Objectives Information on the recently COVID‐19‐associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) entity is scarce. We describe eight CAPA patients, compare them to colonised ICU patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19), and review the published literature from Western countries. Methods Prospective study (March to May, 2020) that included all COVID‐19 patients admitted to a tertiary hospital. Modified AspICU and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer/Mycoses Study Group (EORTC/MSG) criteria were used. Results COVID‐19‐associated pulmonary aspergillosis was diagnosed in eight patients (3.3% of 239 ICU patients), mostly affected non‐immunocompromised patients (75%) with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) receiving corticosteroids. Diagnosis was established after a median of 15 days under mechanical ventilation. Bronchoalveolar lavage was performed in two patients with positive Aspergillus fumigatus cultures and galactomannan (GM) index. Serum GM was positive in 4/8 (50%). Thoracic CT scan findings fulfilled EORTC/MSG criteria in one case. Isavuconazole was used in 4/8 cases. CAPA‐related mortality was 100% (8/8). Compared with colonised patients, CAPA subjects were administered tocilizumab more often (100% vs. 40%, p = .04), underwent longer courses of antibacterial therapy (13 vs. 5 days, p = .008), and had a higher all‐cause mortality (100% vs. 40%, p = .04). We reviewed 96 similar cases from recent publications: 59 probable CAPA (also putative according modified AspICU), 56 putative cases and 13 colonisations according AspICU algorithm; according EORTC/MSG six proven and two probable. Overall, mortality in the reviewed series was 56.3%. Conclusions COVID‐19‐associated pulmonary aspergillosis must be considered a serious and potentially life‐threatening complication in patients with severe COVID‐19 receiving immunosuppressive treatment.

Background There is a paucity of knowledge on the long-term outcome in patients diagnosed with COVID-19. We describe a cohort of patients with a constellation of symptoms occurring four weeks after diagnosis causing different degrees of reduced functional capacity. Although different hypothesis have been proposed to explain this condition like persistent immune activation or immunological dysfunction, to date, no physiopathological mechanism has been identified. Consequently, there are no therapeutic options besides symptomatic treatment and rehabilitation. Methods We evaluated patients with symptoms that persisted for at least 4 weeks after COVID-19. Epidemiological and clinical data were collected. Blood tests, including inflammatory markers, were conducted, and imaging studies made if deemed necessary. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) in plasma, stool, and urine were performed. Patients were offered antiviral treatment (compassionate use). Results We evaluated 29 patients who reported fatigue, muscle pain, dyspnea, inappropriate tachycardia, and low-grade fever. Median number of days from COVID-19 to positive RT-PCR in extra-respiratory samples was 55 (39–67). Previous COVID-19 was mild in 55% of the cases. Thirteen patients (45%) had positive plasma RT-PCR results and 51% were positive in at least one RT-PCR sample (plasma, urine, or stool). Functional status was severely reduced in 48% of the subjects. Eighteen patients (62%) received antiviral treatment. Improvement was seen in most patients (p = 0.000) and patients in the treatment group achieved better outcomes with significant differences (p = 0.01). Conclusions In a cohort of COVID-19 patients with persistent symptoms, 45% of them have detectable plasma SARS-CoV-2 RNA. Our results indicate possible systemic viral persistence in these patients, who may benefit of antiviral treatment strategies.

Incidence, risk factors and clinical significance of late recurrent (LR) candidaemia (>1 month between episodes) remains unclear. The 1219 episodes of candidaemia detected from January 1985 to December 2014 were reviewed. We selected all cases with more than one episode separated by at least 30 days after clinical resolution in the interim (cases) and compared each of them with two controls (patients with single episodes of candidaemia). Clinical strains were genotyped to differentiate relapses from re-infection. Eighteen patients (1.48%) had 36 episodes of LR candidaemia (median 4 months). Independent risk factors for recurrence in the multivariate analysis were: underlying gastrointestinal disease (OR 67.16; 95% CI 5.23-861.71; p 0.001) and fungaemia due to Candida parapsilosis (OR 9.10; 95% 1.33-62.00; p 0.02). All episodes of LR candidaemia diagnosed during the first 3 months were due to an intravascular source of infection, whereas in those occurring after 3 months the main source of the disease was the abdomen, followed by endocarditis, and urinary tract. Molecular typing showed that 42.9% of LR candidaemias were relapses and 57.1% were re-infections. Neither time of recurrence nor clinical origin could predict type of recurrence. LR candidaemia is a relatively rare event that is more frequent in patients who have an initial episode of candidaemia due to C. parapsilosis or an underlying gastrointestinal disease. Episodes of LR candidaemia that occur within the first 3 months should prompt an attempt to exclude an intravascular source of infection, whereas those occurring later point to an intra-abdominal origin.

We assessed the performance of Abbott's SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay and the PanbioTM COVID-19 IgG/IgM rapid test device for the diagnosis of either active or cured COVID-19. Three cohorts of patients were chosen. Cohort 1, patients (n = 65) who attended the emergency department on March 30, 2020 with clinical suspicion of active COVID-19 (n = 56 with proven/probable COVID-19). Cohort 2, hospital workers (n = 92) who had either been (n = 40) or not (n = 52) diagnosed with proven/probable COVID-19 and were asymptomatic at the time of the sampling. Cohort 3, patients (n = 38) cared at the hospital before the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. Detection of serum antibodies was done using Abbott´s SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay and the PanbioTM COVID-19 IgG/IgM device. Both methods showed 98% agreement for IgG detection. No antibodies were detected in the 38 samples from hospitalized pre-COVID subjects. The diagnostic performance of IgGs detected by Abbott´s SARS-CoV-2 assay in Cohorts 1/2 was: sensitivity (60.7%/75%) and specificity (100%/84.6%). The diagnostic performance of IgM by PanbioTM COVID-19 in Cohorts 1/2 was: sensitivity (16%/17.5%) and specificity (100%/98.1%). We show that IgG detection alone is insufficient for the diagnosis of active or cured COVID-19. IgM detection has a limited diagnostic value.