Background: Early 2020, a COVID-19 epidemic became a public health emergency of international concern. To address this pandemic broad testing with an easy, comfortable and reliable testing method is of utmost concern. The nasopharyngeal (NP) swab sampling is the reference method though hampered by international supply shortages. A new oropharyngeal/nasal (OP/N) sampling method was investigated using the more readily available throat swab. Methods: In this prospective observational study 36 COVID-19 patients were tested with both a NP and combined OP/N swab for SARS-CoV-2 RNA by PCR. In hospitalized suspect patients, who tested negative on both swabs, extensive retesting was performed. The sensitivity of NP versus combined OP/N swab sampling on admission and the correlation between viral RNA loads recovered was investigated. Results: 35 patients were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 by means of either NP or OP/N sampling. The paired swabs were both positive in 31 patients. The one patient who tested negative on both NP and OP/N swab on admission, was ultimately diagnosed on bronchoalveolar lavage fluid. A strong correlation was found between the viral RNA loads of the paired swabs (r = 0.76; P < 0.05). The sensitivity of NP and OP/N analysis in hospitalized patients (n = 28) was 89.3% and 92.7% respectively. Conclusions: This study demonstrates equivalence of NP and OP/N sampling for detection of SARS-CoV-2 by means of rRT-PCR. Sensitivity of both NP and OP/N sampling is very high in hospitalized patients.
Introduction : We present the results of the COVID-19 rule-out protocol at Ghent University Hospital, a step-wise testing approach which included repeat NFS SARS-CoV-2 rRT-PCR, respiratory multiplex RT-PCR, low-dose chest CT and bronchoscopy with BAL to confirm or rule-out SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients admitted with symptoms suggestive of COVID-19. Results : Between 19 March 2020 and 30 April 2020, 455 non-critically ill patients with symptoms suspect for COVID-19 were admitted. The initial NFS for SARS-CoV-2 rRT-PCR yielded 66.9%, the second NFS 25.4% and bronchoscopy with BAL 5.9% of total COVID-19 diagnoses. In the BAL fluid, other respiratory pathogens were detected in 65% (13/20) of the COVID-19 negative patients and only in 1/7 COVID-19 positive patients. Retrospective antibody testing at the time around BAL sampling showed a positive IgA or IgG in 42.9 % of the COVID-19 positive and 10.5% of the COVID-19 negative group. Follow-up serology showed 100% COVID-19 positivity in the COVID-19 positive group and 100% IgG negativity in the COVID-19 negative group. Conclusion : In our experience, bronchoscopy with BAL can have an added value to rule-in or rule-out COVID-19 in patients with clinical and radiographical high-likelihood of COVID-19 and repeated negative NFS testing. Furthermore, culture and respiratory multiplex PCR on BAL fluid can aid to identify alternative microbial etiological agents in this group. Retrospective analysis of antibody development in this selected group of patients suggests that the implementation of serological assays in the routine testing protocol will decrease the need for invasive procedures like bronchoscopy.
Background Early 2020, a COVID-19 epidemic became a public health emergency of international concern. To address this pandemic broad testing with an easy, comfortable and reliable testing method is of utmost concern. Nasopharyngeal (NP) swab sampling is the reference method though hampered by international supply shortages. A new oropharyngeal/nasal (OP/N) sampling method was investigated using the more readily available throat swab. Results 35 patients were diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 by means of either NP or OP/N sampling. The paired swabs were both positive in 31 patients. The one patient who tested negative on both NP and OP/N swab on admission, was ultimately diagnosed on bronchoalveolar lavage fluid. A strong correlation was found between the viral RNA loads of the paired swabs (r = 0.76; P < 0.05). The sensitivity of NP and OP/N analysis in hospitalized patients (n = 28) was 89.3% and 92.7% respectively. Conclusions This study demonstrates equivalence of NP and OP/N sampling for detection of SARS-CoV-2 by means of rRT-PCR. Sensitivity of both NP and OP/N sampling is very high in hospitalized patients.
Objectives Disulfiram is an adjunct in the treatment of alcohol use disorders, but case reports indicate that disulfiram ethanol reactions are not always recognized in the emergency department. Our first aim is to remind of this risk with two case reports of life-threatening reactions not immediately considered by the emergency physician. The second aim is to estimate the probability that a disulfiram reaction goes unrecognized with the use of a retrospective study of patients admitted to the emergency department. Methods Clinical files of patients admitted between October 1, 2010 and September 30, 2014 to the emergency department were retrospectively screened for the key words “ethanol use” and “disulfiram”. Their diagnoses were then scored by a panel regarding the probability of an interaction. Results Seventy-nine patients were included, and a disulfiram-ethanol reaction was scored as either ‘highly likely’, ‘likely’ or ‘possible’ in 54.4% and as ‘doubtful’ or ‘certainly not present’ in 45.6% of the patients. The interrater agreement was 0.71 (95% CI: 0.64–0.79). The diagnosis was not considered or only after a delay in 44.2% of the patients with a ‘possible’ to ‘highly likely’ disulfiram interaction. One patient with a disulfiram overdose died and was considered as a ‘possible’ interaction. Discussion and conclusions A disulfiram ethanol interaction can be life threatening and failure to consider the diagnosis in the emergency department seems frequent. Prospective studies with documentation of the intake of disulfiram and evaluation of the value of acetaldehyde as a biomarker are needed to determine the precise incidence. Improving knowledge of disulfiram interactions and adequate history taking of disulfiram intake may improve the care for patients.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.