KTR, and 100% of HC had an antibody response. Median antibody levels were 1539.7 (±3355.8), 178.5 (±369.5), and 2657.8 (±2965.8) AU/mL in HDP, KTR, and HC, respectively (p ≤ 0.05). A SARS-CoV-2 antigen-specific cell response to vaccination was found in 68.8% of HDP, 64.5% of KTR, and 90% of HC. CONCLUSION: The humoral response rates to mRNA-based vaccination of HDPs are comparable to HCs, but antibody titers are lower. Furthermore, HDPs have weaker T-cell response to vaccination than HCs. KTRs have very low humoral and antigen-specific cellular response rates and antibody titers, which requires other vaccination strategies in addition to booster vaccination.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Education of medical students in surgery not only consists of knowledge about diseases and their treatment but also of practical skills like i.e. suturing. In the clinical training of medical students, professional interaction and communication with patients is a key component. Due to the circumstances of distancing and reduced exposure to patients during the COVID-19 pandemic, clinical training of medical students has been challenging. To combat these restrictions, digital modern teaching concepts had to be implemented. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Surgical education of medical students was reorganised during the summer semester 2020 and winter semester 2020/2021 and the necessary adjustments, as well as their evaluation by students, were analysed. Results were compared to the pre-COVID evaluations of the summer semester 2019. Furthermore a survey of all university surgical departments in Germany (n = 39) was conducted to compare the different approaches to handling this very new situation. RESULTS: All participating centres were performing surgical education with medical students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Overall, digital teaching methods were well accepted by students and teachers, even though short-term changes were necessary during the second wave of the pandemic. Both students and teachers missed the direct mutual interaction as well as with patients (summer semester 2020 36%, winter semester 2020/2021 40%). Modern and digital teaching concepts were assessed positively (summer semester 2020 45%, winter semester 2020/2021 40%) and long term implementation was desired by students and teachers (winter semester 2020/2021 60%). CONCLUSION: Training of practical surgical skills, as well as communication skills, can only be taught in presence. Digital learning concepts can support, but not replace, surgical courses held in presence, including contact to patients and manual training. Blended learning concepts facilitate a leap towards modern teaching concepts and increase the quality of classes spent in presence.