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.

Treatment for Immune Thrombocytopenia in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Infection after COVID-19 Vaccination: A Case Report.

Thrombocytopenia is one of the rare signs of both the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and COVID-19 vaccination. An 85-year-old man was diagnosed with immune thrombocytopenia and COVID-19, 7 days after COVID-19 vaccination. The patient was successfully treated with a short course of intravenous immunoglobulin and oral corticosteroids.

Clinical Characteristics of COVID-19: Use of Steroids in Mostly Unvaccinated COVID-19 Patients Before the Omicron Variant.

BACKGROUND: Glucocorticoids are one of the current standard agents for moderate to severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatment based on the RECOVERY trial. Data on the real clinical application of steroids for COVID-19 are scarce and will help guide the optimal use of steroids. We described the current prescription pattern of steroids for COVID-19 and investigated the factors related to specific practices. METHODS: All adults aged ≥ 19 years who were diagnosed with COVID-19 by real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction and admitted to one of 3 study hospitals from 8 December 2020 to 30 June 2021 were enrolled. Demographic and clinical data, including medications and oxygen therapy, were retrospectively collected from electronic medical records. The severity of comorbidities and COVID-19 were measured. The subjects were divided into steroid and nonsteroid groups, and the steroid group was then subdivided into standard and higher/longer groups. RESULTS: Among a total of 805 patients, 217 (27.0%) were treated with steroids. The steroid group showed a higher rate of oxygen therapy (81.1% vs. 2.7%), more concomitant use of remdesivir (77.4% vs. 1.4%) or antibiotics (79.3% vs. 4.3%), and a higher proportion of high risk according to National Early Warning Score-2 score (30.0% vs. 0.9%) or severe risk according to National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease Ordinal Scale score (81.1% vs. 2.7%) than the nonsteroid group. The mortality of the steroid group was 4.6%. In the steroid group, 82.5% received a standard or lower dose of steroids within ten days, and 17.5% (38/217) received a higher or longer dose of steroids. Multivariate analysis showed that initial lymphopenia (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89-0.99) and high level of lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) (aOR, 1.00; 95% CI, 1.00-1.01) were independent risk factors for higher doses or longer steroid use. CONCLUSION: The dose and duration of steroids were in line with current guidelines in 82.5% of COVID-19 patients, but the outliers may need tailored therapy according to surrogate markers, such as initial lymphopenia or high level of LDH.

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.

Dynamics of viral load and anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in patients with positive RT-PCR results after recovery from COVID-19.

Recently, the number of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who have tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), via the reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test, after recovery has increased; this has caused a dilemma regarding the medical measures and policies. We evaluated the dynamics of viral load and anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in four patients with positive RT-PCR results after recovery. In all patients, the highest levels of immunoglobulin G (IgG) and IgM antibodies were reached after about a month of the onset of the initial symptoms. Then, the IgG titers plateaued, and the IgM titers decreased, regardless of RT-PCR results. The IgG and IgM levels did not increase after the post-negative positive RT-PCR results in any of the patients. Our results reinforced that the post-negative positive RT-PCR results may be due to the detection of RNA particles rather than reinfection in individuals who have recovered from COVID-19.