The development of neutralizing antibodies (nAb) against SARS-CoV-2, following infection or vaccination, is likely to be critical for the development of sufficient population immunity to drive cessation of the COVID19 pandemic. A large number of serologic tests, platforms and methodologies are being employed to determine seroprevalence in populations to select convalescent plasmas for therapeutic trials, and to guide policies about reopening. However, tests have substantial variability in sensitivity and specificity, and their ability to quantitatively predict levels of nAb is unknown. We collected 370 unique donors enrolled in the New York Blood Center Convalescent Plasma Program between April and May of 2020. We measured levels of antibodies in convalescent plasma using commercially available SARS-CoV-2 detection tests and in-house ELISA assays and correlated serological measurements with nAb activity measured using pseudotyped virus particles, which offer the most informative assessment of antiviral activity of patient sera against viral infection. Our data show that a large proportion of convalescent plasma samples have modest antibody levels and that commercially available tests have varying degrees of accuracy in predicting nAb activity. We found the Ortho Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Total Ig and IgG high throughput serological assays (HTSAs), as well as the Abbott SARS-CoV-2 IgG assay, quantify levels of antibodies that strongly correlate with nAb assays and are consistent with gold-standard ELISA assay results. These findings provide immediate clinical relevance to serology results that can be equated to nAb activity and could serve as a valuable ‘roadmap’ to guide the choice and interpretation of serological tests for SARS-CoV-2.

The aim of this meta-analysis is to examine the effects of dexmedetomidine on serum inflammatory markers when administered perioperatively. We searched multiple electronic databases for relevant research papers, and carried out meta-analyses of weighted mean differences and interpreted in the light of statistical heterogeneity (I2). Fifteen RCTs recruiting 641 patients were included. Dexmedetomidine treatment significantly decreased interleukin-6 (IL-6), IL-8 and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) levels with mean differences [95% CI] in the changes from baseline between dexmedetomidine treated and controls of −25.14 [−35.29, −15.00]; P < 0.00001 (for IL-6), −5.69 [−10.77, −0.60]; P < 0.04 (for IL-8), and −20.30 [−30.93, −9.67]; P < 0.0002 (for TNF-α) immediately after surgery; and −41.55 [−57.41, −25.70]; P < 0.00001 (IL-6), −6.46 [−10.83, −2.08]; P < 0.005 (IL-8), and −14.67 [−22.61, −6.73]; P < 0.0003 (TNF-α) on postoperative day 1 (random effects). IL-10 levels were found to increase significantly a day after surgery (8.33 [3.31, 13.36]; P = 0.001). Subgroup analyses did not reveal significant differences. In conclusion, perioperative adjunctive use of dexmedetomidine substantially decreases serum IL-6, IL-8 and TNF-α levels.

Background: The development of neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) against SARS-CoV-2, following infection or vaccination, is likely to be critical for the development of sufficient population immunity to drive cessation of the COVID19 pandemic. A large number of serologic tests, platforms and methodologies are being employed to determine seroprevalence in populations to select convalescent plasmas for therapeutic trials, and to guide policies about reopening. However, these tests have substantially variable sensitivity and specificity, and their ability to quantitatively predict levels of NAbs is unknown. Methods: We determined levels of antibodies in convalescent plasma using commercially available SARS-CoV-2 detection tests and in-house ELISA assays and correlated those measurements with neutralization activity measured using pseudotyped virus particles, which offer the most informative assessment of antiviral activity of patient sera against viral infection. Findings: Our data show that a large proportion of convalescent plasma samples have modest antibody levels and that commercially available tests have varying degrees of accuracy in predicting neutralizing activity. Nevertheless, we found particular commercially available tests are capable of accurately measuring levels of antibodies that strongly correlate with neutralization assays. Interpretation: Our findings imply that SARS-CoV-2 convalescent plasma donors have a wide range of antibody concentrations. At present it is unclear how antibody acquisition, particularly for low titer individuals, might afford future immunity to SARS-CoV-2. Further research will be required to determine the minimum threshold of antibody and neutralization activity necessary to accurately predict immunity. Correlation of clinical antibody tests with neutralization activity in this study could serve as a valuable roadmap to guide the choice and interpretation of serological tests for SARS-CoV-2.

BackgroundSince a previous meta-analysis reported that ultrasound guidance was associated with a higher first-attempt success rate in catheterization of the radial artery, a number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have reported inconsistent results. The aim of the present study is to conduct an updated meta-analysis to clarify the role of ultrasound guidance for radial artery catheterization.MethodsA systematic literature search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was conducted using specific search terms. Eligible studies were RCTs that compared ultrasound guidance with traditional palpation for radial artery catheterization. The Mantel-Haenszel method using the random effects model was adopted in this meta-analysis.ResultsSeven RCTs with 482 patients were included. Compared with traditional palpation, ultrasound guidance significantly increased the first-attempt success rate of radial artery catheterization (RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.07–2.14, P = 0.02). Subgroup analyses suggested that the superiority of ultrasound guidance for radial artery catheterization was significant when the technique was operated by experienced users, performed in small children and infants, and on elective procedures in the operating room. In addition, ultrasound guidance significantly reduced mean-attempts to success (WMD −1.13, 95% CI −1.58 to −0.69, P<0.00001), mean-time to success (WMD −74.77s, 95% CI −137.89s to −11.64s, P = 0.02), and the occurrence of hematoma (RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.07–0.41, P = 0.0001).ConclusionsThe present meta-analysis suggests a clear benefit from ultrasound guidance for radial artery catheterization compared with the traditional palpation. Preliminary training and familiarization with the ultrasound-guided technique is needed before applying it for radial artery catheterization, especially for inexperienced operators.

No abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of the combinational use of bupivacaine and fentanyl versus ropivacaine and fentanyl in epidural analgesia for labor.Multiple electronic databases were searched by using appropriate MeSH terms, and keywords for original research papers published before October 2014. Meta-analyses were based on mean differences between the groups as well as odds ratios. Statistical heterogeneity was tested by I2 index.Fifteen randomized controlled trials, recruiting 2097 parturient mothers overall, were selected for the meta-analyses. Concentrations of the preparations used (weight/volume; mean and standard deviations) were bupivacaine 0.1023% ± 0.0375%, ropivacaine 0.1095% ± 0.042%, and fentanyl 0.00021% ± 0.000089%. There were no statistically significant differences between both the combinations in the mean change in Visual Analog Score for pain during labor, incidence of instrumental or cesarean delivery, neonate Apgar score of <7, maternal satisfaction, duration of either first or second stage of labor, oxytocin use for induction, onset of analgesia, and duration of analgesia. Women who received ropivacaine and fentanyl had significantly lower incidence of motor blocks (odds ratio [95% CI] = 0.38 [0.30, 0.48] P < 0.00001, fixed effect and 0.38 [0.27, 0.54] P < 0.0001, random effects I2 30%) when compared with women who received bupivacaine and fentanyl. Incidence of side effects was similar for both the combinations.Analgesia with ropivacaine in combination with fentanyl at 0.1%:0.0002% ratio for labor pain relief is associated with lower incidence of motor blocks in comparison with analgesia with bupivacaine and fentanyl at similar ratio (0.1%: 0.0002%).

This study is to compare the effectiveness of combinational use of bupivacaine with fentanyl (BUPI-FEN) and sufentanil (BUPI-SUF) in epidural/intrathecal analgesia for labor. Electronic databases were searched for relevant research papers published between 1985 and 2014. Meta-analyses of mean differences or odds ratios were performed and statistical heterogeneity between the studies tested by I(2) index. Ten studies recruiting a total of 728 women in labor were selected. Concentrations of the anesthetics used as mean ± sd were bupivacaine 0.115 ± 0.056%, fentanyl 0.0007 ± 0.001%, and sufentanil 0.00017 ± 0.00022%. Duration of analgesia was not significantly different between BUPI-SUF and BUPI-FEN administered mothers (mean difference [95%CI] of -33.55 [-74.94, 7.83] minutes; P = .11) under random effects. The onset of analgesia was also not significantly different between both groups (mean difference [95%CI] of -0.61 [-1.38, 0.16] minutes; P = .12). The number of neonates with Apgar score < 7 was significantly lower in BUPI-FEN group (odd ratio [95%CI] of 0.31 [0.10, 0.95]; P < .05). Pruritus incidence was similar. In conclusion, BUPI-FEN combination exhibits significantly better tolerability at an approximate ratio of 6 FEN:1 SUF, albeit, both fentanyl and sufentanil in combination with bupivacaine provide similar analgesic properties via the epidural or intrathecal routes for labor pain relief.

No abstract