Pausing transplants in the face of a global pandemic: Patient survival implications.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has disrupted normal operating procedures at transplant centers. With the possibility that COVID-19 infection carries an overall 4% mortality rate and potentially a 24% mortality rate among the immunocompromised transplant recipients, many transplant centers considered the possibility of slowing down and even potentially pausing all transplants. Many proposals regarding the need for pausing organ transplants exist; however, much remains unknown. Whereas the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the overall healthcare system is unknown, the potential impact of pausing organ transplants over a period can be estimated. This study presents a model for evaluating the impact of pausing liver transplants over a spectrum of model for end-stage liver disease-sodium (MELD-Na) scores. Our model accounts for two potential risks of a pause: (1) the waitlist mortality of all patients who do not receive liver transplants during the pause period, and (2) the impact of a longer waiting list due to the pause of liver transplants and the continuous accrual of new patients. Using over 12 years of liver transplant data from the United Network for Organ Sharing and a system of differential equations, we estimate the threshold probability above which a decision maker should pause liver transplants to reduce the loss of patient life months. We also compare different pause policies to illustrate the value of patient-specific and center-specific approaches. Finally, we analyze how capacity constraints affect the loss of patient life months and the length of the waiting list. The results of this study are useful to decision makers in deciding whether and how to pause organ transplants during a pandemic. The results are also useful to patients (and their care providers) who are waiting for organ transplants.

COVID-19-another influential event impacts on laboratory medicine management.

BACKGROUND: Before public health emergencies became a major challenge worldwide, the scope of laboratory management was only related to developing, maintaining, improving, and sustaining the quality of accurate laboratory results for improved clinical outcomes. Indeed, quality management is an especially important aspect and has achieved great milestones during the development of clinical laboratories. CURRENT STATUS: However, since the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to be a threat worldwide, previous management mode inside the separate laboratory could not cater to the demand of the COVID-19 public health emergency. Among emerging new issues, the prominent challenges during the period of COVID-19 pandemic are rapid-launched laboratory-developed tests (LDTs) for urgent clinical application, rapid expansion of testing capabilities, laboratory medicine resources, and personnel shortages. These related issues are now impacting on clinical laboratory and need to be effectively addressed. CONCLUSION: Different from traditional views of laboratory medicine management that focus on separate laboratories, present clinical laboratory management must be multidimensional mode which should consider consolidation of the efficient network of regional clinical laboratories and reasonable planning of laboratories resources from the view of overall strategy. Based on relevant research and our experience, in this review, we retrospect the history trajectory of laboratory medicine management, and also, we provide existing and other feasible recommended management strategies for laboratory medicine in future.

A novel screening strategy of anti-SARS-CoV-2 drugs via blocking interaction between Spike RBD and ACE2.

Corona virus disease 2019 has spread worldwide, and appropriate drug design and screening activities are required to overcome the associated pandemic. Using computational simulation, blockade mechanism of SARS-CoV-2 spike receptor binding domain (S RBD) and human angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (hACE2) was clarified based on interactions between RBD and hesperidin. Interactions between anti-SARS-CoV-2 drugs and therapy were investigated based on the binding energy and druggability of the compounds, and they exhibited negative correlations; the compounds were classified into eight common types of structures with highest activity. An anti-SARS-CoV-2 drug screening strategy based on blocking S RBD/hACE2 binding was established according to the first key change (interactions between hesperidin and S RBD/hACE2) vs the second key change (interactions between anti-SARS-CoV-2 drugs and RBD/hACE2) trends. Our findings provide valuable information on the mechanism of RBD/hACE2 binding and on the associated screening strategies for anti-SARS-CoV-2 drugs based on blocking mechanisms of pockets.

Effect of Convalescent Plasma Therapy on Viral Shedding and Survival in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019.

Currently, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has been reported in almost all countries globally. No effective therapy has been documented for COVID-19, and the role of convalescent plasma therapy is unknown. In the current study, 6 patients with COVID-19 and respiratory failure received convalescent plasma a median of 21.5 days after viral shedding was first detected, all tested negative for SARS-CoV-2 RNA within 3 days after infusion, and 5 eventually died. In conclusion, convalescent plasma treatment can end SARS-CoV-2 shedding but cannot reduce the mortality rate in critically ill patients with end-stage COVID-19, and treatment should be initiated earlier.

Clinical course and treatment efficacy of COVID-19 near Hubei Province, China: A multicentre, retrospective study.

Currently, COVID-19 has been reported in nearly all countries globally. To date, little is known about the viral shedding duration, clinical course and treatment efficacy of COVID-19 near Hubei Province, China. This multicentre, retrospective study was performed in 12 hospitals in Henan and Shaanxi Provinces from 20 January to 8 February 2020. Clinical outcomes were followed up until 26 March 2020. The viral shedding duration, full clinical course and treatment efficacy were analysed in different subgroups of patients. A total of 149 COVID-19 patients were enrolled. The median age was 42 years, and 61.1% (91) were males. Of them, 133 (89.3%) had fever, 131 of 144 (91%) had pneumonia, 27 (18.1%) required intensive care unit (ICU) management, 3 (2%) were pregnant, and 3 (2%) died. Two premature newborns were negative for SARS-CoV-2. In total, the median SARS-CoV-2 shedding period and clinical course were 12 (IQR: 9-17; mean: 13.4, 95% CI: 12.5, 14.2) and 20 (IQR: 16-24; mean: 21.2, 95% CI: 20.1, 22.3) days, respectively, and ICU patients had longer median viral shedding periods (21 [17-24] versus 11 [9-15]) and clinical courses (30 [22-33] vs. 19 [15.8-22]) than non-ICU patients (both p < .0001). SARS-CoV-2 clearances occurred at least 2 days before fatality in 3 non-survivors. Current treatment with any anti-viral agent or combination did not present the benefit of shortening viral shedding period and clinical course (all p > .05) in real-life settings. In conclusion, the viral shedding duration and clinical course in Henan and Shaanxi Provinces were shorter than those in Hubei Province, and current anti-viral therapies were ineffective for shortening viral shedding duration and clinical course in real-world settings. These findings expand our knowledge of the SARS-CoV-2 infection and may be helpful for management of the epidemic outbreak of COVID-19 worldwide. Further studies concerning effective anti-viral agents and vaccines are urgently needed.