COVID-19 has now become a pandemic. It has spread from Wuhan, China, in December 2019 to a large number of countries within three months. The objective of this work is to report the initial experience with epidemiologic and clinical features, as well as with the management of COVID-19 patients in India. This is a descriptive case series of the first 21 COVID-19 infected patients confirmed with polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and admitted to a tertiary care centre in India from 01.02.2020 to 19.03.2020. Clinical, laboratory, and radiologic data were collected, including age, sex, nationality, travel history, symptoms, duration of stay, and comorbidities. The mean age of the population was 40.3 years with a male preponderance. Thirteen (62%) patients had recent travel history outside India in the previous 30 days, two thirds of whom had travelled to Italy. The most common symptoms were fever and cough (42.9%) followed by sore throat, headache and breathlessness. Vital and laboratory parameters were preserved in all patients and none of them required ventilatory support. Among the first 21 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 infection in India, the typical clinical presentation consisted in a mild upper respiratory tract infection predominantly affecting the young male population. One patient required supplemental oxygen. All patients recovered with no residual symptoms.   *The Safdarjung Hospital COVID 2019 working group: Nitesh Gupta, Sumita Agrawal, Pranav Ish, Suruchi Mishra, Rajni Gaind, Ganapathy Usha, Balvinder Singh, Manas Kamal Sen, Shibdas Chakrabarti (Consultant and Head, Pulmonary Medicine); NK Gupta (Professor, Pulmonary medicine); Dipak Bhattacharya (Consultant, Pulmonary medicine); Rohit Kumar (Assistant Professor, Pulmonary Medicine); Siddharth R. Yadav (Assistant Professor, Pulmonary Medicine); Rushika Saksena (Specialist, Microbiology); Rojaleen Das (Assistant Professor,Microbiology); Vikramjeet Dutta (Assistant Professor, Microbiology); Anupam Kr Anveshi (Senior Resident, Microbiology); Santvana Kohli (Assistant Professor, Anaesthesiology); Naveen KV (Assistant Professor,  Anaesthesiology); Amandeep Jaswal (Assistant Professor, Anaesthesiology).

Despite rapidly evolving knowledge about COVID 19 infection, routes of perinatal COVID 19 transmission and viral load in mother neonate dyad remain uncertain. Data were analysed to describe the clinicodemographic profile and viral load in neonates born to COVID 19 positive mothers. Of 2947 deliveries, 69 mothers were COVID 19 positive (2.3%), with 1 abortion, 2 macerated stillbirths and 2 fresh stillbirths as pregnancy outcomes. Of 65 tested neonates, 10.7% (7) were confirmed COVID 19 positive by RTPCR (reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction). Viral load (cycle threshold, Ct of E, RDRp) in neonates was comparable with the Ct reported from adults; however, neonates had milder clinical manifestations. All 7 neonates who tested positive for COVID 19 were subsequently discharged. Six of the 7 neonates were asymptomatic and 1 neonate needed respiratory support (indication being prematurity) which resolved after 48 h. Maternal and neonatal comparison of Ct of E and RdRp gene was statistically non-significant (25.97 vs 19.68, p = 0.34 and 26.5 vs 25.0, p = 0.84). Viral loads of mothers with COVID 19 positive neonates compared with mothers with COVID 19 negative neonates for E and RdRp gene were also statistically non-significant (25 vs 27.19, p = 0.63 and 19.6 vs 27.6, p = 0.08). The majority (93%) of neonates tested later than 48 h (roomed in with mother and breastfed) tested negative. Conclusion: The study supports milder manifestation in COVID 19 positive neonates. Risk of transmission from COVID 19 positive mother to neonate by rooming-in and breastfeeding is low. In this study on a limited number of neonates, maternal viral load was not found to be associated with the positivity status or severity of the illness of neonate.

The Novel corona virus 2019 which started as an outbreak in China in December 2019 has rapidly spread all over the world, such that on 11th March 2020 WHO declared this disease as pandemic. The emergency that the world faces today demands that we develop urgent and effective measures to protect people at high risk of transmission. WHO has accelerated research in diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics for this novel coronavirus.

No abstract

We found sarcoidosis, IPF and NSIP to be the most common ILDs in northern India. ILDs are still frequently misdiagnosed as TB, and increased awareness, education and diagnostic facilities are required to diagnose ILDs at an early stage.

Due to the nature of their profession, health care personnel (HCP) have always been easy targets for transmission of communicable diseases like COVID-19. Shielding HCPs is of consequential significance in ensuring continued health care for the whole population in addition to reducing further spread. Close contact, repeated contact and prolonged contact are unavoidable in the intensive care (IC) environment. It is not uncommon for IC-HCPs to get carried away during an emergent situation, such as that posed by a suddenly deteriorating patient, and forgo the protective barriers that protect them from contracting a communicable infection. Some notable precautionary measures are mentioned below. This is by no means an exhaustive list.

Endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) is preferred for evaluating malignant lymph nodes and staging of lung cancer. Nevertheless, larger tissue samples are increasingly needed, particularly for molecular analysis. We describe the feasibility, technical details, and complications of EBUS-guided transbronchial cryo-node biopsy (TBCNB) in four patients with mediastinal adenopathy. The samples obtained by EBUS-TBCNB in all cases were adequate for histopathological examination (HPE) and immunohistochemistry (IHC) staining. In case 1, HPE showed non-caseating epithelioid granuloma with giant cells and fibrosis consistent with sarcoidosis. Case 2 was diagnosed with adenocarcinoma with positivity for ROS1(D4D6). Case 3 showed features of metastatic adenocarcinoma from the breast (positive for Her2, ER, and GATA3). Case 4 was diagnosed with tuberculosis (necrotizing granuloma in histopathology, stain with Ziehl-Neelsen that showed few rodshaped bacilli). Only one patient had minimal bleeding at the puncture site controlled with cold saline. There were no adverse events such as major bleeding, pneumomediastinum, or pneumothorax.

Background There is a paucity of data on risk factors for infection among healthcare workers (HCWs) from India. Our objective was to evaluate the risk factors and frequency of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection among HCWs. Methods We conducted this retrospective case–control study of 3100 HCWs between May and July 2020. HCWs positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection were the cases (n=506) and those negative for SARS-CoV-2 were the controls (n=253). Univariate analysis was followed by multivariate analysis of key demographic, clinical and infection control variables. Results SARS-CoV-2 infection was found in 16.32% of HCWs. Nearly 45% of infected HCWs were asymptomatic. The proportions of sanitation workers (24% vs 8%; p<0.0001) and technicians (10% vs 4%; p=0.0002) were higher and that of doctors was lower among cases as compared with controls (23% vs 43%; p<0.0001). On univariate analysis, the type of HCW, smoking, lack of training, inadequate personal protective equipment (PPE) use and taking no or fewer doses of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) were found to be significant. On multivariate analysis, the type of HCW (risk ratio [RR] 1.67 [95% confidence interval {CI} 1.34 to 2.08], p<0.0001), inappropriate PPE use (RR 0.63 [95% CI 0.44 to 0.89], p=0.01) and taking fewer doses of HCQ (RR 0.92 [95% CI 0.86 to 0.99], p=0.03) were significant. Conclusions The frequency of SARS-CoV-2 infection was 16% among HCWs. Being a sanitation worker, inappropriate PPE use and lack of HCQ prophylaxis predisposed HCWs to SARS-CoV-2 infection.