Simple Saliva Sample Collection for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Variants Compared With Nasopharyngeal Swab Sample.

CONTEXT.­: The use of saliva samples for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection offers several advantages, including ease of sample collection, feasibility of self-collection, and minimization of medical staff exposure to infection. The emergence of new SARS-CoV-2 variants has had an impact on the viral load of specimens and the results of real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR). OBJECTIVE.­: To compare nasopharyngeal swab and saliva samples for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 using rRT-PCR. DESIGN.­: In this study, participants were recruited prospectively, and paired nasopharyngeal swab and saliva samples were collected simultaneously from each participant. After adding universal transport medium, RNA was extracted in an identical manner for both sample types, and samples were tested using rRT-PCR. In addition, samples with positive results were tested for SARS-CoV-2 variants. RESULTS.­: Of the 338 paired samples, 100 nasopharyngeal swab and 101 saliva samples tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. The rRT-PCR results of the saliva and nasopharyngeal swab samples showed a positive percent agreement of 95.0% (95% CI, 88.7%-98.4%), a negative percent agreement of 97.9% (95% CI, 95.2%-99.3%), and an overall percent agreement of 96.8% (95% CI, 94.3%-98.4%). SARS-CoV-2 was detected in the saliva samples of 6 participants with negative nasopharyngeal sample results. In addition, the sensitivity of saliva samples was similar to that of nasopharyngeal samples for detecting various SARS-CoV-2 variants, including the Omicron variant. CONCLUSIONS.­: Saliva samples can be used as an alternative to nasopharyngeal samples for convenient and effective detection of various SARS-CoV-2 variants.

Usefulness of monocyte distribution width and presepsin for early assessment of disease severity in COVID-19 patients.

Early predictors of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) would identify patients requiring intensive care. Recently, the monocyte distribution width (MDW) and presepsin level have been used for the early diagnosis of sepsis. Here, we assessed the utility of MDW and presepsin for the early assessment of COVID-19 severity. Eighty-seven inpatients with confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled and divided into 3 groups by the type of respiratory support: (1) mechanical ventilation or high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy (MVHF-OT), (2) conventional oxygen therapy, and (3) no oxygen therapy. We measured the complete blood count; MDW; erythrocyte sedimentation rate; and the levels of presepsin, C-reactive protein, procalcitonin, lactate dehydrogenase, ferritin, Krebs von den Lungen-6 (KL-6), and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) neutralizing antibody. Thirteen (14.9%) patients on MVHF-OT exhibited a significantly higher mortality and a longer hospital stay than did the others. The MDW and presepsin levels were significantly elevated on admission, and correlated with COVID-19 severity (both P < .001). Notably, only the MDW correlated significantly with symptoms in the no oxygen therapy group (P < .012). In the first week after admission, the MDW fell and no longer differed among the groups. The KL-6 level did not differ by disease severity at any time. Neutralizing antibodies were detected in 74 patients (91.4%) and the level of neutralization correlated significantly with COVID-19 severity (P < .001). The MDW and presepsin are useful indicators for early assessment of disease severity in COVID-19 patients.

Impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on sleep center operations and sleep apnea treatment in Korea: A multicenter survey.

ABSTRACT: The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has not only changed the lives of people around the world but also affected all areas of the healthcare system, including sleep medicine. However, no studies in Korea have investigated the status of domestic sleep centers and their challenges during the pandemic.An online survey was performed from December 2020 to January 2021. Hospitals that belonged to sleep-related academic societies and were considered well managed were included in this survey. The questionnaire focused on changes in sleep center operations, infection control policies, and patient treatment since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. Telemedicine and future directions for sleep medicine services were also investigated.Of the 20 sleep centers that responded, 80% were at university hospitals with more than 500 inpatient beds. During the third wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Korea (November-December 2020), the routine operating schedule of the sleep study room was reduced in 30% of the sleep centers compared to November-December 2019 (before COVID-19). The number of type 1 polysomnographies performed decreased in 85% of the sleep centers. In contrast, in-lab positive airway pressure (PAP) titrations decreased in 40%, remained unchanged in 35%, and increased in 25%. With respect to prescriptions, 30% of the sleep centers increased the number of prescriptions for auto-titrating continuous PAP. However, 60% of the sleep centers reported no change in the rate of fixed continuous PAP and auto-titrating continuous PAP prescriptions. All sleep centers that participated in this survey agreed that the need for documented infection control regulations will continue after the COVID-19 pandemic. Since the beginning of the pandemic, 30% of the centers have tried telemedicine. However, respondents expressed concern about telemedicine, citing a number of practical issues.Compared to countries where the COVID-19 pandemic was severe, Korea had less impact of COVID-19 on the sleep center operations and sleep apnea treatment. Infection and quality control in the sleep study room are important and inevitable issues, and regulation within each institution is necessary. Further research and discussion are needed regarding telemedicine and home sleep apnea test in Korea.

Serial Screening for SARS-CoV-2 in Rectal Swabs of Symptomatic COVID-19 Patients.

We used serial rectal swabs to investigate the amount and duration of virus secretion through the gastrointestinal tract and assessed the association between fecal shedding and gastrointestinal symptoms and to clarify the clinical usefulness testing rectal swabs. We enrolled ten adult patients hospitalized with symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Respiratory and stool specimens were collected by physicians. The presence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was confirmed using real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction. All ten patients had respiratory symptoms, six had diarrhea, and seven were positive for SARS-CoV-2 on rectal swabs. The viral loads in the respiratory specimens was higher than those in the rectal specimens, and no rectal specimens were positive after the respiratory specimens became negative. There was no association between gastrointestinal symptoms, pneumonia, severity, and rectal viral load. Rectal swabs may play a role in detecting SARS-CoV-2 in individuals with suspected COVID-19, regardless of gastrointestinal symptoms.

Containment of a healthcare-associated COVID-19 outbreak in a university hospital in Seoul, Korea: A single-center experience.

BACKGROUND: Our hospital experienced the first healthcare-associated COVID-19 outbreak in Seoul at the time the first COVID-19 cases were confirmed in Korea. The first confirmed COVID-19 patient was a hospital personnel who was in charge of transferring patients inside our hospital. To contain the virus spread, we shutdown our hospital, and tested all inpatients, medical staff members, and employees. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the results of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing according to the contact history, occupation, and presence of respiratory symptoms. Closed-circuit television (CCTV) was reviewed in the presence of an epidemiologist to identify individuals who came into contact with confirmed COVID-19 patients. RESULTS: A total of 3,091 respiratory samples from 2,924 individuals were obtained. Among 2,924 individuals, two inpatients, and one caregiver tested positive (positivity rate, 0.1%). Although all confirmed cases were linked to a general ward designated for pulmonology patients, no medical staff members, medical support personnel, or employees working at the same ward were infected. Contact with confirmed COVID-19 cases was frequent among inpatients and medical support personnel. The most common contact area was the general ward for pulmonology patients and medical support areas, including clinical and imaging examination rooms. Finally, the total number of hospital-associated infections was 14, consisting of four diagnosed at our hospital and ten diagnosed outside the hospital. CONCLUSIONS: The robust control of the COVID-19 outbreak further minimized the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in the hospital and local communities. However, there was also a debate over the appropriate period of hospital shutdown and testing of all hospital staff and patients. Future studies are required to refine and establish the in-hospital quarantine and de-isolation guidelines based on the epidemiological and clinical settings.