Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 12 de 12
Filter
1.
Viruses ; 15(3)2023 03 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2273584

ABSTRACT

Clinical features of COVID-19 are diverse, and a useful tool for predicting clinical outcomes based on clinical characteristics of COVID-19 is needed. This study examined the laboratory values and trends that influence mortality in hospitalised COVID-19 patients. Data on hospitalised patients enrolled in a registry study in Japan (COVID-19 Registry Japan) were obtained. Patients with records on basic information, outcomes, and laboratory data on the day of admission (day 1) and day 8 were included. In-hospital mortality was set as the outcome, and associated factors were identified by multivariate analysis using the stepwise method. A total of 8860 hospitalised patients were included. The group with lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels >222 IU/L on day 8 had a higher mortality rate compared to the group with LDH levels ≤222 IU/L. Similar results were observed in subgroups formed by age, body mass index (BMI), underlying disease, and mutation type, except for those aged <50 years. When age, sex, BMI, underlying disease, and laboratory values on days 1 and 8 were tested for factors strongly associated with in-hospital mortality, LDH on day 8 was most strongly associated with mortality. LDH level on day 8 was the strongest predictor of in-hospital mortality in hospitalised COVID-19 patients, indicating its potential usefulness in post-treatment decision-making in severe COVID-19 cases.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/diagnosis , SARS-CoV-2 , Japan/epidemiology , Prognosis , Lactate Dehydrogenases , Retrospective Studies
2.
J Clin Virol Plus ; 2(4): 100109, 2022 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2273286

ABSTRACT

The Omicron emerged in November 2021 and became the predominant SARS-CoV-2 variant globally. It spreads more rapidly than ancestral lineages and its rapid detection is critical for the prevention of disease outbreaks. Antigen tests such as immunochromatographic assay (ICA) and chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay (CLEIA) yield results more quickly than standard polymerase chain reaction (PCR). However, their utility for the detection of the Omicron variant remains unclear. We herein evaluated the performance of ICA and CLEIA in saliva from 51 patients with Omicron and 60 PCR negative individuals. The sensitivity and specificity of CLEIA were 98.0% (95%CI: 89.6-100.0%) and 100.0% (95%CI: 94.0-100.0%), respectively, with fine correlation with cycle threshold (Ct) values. The sensitivity and specificity of ICA were 58.8% (95%CI: 44.2-72.4%) and 100.0% (95%CI: 94.0-100.0%), respectively. The sensitivity of ICA was 100.0% (95%CI: 80.5-100.0%) when PCR Ct was less than 25. The Omicron can be efficiently detected in saliva by CLEIA. ICA also detects high viral load Omicron using saliva.

3.
J Biol Rhythms ; 37(6): 700-706, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2053636

ABSTRACT

The immune system exhibits circadian rhythms, and its response to viral infection is influenced by the circadian clock system. Previous studies have reported associations between the time of day of vaccination against COVID-19 and production of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody titer. We examined the effect of vaccination time of day on anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody titer after the first dose of vaccination with the mRNA-1273 (Moderna) COVID-19 vaccine in an adult population. A total of 332 Japanese adults participated in the present study. All participants were not infected with SARS-CoV-2 and had already received the first dose of mRNA-1273 2 to 4 weeks prior to participating in the study. The participants were asked to provide basic demographic characteristics (age, sex, medical history, allergy, medication, and mean sleep duration), the number of days after the first dose of vaccination, and the time of day of vaccination. Blood was collected from the participants, and SARS-CoV-2 antibody titers were measured. Ordinary least square regression was used for assessing the relationship between basic demographic characteristics, number of days after vaccination, time of day of vaccination, and the log10-transformed normalized antibody titer. The least square mean of antibody titers was not associated with the vaccination time and sleep durations. The least square means of antibody titers was associated with age; the antibody titers decreased in people aged 50 to 59 years and 60 to 64 years. The present findings demonstrate that the vaccination time with mRNA-1273 was not associated with the SARS-CoV-2 antibody titer in an adult population, suggesting that these results do not support restricting vaccination to a particular time of day. The present findings may be useful in optimizing SARS-CoV-2 vaccination strategies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Adult , Humans , RNA, Messenger , COVID-19/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Circadian Rhythm , Vaccination , 2019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273
4.
J Anesth ; 36(6): 707-714, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2035074

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Studies in adults have reported that video laryngoscope is more useful than direct laryngoscope when training less experienced anesthesiologists. However, whether this is true for infants remains unclear. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate whether the use of video laryngoscope would result in smaller differences in success rate according to anesthesiologists' expertise than those in direct laryngoscope. METHODS: Medical records and video recordings from the operating room of patients aged < 1 year who underwent non-cardiac surgery between March 2019 and September 2021 were reviewed. Tracheal intubations between April 8, 2020, and June 20, 2021, were excluded due to the shortage of video laryngoscope blades during the COVID-19 pandemic. Rates of first-time tracheal intubation success were compared by years of anesthesia experience and initial intubation device. RESULTS: In total, 125 of 175 tracheal intubations were analyzed (direct laryngoscope group, n = 72; video laryngoscope group, n = 53). The first-time tracheal intubation success rate increased with years of experience as an anesthesiologist in the direct laryngoscope group (odds ratio OR 1.70, 95% confidence interval CI 1.15, 2.49; P = 0.0070), but not the video laryngoscope group (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.74, 1.35; P = 0.99). CONCLUSION: The differences in success rate according to the anesthesiologists' years of experience were non-significant when using video laryngoscope in infants, compared to those in direct laryngoscope.


Subject(s)
Anesthesia , COVID-19 , Laryngoscopes , Adult , Infant , Humans , Pandemics , Laryngoscopy , Intubation, Intratracheal , Video Recording
5.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(11): e3986-e3987, 2021 12 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1612452
6.
J Infect Chemother ; 28(4): 539-542, 2022 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1587256

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The effectiveness of several vaccines against coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has been reported in the real-world setting. However, it is still unknown how long antibodies persist following vaccination and whether or not the persistence of antibodies has a protective effect against COVID-19. METHODS: Healthcare workers who had received two doses of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine were enrolled, and a single-center study was conducted at the National Hospital Organization Hakodate National Hospital. Serum samples from all participants were collected 13-21 weeks (median: 20 weeks) after the second dose of vaccination. The antibody titers were measured using an electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (Elecsys® Anti-SARS-CoV-2 S). Data on characteristics of the participants were gathered from patient records and interview sheets. RESULTS: A total of 401 participants, among whom 70.1% were women and the median age was 42 years, were evaluated in this study. None of the participants had a definite COVID-19 history, and all participants who received complete vaccination showed positive antibody titers. The antibody titer was observed to be higher in participants with younger age (p < 0.001) and those who were females (p = 0.028). Despite the higher risk of infection than that of the general public, no vaccinated staff developed breakthrough infections. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the significant contribution of the BNT162b2 vaccine in the acquisition of anti-SARS-CoV-2S antibodies; therefore, the general population should benefit from these two vaccine doses, which are expected to be protective for at least five months.


Subject(s)
BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19 , Adult , Antibodies, Viral , Antibody Formation , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Female , Health Personnel , Hospitals, Community , Humans , Japan , RNA, Messenger , Vaccination
7.
Infect Dis Rep ; 13(3): 742-747, 2021 Aug 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1374333

ABSTRACT

The rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2 is critical for the prevention of disease outbreaks. Antigen tests such as immunochromatographic assay (ICA) and chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay (CLEIA) can yield results more quickly than PCR. We evaluated the performance of ICA and CLEIA using 34 frozen PCR-positive (17 saliva samples and 17 nasopharyngeal swabs [NPS]) and 309 PCR-negative samples. ICA detected SARS-CoV-2 in only 14 (41%) samples, with positivity rates of 24% in saliva and 59% in NPS. Notably, ICA detected SARS-CoV-2 in 5 of 6 samples collected within 4 days after symptom onset. CLEIA detected SARS-CoV-2 in 31 (91%) samples, with a positivity of 82% in saliva and 100% in NPS. These results suggest that the use of ICA should be limited to an earlier time after symptom onset and CLEIA is more sensitive and can be used in situations where quick results are required.

8.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(3): e559-e565, 2021 08 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1338669

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has rapidly evolved to become a global pandemic, largely owing to the transmission of its causative virus through asymptomatic carriers. Detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in asymptomatic people is an urgent priority for the prevention and containment of disease outbreaks in communities. However, few data are available in asymptomatic persons regarding the accuracy of polymerase chain reaction testing. In addition, although self-collected saliva samples have significant logistical advantages in mass screening, their utility as an alternative specimen in asymptomatic persons is yet to be determined. METHODS: We conducted a mass screening study to compare the utility of nucleic acid amplification, such as reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction testing, using nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) and saliva samples from each individual in 2 cohorts of asymptomatic persons: the contact-tracing cohort and the airport quarantine cohort. RESULTS: In this mass screening study including 1924 individuals, the sensitivities of nucleic acid amplification testing with NPS and saliva specimens were 86% (90% credible interval, 77%-93%) and 92% (83%-97%), respectively, with specificities >99.9%. The true concordance probability between the NPS and saliva tests was estimated at 0.998 (90% credible interval, .996-.999) given the recent airport prevalence of 0.3%. In individuals testing positive, viral load was highly correlated between NPS and saliva specimens. CONCLUSION: Both NPS and saliva specimens had high sensitivity and specificity. Self-collected saliva specimens are valuable for detecting SARS-CoV-2 in mass screening of asymptomatic persons.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Humans , Mass Screening , Saliva , Specimen Handling
9.
Travel Med Infect Dis ; 43: 102127, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1281580

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Airport quarantine is required to reduce the risk of entry of travelers infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). However, it is challenging for both high accuracy and rapid turn-around time to coexist in testing; polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is time-consuming with high accuracy, while antigen testing is rapid with less accuracy. However, there are few data on the concordance between PCR and antigen testing. METHODS: Arrivals at three international airports in Japan between July 29 and September 30, 2020 were tested for SARS-CoV-2 using self-collected saliva by a screening strategy with initial chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay (CLEIA) followed by confirmatory nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT) only for intermediate range antigen concentrations. RESULTS: Among the 95,457 persons entering Japan during the period, 88,924 (93.2%) were tested by CLEIA, and 0.29% (254/88,924) were found to be SARS-CoV-2 antigen positive (≥4.0 pg/mL). NAAT was required for confirmatory testing in 0.58% (513/88,924) with intermediate antigen concentrations (0.67-4.0 pg/mL) whereby the virus was detected in 6.6% (34/513). This two-step strategy reduced the utilization of NAAT to one out of every 173 test subjects. The estimated performance of this strategy did not show significant increase in false negatives as compared to performing NAAT in all subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Point of care testing by quantitative CLEIA using self-collected saliva is less labor-intensive and yields results rapidly, thus suitable as an initial screening test. Reserving NAAT for CLEIA indeterminate cases may prevent compromising accuracy while significantly improving the logistics of administering mass-screening at large venues.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Airports , Humans , Quarantine , Saliva
10.
Lancet Microbe ; 2(8): e397-e404, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1233658

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Quantitative RT-PCR (RT-qPCR) of nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) samples for SARS-CoV-2 detection requires medical personnel and is time consuming, and thus is poorly suited to mass screening. In June, 2020, a chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay (CLEIA; Lumipulse G SARS-CoV-2 Ag kit, Fujirebio, Tokyo, Japan) was developed that can detect SARS-CoV-2 nucleoproteins in NPS or saliva samples within 35 min. In this study, we assessed the utility of CLEIA in mass SARS-CoV-2 screening. METHODS: We did a diagnostic accuracy study to develop a mass-screening strategy for salivary detection of SARS-CoV-2 by CLEIA, enrolling hospitalised patients with clinically confirmed COVID-19, close contacts identified at community health centres, and asymptomatic international arrivals at two airports, all based in Japan. All test participants were enrolled consecutively. We assessed the diagnostic accuracy of CLEIA compared with RT-qPCR, estimated according to concordance (Kendall's coefficient of concordance, W), and sensitivity (probability of CLEIA positivity given RT-qPCR positivity) and specificity (probability of CLEIA negativity given RT-qPCR negativity) for different antigen concentration cutoffs (0·19 pg/mL, 0·67 pg/mL, and 4·00 pg/mL; with samples considered positive if the antigen concentration was equal to or more than the cutoff and negative if it was less than the cutoff). We also assessed a two-step testing strategy post hoc with CLEIA as an initial test, using separate antigen cutoff values for test negativity and positivity from the predefined cutoff values. The proportion of intermediate results requiring secondary RT-qPCR was then quantified assuming prevalence values of RT-qPCR positivity in the overall tested population of 10%, 30%, and 50%. FINDINGS: Self-collected saliva was obtained from 2056 participants between June 12 and Aug 6, 2020. Results of CLEIA and RT-qPCR were concordant in 2020 (98·2%) samples (Kendall's W=0·99). Test sensitivity was 85·4% (76 of 89 positive samples; 90% credible interval [CrI] 78·0-90·3) at the cutoff of 0·19 pg/mL; 76·4% (68 of 89; 68·2-82·8) at the cutoff of 0·67 pg/mL; and 52·8% (47 of 89; 44·1-61·3) at the cutoff of 4·0 pg/mL. Test specificity was 91·3% (1796 of 1967 negative samples; 90% CrI 90·2-92·3) at the cutoff of 0·19 pg/mL, 99·2% (1952 of 1967; 98·8-99·5) at the cutoff of 0·67 pg/mL, and 100·0% (1967 of 1967; 99·8-100·0) at the cutoff of 4·00 pg/mL. Using a two-step testing strategy with a CLEIA negativity cutoff of 0·19 pg/mL (to maximise sensitivity) and a CLEIA positivity cutoff of 4·00 pg/mL (to maximise specificity), the proportions of indeterminate results (ie, samples requiring secondary RT-qPCR) would be approximately 11% assuming a prevalence of RT-qPCR positivity of 10%, 16% assuming a prevalence of RT-qPCR positivity of 30%, and 21% assuming a prevalence of RT-qPCR positivity of 50%. INTERPRETATION: CLEIA testing of self-collected saliva is simple and provides results quickly, and is thus suitable for mass testing. To improve accuracy, we propose a two-step screening strategy with an initial CLEIA test followed by confirmatory RT-qPCR for intermediate concentrations, varying positive and negative thresholds depending on local prevalence. Implementation of this strategy has expedited sample processing at Japanese airports since July, 2020, and might apply to other large-scale mass screening initiatives. FUNDING: Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, Japan.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/diagnosis , Humans , Mass Screening/methods , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Saliva , Sensitivity and Specificity
11.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 4500, 2021 02 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1101683

ABSTRACT

Emerging evidences have shown the utility of saliva for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 by PCR as alternative to nasopharyngeal swab (NPS). However, conflicting results have been reported regarding viral loads between NPS and saliva. We conducted a study to compare the viral loads between NPS and saliva in 42 COVID-19 patients. Viral loads were estimated by the cycle threshold (Ct) values. SARS-CoV-2 was detected in 34 (81%) using NPS with median Ct value of 27.4, and 38 (90%) using saliva with median Ct value of 28.9 (P = 0.79). Kendall's W was 0.82, showing a high degree of agreement, indicating equivalent viral loads in NPS and saliva. After symptom onset, the Ct values of both NPS and saliva continued to increase over time, with no substantial difference. Self-collected saliva has a detection sensitivity comparable to that of NPS and is a useful diagnostic tool with mitigating uncomfortable process and the risk of aerosol transmission to healthcare workers.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/virology , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Adult , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19 Testing/methods , Diagnostic Tests, Routine/methods , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Nasopharynx/virology , Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods , RNA, Viral/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Saliva/virology , Specimen Handling/methods , Viral Load/methods
12.
J Infect Chemother ; 27(2): 410-412, 2021 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-894033

ABSTRACT

Rapid and simple point-of-care detection of SARS-CoV-2 is an urgent need to prevent pandemic. Reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) can detect SARS-CoV-2 more rapidly than RT-PCR. Saliva is non-invasive specimen suitable for mass-screening, but data comparing utility of nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) and saliva in RT-LAMP test are lacking and it remains unclear whether SARS-CoV-2 could be detected by direct processing of samples without the need for prior RNA extraction saliva. In this study, we compared utility of saliva and NPS samples for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 by a novel RT-fluorescence LAMP (RT-fLAMP). The sensitivity and specificity of the RT-fLAMP with RNA extraction were 97% and 100%, respectively, with equivalent utility of NPS and saliva. However, sensitivity was decreased to 71% and 47% in NPS and saliva samples without RNA extraction, respectively, suggesting that RNA extraction process may be critical for the virus detection by RT-fLAMP.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , Molecular Diagnostic Techniques/methods , Nucleic Acid Amplification Techniques/methods , RNA, Viral/isolation & purification , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Fluorescence , Humans , Mass Screening/methods , Nasopharynx/virology , Point-of-Care Systems , RNA, Viral/analysis , Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods , Saliva/virology , Sensitivity and Specificity
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL