Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Front Immunol ; 13: 928501, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2065504

ABSTRACT

COVID-19 pandemic witnessed rapid development and use of several vaccines. In India, a country-wide immunization was initiated in January 2021. COVISHIELD, the chimpanzee adenoviral-vectored vaccine with full-length SARS-COV-2 spike insert and COVAXIN, the whole virus-inactivated vaccines were used. To assess and compare immune response of health-care-workers to COVISHIELD (n=187) and COVAXIN (n=21), blood samples were collected pre-vaccination, 1month post-1/post-2 doses and 6months post-dose-2 and tested for IgG-anti-SARS-CoV-2 (ELISA) and neutralizing (Nab,PRNT50) antibodies. Spike-protein-specific T cells were quantitated by IFN-γ-ELISPOT. In pre-vaccination-antibody-negative COVISHIELD recipients (pre-negatives, n=120), %Nab seroconversion (median, IQR Nab titers) increased from 55.1% (16, 2.5-36.3) post-dose-1 to 95.6% (64.5, 4.5-154.2, p<0.001) post-dose-2 that were independent of age/gender/BMI. Nab response was higher among pre-positives with hybrid immunity at all-time points (p<0.01-0.0001) and independent of age/gender/BMI/Comorbidities. Post-dose-2-seroconversion (50%, p<0.001) and Nab titers (6.75, 2.5-24.8, p<0.001) in COVAXIN-recipients were lower than COVISHIELD. COVAXIN elicited a superior IFN-γ-T cell response as measured by ELISPOT (100%; 1226, 811-1532 spot forming units, SFU/million PBMCs v/s 57.8%; 21.7,1.6-169.2; p<0.001). At 6months, 28.3% (15/53) COVISHIELD and 3/3COVAXIN recipients were Nab-negative. T cell response remained unchanged. During immunization, COVID-19 cases were detected among COVISHIELD (n=4) and COVAXIN (n=2) recipients. At 6months, 9cases were recorded in COVISHIELD-recipients. This first-time, systematic, real-world assessment and long-term follow up revealed generation of higher neutralizing antibody titers by COVISHIELD and stronger T-cell response by COVAXIN. Diminished Nab titers at 6months emphasize early booster. Immunogenicity/efficacy of vaccines will change with the progression of the pandemic needing careful evaluations in the field-settings.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Antibodies, Neutralizing , COVID-19/prevention & control , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , Cohort Studies , Enzyme-Linked Immunospot Assay , Health Personnel , Humans , Immunoglobulin G , Pandemics/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Tertiary Care Centers , Vaccines, Inactivated
3.
Indian Heart J ; 73(4): 413-423, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1275353

ABSTRACT

AIM: Studies on the changes in the presentation and management of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) during the COVID-19 pandemic from low- and middle-income countries are limited. We sought to determine the changes in the number of admissions, management practices, and outcomes of AMI during the pandemic period in India. METHODS & RESULTS: In this two-timepoint cross-sectional study involving 187 hospitals across India, patients admitted with AMI between 15th March to 15th June in 2020 were compared with those admitted during the corresponding period of 2019. We included 41,832 consecutive adults with AMI. Admissions during the pandemic period (n = 16414) decreased by 35·4% as compared to the corresponding period in 2019 (n = 25418). We observed significant heterogeneity in this decline across India. The weekly average decrease in AMI admissions in 2020 correlated negatively with the number of COVID cases (r = -0·48; r2 = 0·2), but strongly correlated with the stringency of lockdown index (r = 0·95; r2 = 0·90). On a multi-level logistic regression, admissions were lower in 2020 with older age categories, tier 1 cities, and centers with high patient volume. Adjusted utilization rate of coronary angiography, and percutaneous coronary intervention decreased by 11·3%, and 5·9% respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The magnitude of reduction in AMI admissions across India was not uniform. The nature, time course, and the patient demographics were different compared to reports from other countries, suggesting a significant impact due to the lockdown. These findings have important implications in managing AMI during the pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Myocardial Infarction , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , Communicable Disease Control , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , India/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Pandemics , Stroke Volume , Ventricular Function, Left
4.
Indian Heart J ; 72(6): 541-546, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-746032

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 pandemic has affected around 20million patients worldwide and 2.0 million cases from India. The lockdown was employed to delay the pandemic. However, it had an unintentional impact on acute cardiovascular care, especially acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Observational studies have shown a decrease in hospital admissions for AMI in several developed countries during the pandemic period. We aimed to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on the AMI admissions patterns across India. METHODS: In this multicentric, retrospective, cross-sectional study, we included all AMI cases admitted to participating hospitals during the study period 15th March to 15th June 2020 and compared them using a historical control of all cases of AMI admitted during the corresponding period in the year 2019. Major objective of the study is to analyze the changes inthe number of hospital admissions for AMI in hospitals across India. In addition, we intend to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on the weekly AMI admission rates, and other performance measures like rates of thrombolysis/primary percutaneous interventions (PCI), window period, door to balloon time, and door to needle time. Other objectives include evaluation of changes in the major complications and mortality rates of AMI and its predictors during COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: This CSI-AMI study will provide scientific evidence about the impact of COVID-19 on AMI care in India. Based on this study, we may be able to suggest appropriate changes to the existing MI guidelines and to educate the public regarding emergency care for AMI during COVID-19 pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Cardiology , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , Pandemics , Patient Admission/trends , Societies, Medical , Adult , Comorbidity , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Incidence , India/epidemiology , Male , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL