Comparison of Diagnostic Accuracy of CRP Versus Ferritin in COVID Patients as a Marker of Severity of Disease Taking who Severity Classification as Gold Standard

Objective: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of elevated C reactive protein (CRP) and ferritin in predicting severe Covid-19 infection using the World Health Organization's (WHO) Covid-19 severity classification as gold standard. Study Design: Descriptive study. Place and Duration of Study: This study was conducted at the Pak Emirates Military Hospital, Rawalpindi, from January 1st 2021 till April 30th 2021. Ethical review committee's (ERC) approval was taken and good clinical practice guidelines were followed. Material(s) and Method(s): Baseline blood samples were sent to the hospital laboratory for the measurement of C reactive protein and ferritin levels. PCR was taken as gold standard for the diagnosis of Corona virus disease. Patients were classified into severe and non-severe categories using WHO classification of severity. Sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic accuracy, negative predictive value and positive predictive value were calculated for elevated CRP and ferritin. Result(s): There were 65 (57.5%) patients who had severe Covid-19 disease and 48 (42.5%) patients who had non-severe Covid-19 disease. Among the patients with severe Covid-19, 57 (87.7%) had elevated CRP levels, and 50 (76.9%) patients had elevated ferritin levels. Testing ferritin levels, against the severity of Covid-19 patients, there was a sensitivity of 76.9%, specificity of 79.2%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 83.3%, negative predictive value (NPV) of 71.7% and diagnostic accuracy of 77.8%. Testing CRP levels, there was a sensitivity of 87.7%, specificity of 85.4%, PPV of 89.1%, NPV of 83.6% and diagnostic accuracy of 86.7%. Conclusion(s): The results from our study show that CRP has a slightly improved diagnostic accuracy as compared to ferritin. However, both these markers have value in the prediction of severity of Covid-19 infection.Copyright © 2023 Lahore Medical And Dental College. All rights reserved.

Strategies to meet blood demand for transfusions during the COVID-19 pandemic: lessons learnt from a large central hospital in Malawi

Background: The coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic affected blood banks globally. We sought to examine how COVID-19 affected blood supply and transfusion in our institution. Method(s): The study was conducted at the Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital (QECH) and the Malawi Blood Transfusion Service (MBTS) in Malawi. Data from April to November 2020, collected during the pandemic, were compared with data from the same time period in 2019 pre-COVID-19. Additionally, in-depth interviews with key personnel were conducted at both institutions. Statistical analysis was performed using Stata 15 and qualitative data were analyzed using Nvivo software. Result(s): There was a significant reduction in blood supplied to the QECH from 7,303 [2019] to 6,028 units [2020] (P<0.04). The highest reduction in blood supply was to the Adult Emergency & Trauma department (29%) while the lowest was in Obstetrics & Gynecology, and Pediatric departments (17% reduction each). This is despite that the transfusion services continued to conduct blood drives during the pandemic, and the hospital laboratory prioritized blood issuing for emergency indications. Conclusion(s): Blood supply has significantly reduced during COVID-19 pandemic in our centers. Developing plans for overcoming similar shortages in future pandemics is critical.Copyright © Annals of Blood. All rights reserved.

Role of Liver And Kidneys In The COVID-19 Patients In A Tertiary Care Hospital

Corona virus pandemic started in 2019, is due to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-Co V-2), that belongs to the family of coronaviruses and primarily affects the respiratory system. This disease affected millions of people across the world since 2020. This has wide spectrum clinical infection leading to affect in liver and Kidney. So, this study was conducted to illustrate severity of affect of this virus to liver in kidneys in CO VID-19 patients. Blood samples was collected from COVID-19 patients after their consent and access for Liver and Kidney function test in hospital laboratory. The obtained data was statistically analysed with control subjects. Two sample unpaired t-test was done for comparing data with control values obtained. The study was conducted on 50 non co-morbidity COVID-19 patients arriving at tertiary care hospital, Bareilly. And it is compared with LFT & KFT values of 50 healthy subjects. It was obtained that ALT, AS T & BUN values are significantly (P<=0.05) higher in COVID-19 patients. Though the mean values were not high at critical level.By this study we conclude that patients of COVID-19 without co-morbidity don't have critical severity on liver and kidney damage. ALT, AST and BUN could be independent factors for predicting the severity of CO VID-19. Further studies need to be done on these factors.

Developing an assay to distinguish between HIT and VITT antibodies

Introduction Vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) is a rare, but severe side effect after Covid-19 and other vaccinations. First cases of VITT-mimicking antibodies in unvaccinated patients with recurrent thrombosis have been described. Differentiation between heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) and VITT is difficult in some patients. Widely used enzyme-linked immunoassays (EIA) cannot differentiate between the two, some of them even fail to detect VITT antibodies. So far, differentiation between HIT-like and VITT-like anti-PF4 antibodies can only be performed in specialized laboratories by functional tests using the heparin-induced platelet activation (HIPA) or PF4-induced platelet activation (PIPA) test. We have developed an assay, which can distinguish between HIT and VITT antibodies and can be used in any hospital laboratory. Method Confirming platelet-activation assays (HIPA and PIPA) were performed as described.[1] We defined 3 cohorts: 1) Negative controls (n = 112, including 35 healthy donors from before 2020, 46 clinical patients suspected for HIT but with negative EIA and HIPA and 31 non-thrombotic patients);2) classical HIT-patients with positive EIA and HIPA (n = 121);3) typical VITT patients (n = 63;presenting after vaccination with adenoviral vector-based Covid-19 vaccine and positive EIA and PIPA). Samples were analyzed by an automated coagulation analyzer ACL AcuStar (Werfen / IL Inc., Bedford, MA, USA) using HemosIL AcuStar HIT-IgG(PF4-H) and a prototype of VITT-IgG(PF4) assay according to the manufacturer's protocol. For both assays, raw data was analyzed as relative light units (RLU). Results All VITT samples were positive in the prototype VITT-assay (Fig. 1);only a few (n = 9;14.3 %) also showed weakly positive results in the HIT-assay. On the other hand, most of the HIT samples showed positive results in the HIT-assay (113;93.4 %), 34 of them (30.1 %) also reacted positive in the prototype VITT-assay (12 of them strongly;10.6 %), and three demonstrated an antibody pattern like autoimmune VITT. Negative control samples where all non-reactive in the HITassay and served to adjust the cutoff for the prototype VITT-assay. Conclusion The different reaction pattern of samples of HIT and VITT patients using HemosIL AcuStar HIT-IgG(PF4-H) and a VITT prototype assay was able to distinguish between the two antibody entities for the first time. The combination of assays can facilitate a rapid decision whether heparin may be used for treatment and also identify patients with autoimmune-VITT as a cause of recurrent thrombosis. (Table Presented).

PREVALENCE AND HOSPITAL OUTCOME OF BACTERIAL CO-INFECTION IN RESPIRATORY TRACT SPECIMEN AMONG COVID 19 PATIENTS WITH SARS-COV-2 PNEUMONIA

Introduction: COVID-19, a zoonotic disease caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, is a highly transmittable pathogenic viral infection, infecting millions of people globally. Guidelines recommendthe use of empiric antimicrobials based on clinical judgment, patient host factors and local epidemiology in patients suspected or confirmed severe COVID-19. However, current evidence does not support a high rate of bacterial respiratory co-infections in patients with SARSCOV- 2 infection. At present, there is no known study regarding the prevalence of bacterial co-infection in COVID-19 patients in the Philippines Methods: This research is a cross-sectional hospital-based study that utilized hospital electronic and printed medical records, chest radiograph and microbiologic results. All respiratory specimen bacteriologic results for the year 2020 and 2021 were collected from the hospital laboratory unit followed by review of the hospital electronic records, printed medical records and chest radiograph results. Data were analyzed using Two-tailed Z-test for significance test for proportions and Chi-square test. Results: Among 100 subjects, only 22% (n = 22) of the subjects were found to have bacterial isolates. the only demographic that is dependent with presence of bacterial infection is gender. The three most common bacterial isolate among COVID confirmed patients are Klebsiella pneumoniae (n = 9), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n = 5), and Acinetobacter baumannii (n = 3). Although the most common bacterial isolate is Klebsiella pneumoniae, the most common bacterial co-infection in patients who died are Acinetobacter baumannii (n = 2, 29%)and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n = 2, 29%). Conclusion: The prevalence of bacterial co-infection among COVID confirmed patients is relatively low, hence appropriate guidelines regarding antibiotic use should be formed taking into consideration local data on antimicrobial resistance.

Risk of Pediatric Inflammatory Multi-System Syndrome (Pims or Mis-C) in Pediatric Patients with Covid-19 Presenting with Gastrointestinal Symptoms

Introduction and objectives: SARS-CoV 2 infection has spread throughout the world and affects patients of all ages. Until recently it was thought that children had a short course of the disease without complications;however, a group of children with severe multisystem disease known as pediatric inflammatory multisystem syndrome (PIMS or MIS-C), characterized by fever and multiple organ dysfunction were found to be associated with infection SARS-CoV 2 and development of COVID-19. An increase in the association of gastrointestinal symptoms and the presence of PIMS has been observed. The objective of this study was to analyze whether pediatric patients with COVID-19, who debut with gastrointestinal symptoms, have a higher risk of developing PIMS. Material(s) and Method(s): An observational, analytical and retrolective study was carried out with a review of the records of patients diagnosed with COVID-19 from April 27th, 2020, to May 9th, 2021. All pediatric patients who had a positive test for SARS-CoV 2 (RT- PCR test for SARS-CoV 2, by QUANT STUDIO 5 applied biosystems by Thermo Fisher equipment) were included, those patients who did not have laboratory results for acute phase reactants during their hospitalization were excluded. PIMS/MIS-C was defined according to the CDC criteria, which include patients under 21 years of age with fever greater than 38.0, with involvement of two or more organs or systems, with elevated acute phase reactants (ESR / CRP / Ferritin);which were determined as high according to the values established by the local hospital laboratory;as well as not having another disease that explains the patient's symptoms. In order to identify every patient with/without PIMS/MIS-C a thorough search through patient's files was conducted. With the objective of determining if every patient fulfilled the criteria established for PIMS/MIS-C and determine the cause of admission, as well as the presence of other factors that could influence or discard the diagnosis of PIMS/MISC as according to CDC criteria, excluding those patients with initial suspicion of PIMS/MIS-C that had other diseases that explained the symptoms at admission or during hospital stay. Normally distributed variables are summarized as the mean and standard deviation, data from skewed distributions are shown as the median (range), and categorical variables are summarized as frequency and percentages. A (two-tailed) P value<0.05 was considered to be significant. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed for significant categorical variables. Given the retrospective nature of the study, informed consent was not required. Result(s): A total of 248 patients who met the selection criteria were included. Of Those 40% were female, with a mean age of 7 +/- 5.8 years. Although it wasn't possible to determine the strain of SARS-CoV 2 in our institution until after our study was finished (October 2021), based on epidemiological data we can assume our patients were infected with the Delta strain of the SARS-CoV 2 virus. Gastrointestinal symptoms were the initial presentation in 103 patients, with vomiting being the most frequent symptom, followed by abdominal pain and diarrhea. In total 52 patients developed PIMS, 30 of whom presented with gastrointestinal symptoms. The comparison of patient's characteristics, comorbidities and biometric laboratory results can be found in table 1. An OR of 2.35 (97% CI of 1.26-4.37) was found for the presentation of PIMS in patients positive for SARS-CoV 2 who present with gastrointestinal symptoms. Conclusion(s): There is an increased risk of developing pediatric multisystem inflammatory syndrome when there are gastrointestinal symptoms in pediatric patients with COVID-19. (Table Presented).

UPPER RESPIRATORY TRACT BACTERIAL INFECTION FOR POST COVID-19 PATIENTS

This study was conducted in the College of Medicine, Wasit University Cooperation with the Al Zahraa Teaching Hospital, Al Kut Hospital laboratory in Wasit, Al-Karama hospital and private clinics of internal from the period of November 2020 to April 2021. It has been carried out on 150 samples of nasal and throat swabs from post COVID-19 patients who suffered from nasal and throat infection from both sex (male &female). The infections were in age group between (4-88) years. The results of throat swabs showed that 84(56%) were infected with bacteria and 66(44%) non-infected and the results of nasal swabs showed that 67(44.66%) were infected with bacteria and 83(55.33%) non-infected. The results of culture appeared that from 150 throat swab sample found that 66(44%) samples were no growth and 84(56%) were infected with bacteria. The results were Pseudomonas aeruginosa 12/150(8%), E. coli 9/150(6%), Enterobacter spp. 2/150(1.33), Pseudomonas spp. 2/ 150(1.33%), Klebsiella spp. 2/150(1.33%), Staphylococcus spp. 4/150(2.66%), Staphylococcus aureus 4/150(2.66%), Streptococcus viridans 43/150(28.66%) and mix of Staphylococcus spp. and Streptococcus viridans 6/150(4%). Out of 150 nasal swab sample found that 83/150(55.33%) sample were no growth and 67/150(44.67%) were infected with bacteria. The result were Pseudomonas aeruginosa 7/150(4.66%), E.coli 3/150(2%), Enterobacter spp. 2/150(1.33), Pseudomonas spp. 5/ 150(3.33%), Klebsiella spp. 6/150(4%), Staphylococcus spp. 12/150(8%), Staphylococcus aureus 3/150(2%), Streptococcus viridans 24/150(16%) and mix of Staphylococcus spp. and Streptococcus viridans 3/150(5.33%) and mix of E. coli and Pseudomonas spp. 2/150(1.33%). Antimicrobial sensitivity for Pseudomonas aeruginosa showed sensitivity to Amikacin (100%), levofloxacin (90%), Meropenem (90%), Cefipime (70%), Imipenem (60%), Aztreonam (30%), Chloramphenicol (5%), and don’t show sensitive to Tetracycline, Pipracillin, Ampicillin, Trimethoprim-Sulphamethoxazole and Clarithromycin. To facilitate species identification, used molecular methods (PCR analysis) by 16s rRNA primers gene for more predominant bacteria isolates (Pseudomonas aeruginosa) isolates studied were detected by 16S rRNA gene and there virulence factors based on multiplex polymerase chain reaction technique amplifying five virulence factors primer for Pseudomonas aeruginosa (aprA, filC, toxA, pilA, pslA). In this study, we concluded that the production of virulence factors genes in Pseudomonas aeruginosa is important to human infection especially (ToxA) gene and the PCR technique was very specific and fast method in detection virulence factor genes in Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Clinical genomic population health testing for 431 genes implemented through family medicine practices: the Vermont experience

Integration of genomics into health practice depends on successful implementation in non-research settings. We describe a medical home-centered implementation at the intersection of genomic medicine and population health in the UVM Health Network. In this clinical implementation, the hospital laboratory orchestrates a collaboration involving primary care providers (PCPs), patient and family advisors, health system administrators, clinical genetics services, oncologists and cardiologists, Vermont’s accountable care organization, and a commercial CLIA genomic testing laboratory. Phenotypically unselected adult primary care patients are offered “The Genomic DNATest” at no cost as part of their regular care. Testing is introduced by primary care providers and their staff using a brief animated video and printed decision aids with graded detail. Question resolution and pre- and post-test genetic counseling is offered at no cost using telephone, video, or in-person visits, and is coordinated bya single phone and email contact point, the Genomic Medicine Resource Center. 431 genes are sequenced for germline health risk and recessive carrier variants;only pathogenic and likely-pathogenic variants are reported. New reports are issued when reported and unreported variants are later reclassified. Test reports are reviewed by a clinical geneticist and genetic counselor. Two brief "action plans" are developed with PCP and patient focus in a single messaging document. This is prepended to the lab reports before release to the PCP, who reviews and then conveys them to the patient. PCPs and their staff receive initial training on the test and process and are invited to participate in an online community with monthly video case discussions. Among the first 72 patients tested, 17% had a health risk identified. This included dominantly inherited disorders and bi-allelic or hemizygous variants for common recessive disorders. Care pathways created in advance using multi-disciplinary expertise were activated for those. Free testing for blood relatives was made available. 76% of tested patients had at least one heterozygous recessive disease variant identified, and low-cost partner testingwas made available. Frequency of positive test results was in line with population frequency predictions. Pre- and post-test genetic counseling uptakewas lower than expected. This raised the question of unmet informational needs. A 2-page anonymous process quality survey mailed twice to the first 61 tested patients had a 31% return rate. Key findings included (1) pre-test engagement methods and decision aids were helpful;(2) the testing decision was influenced equally by value for the individual’s health, for their family’s health, and for researchers;(3) emotions during the ∼4-week time to results were neutral or excited, with none experiencing anxious feelings, and none reported the wait time as too long;(4) 21% reported contacting the Genomic Medicine Resource Center;(5) 16% reported referral to a specialist due to their result;(6) about half reported sharing the results with family members, but none reported any family members getting tested;(7) none indicated they were dissatisfied with the testing and result process, and only one responded they would not recommend others get the test;and (8) all agreed or somewhat agreed that the PCPs officewas the right place to do this testing.While this implementation was designed with scalability and a low management profile in mind, several systems-level barriers were encountered that contributed to lower engagement efforts and slower expansion than planned. This included lack of institutional information technology resources to surmount paper-based systems for requisitions, sample-routing, and consent forms;dependency of the patient engagement process during PCP visits on rooming and nursing staff during times of staffing shortages;susceptibility to practice model disruptions and priorities caused by the Covid-19 pandemic;and PCP time distraction resulting from user interface and polic changes in our EHR during the pilot. These barriers are targets for study and continuous process improvement activities. In summary, an example of clinical genomic population health testing using a medical-home focus has been successfully implemented in a non-research setting, supported by multi-disciplinary collaboration. This implementation depends on minimal staff, avoids financial barriers to access and genetic counseling, and offers a short, defined, test turnaround time as compared to similar biobank-based research programs. Tested patients find the program satisfactory, and meaningful test results are at least as common as in existing population health risk screening archetypes.

Our experience of using HbA1c home-testing kits for paediatric type 1 diabetes patients to aid remote consultations during the COVID-19 pandemic

Introduction: The Reset, Restore & Recover initiative by the Royal College of Paediatricians (RCPCH), encouraged innovations which minimise exposure to and transmission of COVID-19. Objectives: We introduced a virtual surveillance initiative for Type 1 Diabetic (T1D) children in North West London. This consisted of integrating remote consultations with home HbA1c testing kits to optimise diabetic control. Methods: An initial telephone survey was conducted of 190 patients to ascertain preference for mode of remote testing.79/190 opted for drivethrough HbA1c testing and 106/190 for home testing kits. Home testing kits containing an instruction leaflet and sampling equipment were posted out to patients attending clinics virtually on 4 occasions over a period of 6months (December 2020-June 2021). The samples were sent to the hospital laboratory for testing via local GP practices with a result ready prior to the next Diabetes clinic appointment. During clinic appointments, parents were asked to provide qualitative feedback on the sampling process. Results: Out of 35 recruited patients,71.4% had a successfully reported HbA1c result in time for clinic appointment.28.6% of patients failed to receive a result in time for appointment. Within this cohort,30% of samples clotted,10% contained insufficient sample,10% were mis-labelled and 50% of samples were not received by the laboratory. Qualitative feedback highlighted challenges with the sampling process which prompted changes to the instruction leaflet and an alternate lancet device was provided in the packs. Conclusions: Our experience of using home testing kits was encouraging with a large proportion of patients successfully obtaining HbA1c results. This single method did not, however, work for all patients due to issues with obtaining enough blood and pain. For our large, diverse patient population, both home testing kits and drive-through point of care testing for HbA1c may need to be offered in order to continue with virtual consultations.

Troponin T in COVID-19 hospitalized patients: Kinetics matter

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to overwhelm healthcare systems worldwide, due to high numbers of critical cases over a short period of time (1,2). Elevated cardiac troponin (cTn), suggestive for myocardial damage, was associated with increased mortality of COVID-19 patients (3,4). However, data addressing the role of cTn in major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in COVID-19 patients is scarce. Objectives: We aimed to assess the role of baseline cTnT and cTnT kinetics in the prediction of MACE and in - hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients. Furthermore, we assessed the association between cTnT kinetics and the need of cardiac imaging evaluation. Methods: 310 patients were included prospectively (age 64.6±16.7 years, 180 (58.1%) males), between March 2020 and April 2020. Clinical data including demographics,medical history,comorbidities,clinical evaluation, laboratory exams,in-hospital treatment,complications and outcomes were collected at admission and during hospitalization by physicians in charge. Two hundred and two patients (65.1%) with at least two cTnT values assessed during hospitalization, at 24-48 hours interval were included in the final analysis. cTnT-values >0.011 micrograms/L were considered elevated, according to hospital laboratory cut-offs. Patients were divided into 3 groups according to cTnT kinetics profile: 1 - variable, 2 - descending and 3 - constant. cTnT slope was defined as the ratio of the cTnT change and the change in time. MACE were considered as the primary endpoint and were composed by all-cause mortality, acute heart failure, acute coronary syndrome, pericarditis, myocarditis, atrial fibrillation or flutter and pulmonary embolism. In-hospital mortality was considered as the secondary endpoint. Results: Mean hospitalization was 13.9±0.9 days. MACE occurred in 60 patients (29.7%) and in-hospital mortality in 40 (19.8%) patients. Baseline cTnT independently predicted MACE, (p=0.047, HR 1.805, 95% CI 1.009-3.231) and in-hospital mortality (p=0.009, HR 2.322, 95% CI 1.234- 4.369) (Figure 1A, 1B). An increased cTnT slope independently predicted in-hospital mortality (p=0.041, HR 1.006, 95% CI 1.000-1.011). Constant cTnT was associated with lower MACE and mortality rates (p=0,000, HR 3.080, 95% CI, 1.914-4.954, p=0.000, HR 2.851. 95% CI 1.828-4.447, respectively) (Figure 1C, 1D, 2). Cardiac imaging evaluation was performed in 8 (16%) patients with constant cTnT, 30 (60%) with variable cTnT, and 12 (24%) with descending cTnT.(p<0.001) Conclusions: Increased baseline cTnT independently predicted MACE and in-hospital mortality in COVID-19 patients. The magnitude of cTnT increase over time was associated with in-hospital mortality. On the contrary, patients with constant cTnT had lower MACE and in-hospital mortality rates. These finding emphasize the additional role of cTnT testing in COVID-19 patients for risk stratification and improved diagnostic pathway and management (Figure Presented).

Transfusion 2024: A 5-year plan for clinical and laboratory transfusion in England.

The Transfusion 2024 plan outlines key priorities for clinical and laboratory transfusion practice for safe patient care across the NHS for the next 5 years. It is based on the outcomes of a multi-professional symposium held in March 2019, organised by the National Blood Transfusion Committee (NBTC) and NHS Blood and Transplant (NHSBT), attended and supported by Professor Keith Willet and Dame Sue Hill on behalf of NHS England and Improvement. This best practice guidance contained within this publication will facilitate the necessary change in pathway design to meet the transfusion challenges and pressures for the restoration of a cohesive, and functional, healthcare system across the NHS following the COVID-19 pandemic.