Effect of Wearing Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) for COVID-19 Treatment on Blood Culture Contamination: Implication for Optimal PPE Strategies.

The personal protective equipment (PPE) used to minimize exposure to hazards can hinder healthcare workers from performing sophisticated procedures. We retrospectively reviewed 77,535 blood cultures (202,012 pairs) performed in 28,502 patients from January 2020 to April 2022. The contamination rate of all blood cultures was significantly elevated in the coronavirus disease 2019 ward at 4.68%, compared to intensive care units at 2.56%, emergency rooms at 1.13%, hematology wards at 1.08%, and general wards at 1.07% (All of P < 0.001). This finding implies that wearing PPE might interfere with adherence to the aseptic technique. Therefore, a new PPE policy is needed that considers the balance between protecting healthcare workers and medical practices.

Clinical application of the Panbio™ COVID-19 Ag rapid test device and SSf-COVID19 kit for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of the Panbio™ COVID-19 Ag rapid test device using nasal swabs and those of the SSf-COVID19 kit, one of RT-PCR tests, using saliva specimens. These tests were compared with RT-PCR tests using nasopharyngeal swabs for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The three diagnostic tests were simultaneously conducted for patients aged ≥ 18 years, who were about to be hospitalized or had been admitted for COVID-19 confirmed by RT-PCR in two research hospitals from August 20 to October 29, 2021. Nasal swabs were tested using the Panbio™ COVID-19 Ag rapid test device. More than 1 mL of saliva was self-collected and tested using the SSf-COVID19 kit. RESULTS: In total, 157 patients were investigated; 124 patients who were about to be hospitalized and 33 patients already admitted for COVID-19. The overall sensitivity and specificity of the Panbio™ COVID-19 Ag rapid test device with nasal swabs were 64.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 47.9-78.5%) and 100.0% (95% CI 97.0-100.0%), respectively. The median time to confirm a positive result was 180 s (interquartile range 60-255 s). The overall sensitivity and specificity of the SSf-COVID19 kit with saliva specimens were 94.1% (95% CI 80.9-98.4%) and 100.0% (95% CI 97.0-100.0%), respectively.

Guidelines for the Laboratory Diagnosis of Monkeypox in Korea.

While the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic is ongoing, monkeypox has been rapidly spreading in non-endemic countries since May 2022. Accurate and rapid laboratory tests are essential for identifying and controlling monkeypox. Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine and the Korea Disease Prevention and Control Agency have proposed guidelines for diagnosing monkeypox in clinical laboratories in Korea. These guidelines cover the type of tests, selection of specimens, collection of specimens, diagnostic methods, interpretation of test results, and biosafety. Molecular tests are recommended as confirmatory tests. Skin lesion specimens are recommended for testing in the symptomatic stage, and the collection of both blood and oropharyngeal swabs is recommended in the presymptomatic or prodromal stage.

SARS-CoV-2 shedding dynamics and transmission in immunosuppressed patients.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants of concern have been emerging. However, knowledge of temporal and spatial dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 is limited. This study characterized SARS-CoV-2 evolution in immunosuppressed patients with long-term SARS-CoV-2 shedding for 73-250 days, without specific treatment. We conducted whole-genome sequencing of 27 serial samples, including 26 serial samples collected from various anatomic sites of two patients and the first positive sample from patient 2's mother. We analysed the intrahost temporal dynamics and genomic diversity of the viral population within different sample types. Intrahost variants emerging during infection showed diversity between individual hosts. Remarkably, N501Y, P681R, and E484K, key substitutions within spike protein, emerged in vivo during infection and became the dominant population. P681R, which had not yet been detected in the publicly available genome in Korea, appeared within patient 1 during infection. Mutually exclusive substitutions at residues R346 (R346S and R346I) and E484 (E484K and E484A) of spike protein and continuous turnover of these substitutions occurred. Unique genetic changes were observed in urine samples. A household transmission from patient 2 to his mother, at least 38 days after the diagnosis, was characterized. Viruses may differently mutate and adjust to the host selective pressure, which could enable the virus to replicate efficiently for fitness in each host. Intrahost variants could be candidate variants likely to spread to the population eventually. Our findings may provide new insights into the dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 in response to interactions between the virus and host.

Update of Guidelines for Laboratory Diagnosis of COVID-19 in Korea.

Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine and the Korea Disease Prevention and Control Agency have announced guidelines for diagnosing coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in clinical laboratories in Korea. With the ongoing pandemic, we propose an update of the previous guidelines based on new scientific data. This update includes recommendations for tests that were not included in the previous guidelines, including the rapid molecular test, antigen test, antibody test, and self-collected specimens, and a revision of the previous recommendations. This update will aid clinical laboratories in performing laboratory tests for diagnosing COVID-19.

Guidelines for Mobile Laboratories for Molecular Diagnostic Testing of COVID-19.

With the rapid spread of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19), the need for rapid testing and diagnosis and consequently, the demand for mobile laboratories have increased. Despite this need, there are no clear guidelines for the operation, maintenance, or quality control of mobile laboratories. We provide guidelines for the operation, management, and quality control of mobile laboratories, and specifically for the implementation and execution of COVID-19 molecular diagnostic testing. These practical guidelines are primarily based on expert opinions and a laboratory accreditation inspection checklist. The scope of these guidelines includes the facility, preoperative evaluation, PCR testing, internal and external quality control, sample handling, reporting, laboratory personnel, biosafety level, and laboratory safety management. These guidelines are useful for the maintenance and operation of mobile laboratories not only in normal circumstances but also during public health crises and emergencies.

A Direct Rapid Phenotypic Antimicrobial Susceptibility Test Enables Early Selection of Optimal Antibiotics to Treat Bacteremia in COVID-19 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Co-infection with bacteria and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 may result in greater use of healthcare resources and a poor prognosis. Therefore, early selection and use of optimal antibiotics are essential. The direct rapid antibiotic susceptibility test (dRAST) can detect antibiotic resistance within 6 h of a Gram smear result. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of dRAST for improving early selection of appropriate antibiotics for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients with bacteremia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included 96 blood culture-positive COVID-19 patients. Bacterial isolates and antimicrobial resistance profiles of each case were evaluated. Cases were divided into two groups based on whether they underwent conventional antibiotic susceptibility test (AST) or dRAST. The time to optimal targeted treatment for the two groups was investigated and compared. In addition, we examined the proportion of cases for which appropriate antibiotics were selected and broad spectrum antibiotics were administered at 72 h from blood sample collection. RESULTS: The mean time to optimal targeted antibiotic treatment was shorter for the dRAST group [55.7; standard deviation (SD), 28.7 vs. 92.3; SD, 51.1 h; P = 0.041]. The proportion of cases receiving optimal targeted antibiotics 72 h after blood collection for culture was higher [6/10 (60.0%) vs. 10/25 (40.0%)] and the percentage receiving broad spectrum antibiotics at 72 h was lower [6/10 (60.0%) vs. 19/25 (76.0%)] in the dRAST group than in the conventional AST group. In terms of microbiology profile, the contamination rate was high (35.5%) and multidrug-resistant strains were common (63.2%) in COVID-19 patients with bacteremia. CONCLUSION: Application of dRAST for selection of antibiotics to treat bacteremia in COVID-19 patients may enable earlier and optimal treatment. The high incidence of contamination and resistant organisms in blood cultures from COVID-19 patients suggest that dRAST may speed up appropriate targeted treatment.

Evaluation of Three Multiplex Real-time Reverse Transcription PCR Assays for Simultaneous Detection of SARS-CoV-2, Influenza A/B, and Respiratory Syncytial Virus in Nasopharyngeal Swabs.

BACKGROUND: In the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic era, the simultaneous detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), influenza virus (Flu), and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is important in the rapid differential diagnosis in patients with respiratory symptoms. Three multiplex real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) assays have been recently developed commercially in Korea: PowerChek™ SARS-CoV-2, Influenza A&B Multiplex Real-time PCR Kit (PowerChek; KogeneBiotech); STANDARD™ M Flu/SARS-CoV-2 Real-time Detection Kit (STANDARD M; SD BioSensor); and Allplex™ SARS-CoV-2/FluA/FluB/RSV Assay (Allplex; Seegene). We evaluated the analytical and clinical performances of these kits. METHODS: A limit of detection tests were performed and cross-reactivity analysis was executed using clinical respiratory samples. Ninety-seven SARS-CoV-2-positive, 201 SARS-CoV-2-negative, 71 influenza A-positive, 50 influenza B-positive, 78 RSV-positive, and 207 other respiratory virus-positive nasopharyngeal swabs were tested using the three assays. The AdvanSure™ respiratory viruses rRT-PCR assay (AdvanSure; LG Life Sciences) was used as a comparator assay for RSV. RESULTS: Except in influenza B, in SARS-CoV-2 and influenza A, there were no significant differences in detecting specific genes of the viruses among the three assays. All three kits did not cross-react with common respiratory viruses. All three kits had greater than 92% positive percent agreement and negative percent agreement and ≥ 0.95 kappa value in the detection of SARS-CoV-2 and flu A/B. Allplex detected RSV more sensitively than AdvanSure. CONCLUSION: The overall performance of three multiplex rRT-PCR assays for the concurrent detection of SARS-CoV-2, influenza A/B, and RSV was comparable. These kits will promote prompt differential diagnosis of COVID-19, influenza, and RSV infection in the COVID-19 pandemic era.

Clinical Performance of the Standard Q COVID-19 Rapid Antigen Test and Simulation of its Real-World Application in Korea.

The rapid antigen test (RAT) for coronavirus disease (COVID-19) represents a potent diagnostic method in situations of limited molecular testing resources. However, considerable performance variance has been reported with the RAT. We evaluated the clinical performance of Standard Q COVID-19 RAT (SQ-RAT; SD Biosensor, Suwon, Korea), the first RAT approved by the Korean Ministry of Food and Drug Safety. In total, 680 nasopharyngeal swabs previously tested using real-time reverse-transcription PCR (rRT-PCR) were retested using SQ-RAT. The clinical sensitivity of SQ-RAT relative to that of rRT-PCR was 28.7% for all specimens and was 81.4% for specimens with RNA-dependent RNA polymerase gene (RdRp) threshold cycle (Ct) values ≤23.37, which is the limit of detection of SQ-RAT. The specificity was 100%. The clinical sensitivity of SQ-RAT for COVID-19 diagnosis was assessed based on the Ct distribution at diagnosis of 33,294 COVID-19 cases in Korea extracted from the laboratory surveillance system of Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine. The clinical sensitivity of SQ-RAT for COVID-19 diagnosis in the Korean population was 41.8%. Considering the molecular testing capacity in Korea, use of the RAT for COVID-19 diagnosis appears to be limited.

Longitudinal proteomic profiling provides insights into host response and proteome dynamics in COVID-19 progression.

In managing patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), early identification of those at high risk and real-time monitoring of disease progression to severe COVID-19 is a major challenge. We aimed to identify potential early prognostic protein markers and to expand understanding of proteome dynamics during clinical progression of the disease. We performed in-depth proteome profiling on 137 sera, longitudinally collected from 25 patients with COVID-19 (non-severe patients, n = 13; patients who progressed to severe COVID-19, n = 12). We identified 11 potential biomarkers, including the novel markers IGLV3-19 and BNC2, as early potential prognostic indicators of severe COVID-19. These potential biomarkers are mainly involved in biological processes associated with humoral immune response, interferon signalling, acute phase response, lipid metabolism, and platelet degranulation. We further revealed that the longitudinal changes of 40 proteins persistently increased or decreased as the disease progressed to severe COVID-19. These 40 potential biomarkers could effectively reflect the clinical progression of the disease. Our findings provide some new insights into host response to SARS-CoV-2 infection, which are valuable for understanding of COVID-19 disease progression. This study also identified potential biomarkers that could be further validated, which may support better predicting and monitoring progression to severe COVID-19.

Clinical Application of the Standard Q COVID-19 Ag Test for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Infection.

We evaluated the Standard Q COVID-19 Ag test for the diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) compared to the reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test. We applied both tests to patients who were about to be hospitalized, had visited an emergency room, or had been admitted due to COVID-19 confirmed by RT-PCR. Two nasopharyngeal swabs were obtained; one was tested by RT-PCR and the other by the Standard Q COVID-19 Ag test. A total of 118 pairs of tests from 98 patients were performed between January 5 and 11, 2021. The overall sensitivity and specificity for detecting severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) for the Standard Q COVID-19 Ag test compared to RT-PCR were 17.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.8-32.0%) and 100% (95% CI, 95.3-100.0%). Analysis of the results using RT-PCR cycle thresholds of ≤ 30 or ≤ 25 increased the sensitivity to 26.9% (95% CI, 13.7-46.1%), and 41.1% (95% CI, 21.6-64.0%), respectively.

Evidence of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Reinfection After Recovery from Mild Coronavirus Disease 2019.

BACKGROUND: Positive results from real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) in recovered patients raise concern that patients who recover from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may be at risk of reinfection. Currently, however, evidence that supports reinfection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has not been reported. METHODS: We conducted whole-genome sequencing of the viral RNA from clinical specimens at the initial infection and at the positive retest from 6 patients who recovered from COVID-19 and retested positive for SARS-CoV-2 via rRT-PCR after recovery. A total of 13 viral RNAs from the patients' respiratory specimens were consecutively obtained, which enabled us to characterize the difference in viral genomes between initial infection and positive retest. RESULTS: At the time of the positive retest, we were able to acquire a complete genome sequence from patient 1, a 21-year-old previously healthy woman. In this patient, through the phylogenetic analysis, we confirmed that the viral RNA of positive retest was clustered into a subgroup distinct from that of the initial infection, suggesting that there was a reinfection of SARS-CoV-2 with a subtype that was different from that of the primary strain. The spike protein D614G substitution that defines the clade "G" emerged in reinfection, while mutations that characterize the clade "V" (ie, nsp6 L37F and ORF3a G251V) were present at initial infection. CONCLUSIONS: Reinfection with a genetically distinct SARS-CoV-2 strain may occur in an immunocompetent patient shortly after recovery from mild COVID-19. SARS-CoV-2 infection may not confer immunity against a different SARS-CoV-2 strain.

Surveillance of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Testing in Clinical Laboratories in Korea.

In response to the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, an online laboratory surveillance system was established to monitor severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) real-time reverse transcription-PCR (rRT-PCR) testing capacities and results. SARS-CoV-2 rRT-PCR testing data were collected from 97 clinical laboratories, including 84 medical institutions and 13 independent clinical laboratories in Korea. We assessed the testing capacities to utilize SARS-CoV-2 rRT-PCR based on surveillance data obtained from February 7th to June 4th, 2020 and evaluated positive result characteristics according to the reagents used and sample types. A total of 1,890,319 SARS-CoV-2 rRT-PCR testing were performed, 2.3% of which were positive. Strong correlations were observed between the envelope (E) gene and RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp)/nucleocapsid (N) genes threshold cycle (Ct) values for each reagent. No statistically significant differences in gene Ct values were observed between the paired upper and lower respiratory tract samples, except in the N gene for nasopharyngeal swab and sputum samples. Our study showed that clinical laboratories in Korea have rapidly expanded their testing capacities in response to the COVID-19 outbreak, with a peak daily capacity of 34,193 tests. Rapid expansion in testing capacity is a critical component of the national response to the ongoing pandemic.

Viral RNA Load in Mildly Symptomatic and Asymptomatic Children with COVID-19, Seoul, South Korea.

Along with positive SARS-CoV-2 RNA in nasopharyngeal swabs, viral RNA was detectable at high concentration for >3 weeks in fecal samples from 12 mildly symptomatic and asymptomatic children with COVID-19 in Seoul, South Korea. Saliva also tested positive during the early phase of infection. If proven infectious, feces and saliva could serve as transmission sources.

In vitro activity of lopinavir/ritonavir and hydroxychloroquine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 at concentrations achievable by usual doses.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: As the coronavirus disease-2019 global pandemic progresses, screening of antiviral agents effective against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is urgently needed. In addition, considering the viral load kinetics of SARS-CoV-2, which peaks early in the illness, and the massive burden of the disease, which may increase in the near future, identifying well-tolerated oral antivirals becomes increasingly important. We examined the in vitro activity of lopinavir/ritonavir and hydroxychloroquine on SARS-CoV-2, at concentrations which can be used to treat coronavirus-19 patients with little concern of toxicity. METHODS: Lopinavir/ritonavir (7/1.75 µg/mL), hydroxychloroquine base (1 or 2 µg/mL), or a combination thereof were administered 1 hour after the inoculation of SARS-CoV-2 to Vero cells at a multiplicity of infection of 0.05. We examined cytopathic effects of virus 48 hours after administration of the respective treatments and measured viral loads at three time points (0, 24, and 48 hours post-treatment) by quantitative real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction, and compared the results obtained from the different antiviral regimens tested. RESULTS: The severity of cytopathic effects was lower in lopinavir/ritonavir-treated cells, and viral load was significantly reduced in this group compared with the control group (p < 0.001). However, hydroxychloroquine did not show significant inhibitory effects on anti-SARS-CoV-2-mediated cytotoxicity or on viral load at either concentration. CONCLUSION: Lopinavir/ritonavir showed significant inhibitory effects on SARS-CoV-2 in vitro at its usual plasma concentration. However, the in vitro antiviral activity of hydroxychloroquine at concentrations commonly used in humans was minimal, whether used alone or in combination with lopinavir/ritonavir.