ABSTRACT
COVID‐19 has brought speculations on potential transmission routes of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2), the causal agent of the pandemic. It is reported that the main route of virus transmission to be person‐to‐person by respiratory droplets;however, people have raised concerns on the possible transmission of SARS‐CoV‐2 to humans via food and packaging and its potential effects on food safety. This review discusses food safety issues in the COVID‐19 pandemic and reveals its possible transmission in cold‐chain food. The first outbreak of COVID‐19 in late 2019 was associated with a seafood market in Wuhan, China, while the second outbreak of COVID‐19 in June 2020 was also related to a seafood market in Beijing, China. As of 2020, several frozen seafood products linked with SARS‐CoV‐2 have been reported in China. According to the current survey and scientific studies, the risk of infection by SARS‐CoV‐2 from cold‐chain food, food products, and food packaging is thought to be very low. However, studies on food cold chain contamination have shown that SARS‐CoV‐2 remained highly stable under refrigerated (4°C) and even in freezing conditions (−10 to −80°C). Since one mode of SARS‐CoV‐2 transmission appears to be touching contaminated surfaces, it is important to clean and sanitize food contact surfaces properly. Understanding food safety hazard risks is essential to avoid potential negative health effects and SARS‐CoV‐2 transmission in the food supply chain during the COVID‐19 pandemic.
ABSTRACT
COVID-19 has brought speculations on potential transmission routes of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the causal agent of the pandemic. It is reported that the main route of virus transmission to be person-to-person by respiratory droplets; however, people have raised concerns on the possible transmission of SARS-CoV-2 to humans via food and packaging and its potential effects on food safety. This review discusses food safety issues in the COVID-19 pandemic and reveals its possible transmission in cold-chain food. The first outbreak of COVID-19 in late 2019 was associated with a seafood market in Wuhan, China, while the second outbreak of COVID-19 in June 2020 was also related to a seafood market in Beijing, China. As of 2020, several frozen seafood products linked with SARS-CoV-2 have been reported in China. According to the current survey and scientific studies, the risk of infection by SARS-CoV-2 from cold-chain food, food products, and food packaging is thought to be very low. However, studies on food cold chain contamination have shown that SARS-CoV-2 remained highly stable under refrigerated (4°C) and even in freezing conditions (-10 to -80°C). Since one mode of SARS-CoV-2 transmission appears to be touching contaminated surfaces, it is important to clean and sanitize food contact surfaces properly. Understanding food safety hazard risks is essential to avoid potential negative health effects and SARS-CoV-2 transmission in the food supply chain during the COVID-19 pandemic.
ABSTRACT
The COVID-19 pandemic is an ongoing global pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in 2020-2021. COVID-19 is becoming one of the most fatal pandemics in history and brings a huge challenge to the global healthcare system. Opportune detection, confinement, and early treatment of infected cases present the first step in combating COVID-19. Diagnosis via viral nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) is frequently employed and considered the standard procedure. However, with an increasing urge for point-of-care tests, rapid and cheaper immunoassays are widely utilized, such as lateral flow immunoassay (LFIA), which can be used for rapid, early, and large-scale detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection. In this narrative review, the principle and technique of LFIA applied in COVID-19 antigen and antibody detection are introduced. The diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of the commercial LFIA tests are outlined and compared. Generally, LFIA antigen tests for SARS-CoV-2 are less sensitive than viral NAATs, the "gold standard" for clinical COVID-19 diagnosis. However, antigen tests can be used for rapid and mass testing in high-risk congregate housing to quickly identify people with COVID-19, implementing infection prevention and control measures, thus preventing transmission. LFIA anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests, IgM and/or IgG, known as serology tests, are used for identification if a person has previously been exposed to the virus or vaccine immunization. Notably, advanced techniques, such as LFT-based CRISPR-Cas9 and surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy (SERS), have added new dimensions to the COVID-19 diagnosis and are also discussed in this review.
ABSTRACT
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) had caused huge health losses worldwide. Several drugs had been applied to treat patients with COVID-19, and repurposing colchicine had been proposed for its anti-inflammatory properties via several pathways. In this systematic review, we evaluated the effects of colchicine treatment. From inception to May 31, 2021, databases, including PubMed, EMbase, medRxiv, and Research Square were searched, and 11 studies were enrolled. A total of 17,205 COVID-19 patients with male predominance (62.9%) were analyzed. Patients with colchicine treatment had a significantly lower risk of mortality (odds ratio (OR): 0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.38-0.87, I2: 72%; p < 0.01) and a non-significantly lower rate of mechanical ventilation (OR: 0.67, 95%CI: 0.39-1.15). The side effects were mild and not significantly different (OR: 2.03, 95%CI: 0.51-8.09). Subgroup analysis with randomized controlled trials showed no statistically significant difference in the mortality (OR: 0.80, 95%CI: 0.44-1.46, I2: 33%; p = 0.22). In conclusion, our meta-analysis found that colchicine treatment was associated with a significantly lower risk of mortality in patients with COVID-19. However, this benefit was not observed in the subgroup analysis of randomized controlled trials. Further randomized controlled studies are required to confirm the potential benefits of colchicine treatment.
ABSTRACT
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients exhibited protean clinical manifestations. Olfactory and gustatory abnormalities (anosmia and ageusia) were observed in COVID-19 patients, but the reported prevalence varied. In this systematic review, the prevalence of olfactory and gustatory abnormalities (OGA) was evaluated in laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 patients. On 8 May 2020, 14,506 articles were screened, while 12 of them were enrolled. A total of 1739 COVID-19 patients were analyzed, with a wide range of prevalence observed (5.6-94%). The pooled prevalence was 48.5% with high heterogeneity (I2, 98.8%; p < 0.0001). In total, 15.5% had OGA as their first symptom (I2, 22.6%; p = 0.27) among the patients analyzed. Contradictory to COVID-19 negative controls, patients with COVID-19 had a higher risk of OGA (odds ratio, 5.3; I2, 66.5%; p = 0.03). In conclusion, approximately half of COVID-19 patients had OGA, and one-seventh of them had OGA as their initial symptoms. OGA were cardinal symptoms of COVID-19, which may serve as clues for early diagnosis. Diagnostic testing for SARS-CoV-2 was suggested in patients with OGA during the COVID-19 pandemic to ensure timely diagnosis and appropriate quarantine.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Despite the increasingly recognized impact of novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), on many aspects of health in adults and children, its effects on neonates born to infected mothers remain unclear. We conducted this study to investigate the outcomes of neonates born to mothers with COVID-19. METHODS: We searched the medical databases from inception to March 31, 2020 to perform a systematic review of outcomes in neonates born to mothers with COVID-19. Data were pooled using a random effects regression model. Primary and secondary outcomes were neonatal clinical outcomes and infectious status, respectively. RESULTS: Fourteen studies involving 105 neonates fulfilling the study criteria were identified. The rates of preterm neonates and those small for gestational age (SGA) were 25 (23.8%) and 10 (11.2%), respectively. Among 91 neonates who were tested, 8 (8.8%) were positive for nucleic acids or antibodies for SARS-CoV-2. Additionally, 28 (26.7%) of the neonates were symptomatic and two test-negative neonates died, including one stillbirth. Between test-positive and test-negative groups, the rates of SGA, preterm delivery, duration between maternal symptom onset and delivery, and perinatal complication were not significantly different; but the rate of symptomatic after birth reached significant difference (62.5% vs 20.5%, p = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Most neonates born to infected mothers had favorable outcomes. Although direct evidences of intrauterine infection were scarce, the risk of intrauterine infection should be considered based on a positive test in 8.8% of the neonates. Symptomatic neonates born to infected mothers should receive tests for SARS-CoV-2 to initiate appropriate treatment and quarantine. Further studies are warranted to assess the outcomes of COVID-19 in neonates.