ARS-CoV-2 is the causal agent for COVID-19, and the World Health Organization classifies this virus as an airborne pathogen transmitted by asymptomatic, pre-symptomatic and symptomatic individuals through close contact via exposure to infected droplets and aerosols 1,2 . Although SARS-CoV-2 transmission can occur by activities involving the oral cavity, such as speaking, breathing, coughing, sneezing and even singing [3][4][5] , most attention has focused on the nasal-lung axis of infection 6 . Oral manifestations, such as taste loss, dry mouth and oral lesions, are evident in about half of COVID-19 cases [7][8][9] , although it remains unknown whether SARS-CoV-2 can directly infect and replicate in oral tissues, such as the salivary glands (SGs) or mucosa. This is critical because, if these are sites of early infection, they could play an important role in transmitting the virus to the lungs or the gastrointestinal tract via saliva, as has been suggested for other microbial-associated diseases, such as pneumonia 10 and inflammatory bowel diseases 11,12 (Extended Data Fig. 1a).SARS-CoV-2 uses host entry factors, such as ACE2 and TMPRSS family members (TMPRSS2 and TMPRSS4) 13,14 , and understanding the cell types that harbor these receptors is important for determining infection susceptibilities throughout the body [15][16][17] . ACE2 and TMPRSS2 expression has been reported in oral tissues 18,19 ; however, there are no comprehensive descriptions of viral entry factor expression nor direct confirmation of SARS-CoV-2 infection in oral tissues. We hypothesized that SGs and barrier epithelia of the oral cavity and oropharynx can be infected by SARS-CoV-2 and contribute to the transmission of SARS-CoV-2. To test this, we generated two human oral single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) atlases to predict cell-specific susceptibilities to SARS-CoV-2 infection. We confirmed ACE2 and TMPRSS expression in SGs and oral mucosa epithelia. SARS-CoV-2 infection was confirmed using autopsy and outpatient samples. Saliva from asymptomatic individuals with COVID-19 demonstrated the potential for viral transmission. In a prospective clinical cohort, we found a positive correlation between salivary viral load and taste loss; we also demonstrated persistent salivary antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid and spike proteins. ResultsOral tissue atlases reveal resident immune cells and niche-specific epithelial diversity. The SGs and the barrier mucosa of the oral cavity and oropharynx are likely gateways for viral infection, replication SARS-CoV-2 infection of the oral cavity and saliva

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is known to cause multi-organ dysfunction 1 – 3 during acute infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), with some patients experiencing prolonged symptoms, termed post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 (refs. 4 , 5 ). However, the burden of infection outside the respiratory tract and time to viral clearance are not well characterized, particularly in the brain 3 , 6 – 14 . Here we carried out complete autopsies on 44 patients who died with COVID-19, with extensive sampling of the central nervous system in 11 of these patients, to map and quantify the distribution, replication and cell-type specificity of SARS-CoV-2 across the human body, including the brain, from acute infection to more than seven months following symptom onset. We show that SARS-CoV-2 is widely distributed, predominantly among patients who died with severe COVID-19, and that virus replication is present in multiple respiratory and non-respiratory tissues, including the brain, early in infection. Further, we detected persistent SARS-CoV-2 RNA in multiple anatomic sites, including throughout the brain, as late as 230 days following symptom onset in one case. Despite extensive distribution of SARS-CoV-2 RNA throughout the body, we observed little evidence of inflammation or direct viral cytopathology outside the respiratory tract. Our data indicate that in some patients SARS-CoV-2 can cause systemic infection and persist in the body for months.

Background: Prompt diagnosis and intervention for ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is critical but can lead to overdiagnosis and overtreatment. Objectives: We investigated healthcare provider (HCP) perceptions and challenges associated with VAP diagnosis, and we sought to identify opportunities for diagnostic stewardship. Methods: We conducted a qualitative study of 30 HCPs at a tertiary-care hospital. Participants included attending physicians, residents and fellows (trainees), advanced practice providers (APPs), and pharmacists. Interviews were composed of open-ended questions in 4 sections: (1) clinical suspicion and thresholds for respiratory culture ordering, (2) preferences for respiratory sample collection, (3) culture report interpretation, and (4) VAP diagnosis and treatment. Interviews transcripts were analyzed using Nvivo 12 software, and responses were organized into themes. Results: Overall, 10 attending physicians (75%) and 16 trainees (75%) trainees and APPs believed they were overdiagnosing VAP; this response was frequent among HCPs in practice 5–10 years (91%, n = 12). Increased identification of bacteria as a result of frequent respiratory culturing, misinterpretation of culture data, and fear of missing diagnosis were recognized as drivers of overdiagnosis and overtreatment. Although most HCPs rely on clinical and radiographic changes to initiate work-up, the fear of missing a diagnosis leads to sending cultures even in the absence of those changes. Conclusions: HCPs believe that VAP overdiagnosis and overtreatment are common due to fear of missing diagnosis, overculturing, and difficulty distinguishing colonization from infection. Although we identified opportunities for diagnostic stewardship, interventions influencing the ordering of cultures and starting antimicrobials will need to account for strongly held beliefs and ICU practices.

BACKGROUND: Our Cooling to Help Injured Lungs (CHILL) trial of therapeutic hypothermia in ARDS includes neuromuscular blockade (NMB) as an inclusion criterion to avoid shivering. NMB has been used to facilitate mechanical ventilation in ARDS and was shown to reduce mortality in the ACURASYS trial. To assess the feasibility of a multi-center CHILL trial, we conducted a survey of academic intensivists about their NMB use in patients with ARDS. METHODS: We distributed via email a 16-question survey about NMB use in patients with ARDS including frequency, indications, and dosing strategy. RESULTS: 212 (24.3%) of 871 respondents completed the survey: 94.7% were board-certified in internal medicine, 88% in pulmonary and critical care; 90.3% practiced in academic medical centers, with 87% working in medical ICUs; 96.6% of respondents who treat ARDS use NMB, and 39.7% use NMB in > 50% of these patients. Of 4 listed indications for initiating NMB in ARDS, allowing adherence with lung-protective ventilator strategies and patient-ventilator synchrony were cited as the most important reasons, followed by the results of the ACURASYS trial and facilitating prone positioning. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that NMB is frequently used by academic intensivists to facilitate mechanical ventilation in patients with moderate to severe ARDS.

No abstract