Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
1.
Clin Radiol ; 77(2): 148-155, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1611681

ABSTRACT

AIM: To determine if there is a difference in radiological, biochemical, or clinical severity between patients infected with Alpha-variant SARS-CoV-2 compared with those infected with pre-existing strains, and to determine if the computed tomography (CT) severity score (CTSS) for COVID-19 pneumonitis correlates with clinical severity and can prognosticate outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Blinded CTSS scoring was applied to 137 hospital patients who had undergone both CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA) and whole-genome sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 within 14 days of CTPA between 1/12/20-5/1/21. RESULTS: There was no evidence of a difference in imaging severity on CTPA, viral load, clinical parameters of severity, or outcomes between Alpha and preceding variants. CTSS on CTPA strongly correlates with clinical and biochemical severity at the time of CTPA, and with patient outcomes. Classifying CTSS into a binary value of "high" and "low", with a cut-off score of 14, patients with a high score have a significantly increased risk of deterioration, as defined by subsequent admission to critical care or death (multivariate hazard ratio [HR] 2.76, p<0.001), and hospital length of stay (17.4 versus 7.9 days, p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: There was no evidence of a difference in radiological severity of Alpha variant infection compared with pre-existing strains. High CTSS applied to CTPA is associated with increased risk of COVID-19 severity and poorer clinical outcomes and may be of use particularly in settings where CT is not performed for diagnosis of COVID-19 but rather is used following clinical deterioration.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/diagnostic imaging , Computed Tomography Angiography , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Severity of Illness Index , Whole Genome Sequencing , Aged , COVID-19/mortality , COVID-19/virology , Cohort Studies , Critical Care , Female , Humans , Length of Stay , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies , Time Factors , United Kingdom , Viral Load
2.
Br J Biomed Sci ; 78(4): 211-217, 2021 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1101764

ABSTRACT

Introduction: We aimed to determine the analytical capabilities of a commonly used faecal immunochemical test (FIT) to detect faecal haemoglobin (Hb) in symptomatic people attending primary care in the context of the English NICE DG30 guidance.Materials and Methods: Data obtained from independent verification studies and clinical testing of the HM-JACKarc FIT method in routine primary care practice were analysed to derive performance characteristics.Results: Detection capabilities for the FIT method were 0.5 µg/g (limit of blank), 1.3 µg/g (limit of detection) and 3.0 µg/g (limit of quantitation). Of 33 non-homogenized specimens, 31 (93.9%) analysed in triplicate were consistently categorized relative to 10 µg/g, compared to all 33 (100%) homogenized specimens. Imprecision was higher (median 27.8%, (range 20.5% to 48.6%)) in non-homogenized specimens than in homogenized specimens (10.2%, (7.0 to 13.5%)). Considerable variation was observed in sequential clinical specimens from individual patients but no positive or negative trend in specimen degradation was observed over time (p = 0.26).Discussion: The FIT immunoassay evaluated is capable of detecting faecal Hb at concentrations well below the DG30 threshold of 10 µg/g and is suitable for application in this context. The greatest practical challenge to FIT performance is reproducible sampling, the pre-analytical step associated with most variability. Further research should focus on reducing sampling variability, particularly as post-COVID-19 guidance recommends greater FIT utilization.


Subject(s)
Colorectal Neoplasms/diagnosis , Early Detection of Cancer/standards , Feces/chemistry , Hemoglobins/analysis , Immunohistochemistry/standards , Occult Blood , Primary Health Care , Biomarkers/analysis , COVID-19 , Colorectal Neoplasms/blood , England , Humans , Limit of Detection , Predictive Value of Tests , Reproducibility of Results
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL