SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy and the risk of adverse maternal outcomes in the Republic of Georgia: a national birth registry-based cohort study (preprint)

Importance Georgia experienced an increase in maternal mortality (MM) during the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, which warrants further investigation.Objective This study aimed to assess associations between SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy and MM, post-delivery intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and caesarean section (CS) delivery.Methods We performed a national birth registry-based cohort study including pregnant women who delivered between February 28, 2020 and August 31, 2022. Data was linked with Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) testing, vital, and immunization registries. Pregnant women were classified into three groups: confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection from conception through 31 days before delivery, confirmed infection in the 30 days before or at delivery, and women negative for SARS-CoV-2 infection or without any test results (reference group). Multivariable logistic regression was used to calculate adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).Results Among 111,278 pregnant women, 16,661 had confirmed infection during pregnancy; 7,304 were fully vaccinated against COVID-19. Compared to the reference group, those with confirmed infection in the 30 days before or at delivery experienced increased odds of MM (aOR: 45.5, 95% CI, 23.1–89.3), post-delivery ICU admission (aOR: 5.62, 95% CI, 4.37–7.22), and CS delivery (aOR: 1.12, 95% CI, 1.03–1.21).Conclusions Hence, pregnant women in Georgia with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in the 30 days before or at delivery conferred an alarmingly higher risk of MM and post-delivery ICU admission. Additionally, results highlight that most women were not vaccinated against COVID-19. These findings should signal to stakeholders that adherence to public health preventive measures needs to be improved.

A global systematic analysis of the occurrence, severity, and recovery pattern of long COVID in 2020 and 2021 (preprint)

ImportanceWhile much of the attention on the COVID-19 pandemic was directed at the daily counts of cases and those with serious disease overwhelming health services, increasingly, reports have appeared of people who experience debilitating symptoms after the initial infection. This is popularly known as long COVID. ObjectiveTo estimate by country and territory of the number of patients affected by long COVID in 2020 and 2021, the severity of their symptoms and expected pattern of recovery DesignWe jointly analyzed ten ongoing cohort studies in ten countries for the occurrence of three major symptom clusters of long COVID among representative COVID cases. The defining symptoms of the three clusters (fatigue, cognitive problems, and shortness of breath) are explicitly mentioned in the WHO clinical case definition. For incidence of long COVID, we adopted the minimum duration after infection of three months from the WHO case definition. We pooled data from the contributing studies, two large medical record databases in the United States, and findings from 44 published studies using a Bayesian meta-regression tool. We separately estimated occurrence and pattern of recovery in patients with milder acute infections and those hospitalized. We estimated the incidence and prevalence of long COVID globally and by country in 2020 and 2021 as well as the severity-weighted prevalence using disability weights from the Global Burden of Disease study. ResultsAnalyses are based on detailed information for 1906 community infections and 10526 hospitalized patients from the ten collaborating cohorts, three of which included children. We added published data on 37262 community infections and 9540 hospitalized patients as well as ICD-coded medical record data concerning 1.3 million infections. Globally, in 2020 and 2021, 144.7 million (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 54.8-312.9) people suffered from any of the three symptom clusters of long COVID. This corresponds to 3.69% (1.38-7.96) of all infections. The fatigue, respiratory, and cognitive clusters occurred in 51.0% (16.9-92.4), 60.4% (18.9-89.1), and 35.4% (9.4-75.1) of long COVID cases, respectively. Those with milder acute COVID-19 cases had a quicker estimated recovery (median duration 3.99 months [IQR 3.84-4.20]) than those admitted for the acute infection (median duration 8.84 months [IQR 8.10-9.78]). At twelve months, 15.1% (10.3-21.1) continued to experience long COVID symptoms. Conclusions and relevanceThe occurrence of debilitating ongoing symptoms of COVID-19 is common. Knowing how many people are affected, and for how long, is important to plan for rehabilitative services and support to return to social activities, places of learning, and the workplace when symptoms start to wane. Key PointsO_ST_ABSQuestionC_ST_ABSWhat are the extent and nature of the most common long COVID symptoms by country in 2020 and 2021? FindingsGlobally, 144.7 million people experienced one or more of three symptom clusters (fatigue; cognitive problems; and ongoing respiratory problems) of long COVID three months after infection, in 2020 and 2021. Most cases arose from milder infections. At 12 months after infection, 15.1% of these cases had not yet recovered. MeaningThe substantial number of people with long COVID are in need of rehabilitative care and support to transition back into the workplace or education when symptoms start to wane.

10 minutes with Professor Amiran Gamkrelidze, Director General of the National Center for Disease Control and Public Health of Georgia

Introduction In this brief interview Professor Amiran Gamkrelidze, Director General of the National Center for Disease Control and Public Health, explains his leadership role in the pandemic response and shares what he has learnt so far. What are the key leadership messages you want to get out to the BMJ Leader readership? [...]far, Georgia has performed well in its response to the COVID-19 pandemic.1 The number of cases has remained relatively low and the health sector has managed to keep the outbreak under control. The NCDC strategic priorities are as follows: reduction of morbidity and mortality caused by communicable and non-communicable diseases;assessment and reduction of environmental hazards and behavioural risk factors and so improvement in population health;development of fundamental and applied biomedical and biotechnological scientific research;strengthening of preparedness capacities for a rapid and effective response to public health threats;development of electronic information systems;and the development of better public healthcare system management. [...]far, the people of Georgia have responded very well, but we also need to be prepared for a second wave if it occurs and to be ready to take further preventive measures.

Antibody profiling reveals gender differences in response to SARS-COVID-2 infection (preprint)

The recent emergence of the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has led to an ongoing global COVID-19 pandemic and public health crisis. Detailed study of human immune response to SARS-COVIS-2 infection is the important topic for a successful treatment of this disease. Our study was aimed to characterize immune response on the level of antibody profiling in convalescent plasma of patients in Georgia. Antibodies against the following SARS-COV-2 proteins were studied: nucleocapsid and various regions of Spike (S) protein: S1, S2 and Receptor binding domain (RBD). Convalescent plasma of patients 6-8 weeks after initial confirmation of SARS-COV-2 infection were tested. Nearly 80% out of 154 patients studied showed presence of antibodies against nucleocapsid protein. The antibody response to three fragments of S protein was significantly less and varied in the range of 20-30%. Significantly more females as compared to males were producing antibodies against S1 fragment, whereas the difference between genders by the antibodies against nucleocapsid protein and RBD was statistically significant only by one-tailed Fisher exact test. There were no differences between the males and females by antibodies against S2 fragment. Thus, immune response against some viral antigens are stronger in females and we suggest that it could be one of the factors of less female fatality after SARS-COVID-2 infection.

Epidemiology and transmission of COVID-19 in cases and close contacts in Georgia in the first four months of the epidemic (preprint)

Background Between February and June 2020, 917 COVID-19 cases and 14 COVID-19-related deaths were reported in Georgia. Early on, Georgia implemented non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPI) including extensive contact tracing and restrictions on movement. Aim To characterize the demographics of those tested and infected with COVID-19 in Georgia; to evaluate factors associated with transmission between cases and their contacts; and to determine how transmission varied due to NPI up to 24 June 2020. Methods We use data gathered by the Georgian National Center for Disease Control on all polymerase chain reaction tests conducted (among symptomatic patients, through routine testing and contact tracing); hospitalization data for confirmed cases, and contact tracing data. We calculated the number of contacts per index case, the secondary attack rate (% contacts infected), and effective R number (new cases per index case), and used logistic regression to estimate how age, gender, and contact type affected transmission. Results Most contacts and transmission events were between family members. Contacts <40 years were less likely to be infected, while infected individuals >50 were more likely to die than younger patients. Contact tracing identified 917 index cases with mean 3.1 contacts tested per case, primarily family members. The overall secondary attack rate was 28% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 26-29%) and effective R number was 0.87 (95%CI 0.81-0.93), peaking at 1.1 (95%CI 0.98-1.2) during the period with strongest restrictions. Conclusion Georgia effectively controlled the COVID-19 epidemic in its early stages, although evidence does not suggest transmission was reduced during the strict lockdown period.