Association of Chest X- ray findings with SARS-CoV-2 severity

Background: The COVID-19 first surfaced when cluster of pneumonia patients arose in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China. Although the current gold standard for COVID-19 diagnosis is reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), chest x-ray (CXR) and computed tomography (CT) play a vital role in sickness diagnosis due to their limited sensitivity and availability. Aim: To evaluate retrospectively the role of CXR, the main radiological findings in it and its diagnostic accuracy in COVID-19 pneumonia. Methods: This is a cross sectional study involving 264 PCR positive COVID-19 patients with their clinical-epidemiological findings admitted at Ziauddin Hospital from May-July 2020. CXRs were taken as digital radiographs in our emergency department's isolation wards using the same portable X-ray device, according to local norms. CXRs were taken in two directions: antero-posterior (AP) and postero-anterior (PA). The hospitals' database had all of the images. To determine the number of radiological findings, multiple radiologists on duty completed an independent and retrospective examination of each CXR. In the event of disagreement, a mutual agreement was reached. SPSS version 20 was used for statistical analysis. Results: We were able to find 264 patients who met our criteria. With a mean age of 56.4214.89, the majority of individuals were determined to be males 189(71.6%) and females 75(28.4%). (Range of 16 to 87 years). 127 patients (48.1%) had severe illness symptoms and were admitted to the ICU, while the remaining 102(38.6%) had mild to moderate disease 35(13.3%). Diffuse (29.2%) and middle and lower co-existing distribution (25.8%) whereas just lower lobe (13.3%) were the most common predominance in severity. Peripheral involvement was also seen in (8.7%) cases. Conclusion: Both lungs are equally affected with the disease having the consolidation and opacifications while the effusion is the major complication in the severe cases. Diffuse involvement of the lung lobes is seen in the study followed by the middle and lower lobe involvement.

What was the Prevalence of COVID-19 in Asymptomatic Patients Undergoing Orthopaedic Surgery in One Large United States City Mid-pandemic?

BACKGROUND: Many patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are asymptomatic. The prevalence of COVID-19 in orthopaedic populations will vary depending on the time and place where the sampling is performed. The idea that asymptomatic carriers play a role is generalizable but has not been studied in large populations of patients undergoing elective orthopaedic surgery. We therefore evaluated this topic in one large, metropolitan city in a state that had the ninth-most infections in the United States at the time this study was completed (June 2020). This work was based on a screening and testing protocol that required all patients to be tested for COVID-19 preoperatively. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What is the prevalence of asymptomatic COVID-19 infection in patients planning to undergo orthopaedic surgery in one major city, in order to provide other surgeons with a framework for assessing COVID-19 rates in their healthcare system? (2) How did patients with positive test results for COVID-19 differ in terms of age, sex, and orthopaedic conditions? (3) What proportion of patients had complications treated, and how many patients had a symptomatic COVID-19 infection within 30 days of surgery (recognizing that some may have been missed and so our estimates of event rates will necessarily underestimate the frequency of this event)? METHODS: All adult patients scheduled for surgery at four facilities (two tertiary care hospitals, one orthopaedic specialty hospital, and one ambulatory surgery center) at a single institution in the Philadelphia metropolitan area from April 27, 2020 to June 12, 2020 were included in this study. A total of 1295 patients were screened for symptoms, exposure, temperature, and oxygen saturation via a standardized protocol before surgical scheduling; 1.5% (19 of 1295) were excluded because they had COVID-19 symptoms, exposure, or recent travel based on the initial screening questionnaire, leaving 98.5% (1276 of 1295) who underwent testing for COVID-19 preoperatively. All 1276 patients who passed the initial screening test underwent nasopharyngeal swabbing for COVID-19 via reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction before surgery. The mean age at the time of testing was 56 ± 16 years, and 53% (672 of 1276) were men. Eighty-seven percent (1106), 8% (103), and 5% (67) were tested via the Roche, Abbott, and Cepheid assays, respectively. All patients undergoing elective surgery were tested via the Roche assay, while those undergoing nonelective surgery received either the Abbott or Cepheid assay, based on availability. Patients with positive test results undergoing elective surgery had their procedures rescheduled, while patients scheduled for nonelective surgery underwent surgery regardless of their test results. Additionally, we reviewed the records of all patients at 30 days postoperatively for emergency room visits, readmissions, and COVID-19-related complications via electronic medical records and surgeon-reported complications. However, we had no method for definitively determining how many patients had complications, emergency department visits, or readmissions outside our system, so our event rate estimates for these endpoints are necessarily best-case estimates. RESULTS: A total of 0.5% (7 of 1276) of the patients tested positive for COVID-19: five via the Roche assay and two via the Abbott assay. Patients with positive test results were younger than those with negative results (39 ± 12 years versus 56 ± 16 years; p = 0.01). With the numbers available, we found no difference in the proportion of patients with positive test results for COVID-19 based on subspecialty area (examining the lowest and highest point estimates, respectively, we observed: trauma surgery [3%; 2 of 68 patients] versus hip and knee [0.3%; 1 of 401 patients], OR 12 [95% CI 1-135]; p = 0.06). No patients with negative preoperative test results for COVID-19 developed a symptomatic COVID-19 infection within 30 days postoperatively. Within 30 days of surgery, 0.9% (11 of 1276) of the patients presented to the emergency room, and 1.3% (16 of 1276) were readmitted for non-COVID-19-related complications. None of the patients with positive test results for COVID-19 preoperatively experienced complications. However, because some were likely treated outside our healthcare system, the actual percentages may be higher. CONCLUSION: Because younger patients are more likely to be asymptomatic carriers of disease, surgeons should emphasize the importance of taking proper precautions to prevent virus exposure preoperatively. Because the rates of COVID-19 infection differ based on city and time, surgeons should monitor the local prevalence of disease to properly advise patients on the risk of COVID-19 exposure. Further investigation is required to assess the prevalence in the orthopaedic population in cities with larger COVID-19 burdens. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Spatiotemporal variations and contributing factors of air pollutant concentrations in Malaysia during movement control order due to pandemic COVID-19

The restriction of daily and economic-related activities due to COVID-19 pandemic via lockdown order has been reported to improve air quality. This study evaluated temporal and spatial variations of four major air pollutant concentrations across Malaysia before (March 4, 2020–March 17, 2020) and during the implementation of different phases of Movement Control Order (MCO) (March 18, 2020–May 12, 2020) from 65 official regulatory air quality stations. Results showed that restriction in daily and economic activities has remarkably reduced the air quality in all sub-urban, urban, and industrial settings with relatively small contributions from meteorological conditions. Overall, compared to before MCO, average concentrations of PM2.5, CO, and NO2 reduced by 23.1%, 21.74%, and 54.0%, respectively, while that of SO2 was constant. The highest reduction of PM2.5, CO, and NO2 were observed in stations located in urban setting, where 63% stations showed significant reduction (p <0.05) for PM2.5 and CO, while all stations showed significant reduction in NO2 concentrations. It was also revealed that 70.5% stations recorded lower concentrations of PM2.5 during MCO compared to before MCO, despite that high numbers of local hotspots were observed simultaneously from NASA’s Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS). Spatial analysis showed that the northern part of Peninsular had the highest significant reduction of PM2.5, while the highest of NO2 and CO reduction were found in stations located in the central region. All pollutants exhibit similar diurnal trends when compared between pre-and during MCO although significant lower readings were observed during MCO. This study gives confidence to regulatory body;the enforcement of strict air pollution prevention and control policies could help in reducing pollution. © 2020, AAGR Aerosol and Air Quality Research. All rights reserved.