The third coronavirus epidemic in the third millennium: what’s next?

Čivljak, Rok; Markotić, Alemka; Kuzman, Ilija

doi:10.3325/cmj.2020.61.1

Cited by 46 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…On 25 February 2020, the first confirmed COVID-19 case in the Republic of Croatia was reported in a male patient who had recently returned from Italy, which was at that time the major hotspot of the disease in Europe [4][5][6]. As a response, on 19 March the Croatian Government introduced restrictions that limited social gatherings, operation of shops/services, as well as the prohibition of sporting/cultural events and closing of the borders [7,8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence in industry workers in Split-Dalmatia and Šibenik-Knin County, Croatia

Jerković

Ljubić

Bašić

et al. 2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUNDAs a result of global spread, COVID-19 has also affected the Republic of Croatia in the last week of February. Although official data show that the number of newly infected is declining, it is still unknown what proportion of the population has been affected by the disease. AIMTo examine seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in industry workers population sample. METHODSFrom 23 to 28 April 2020, we conducted serological testing for antibodies (IgG and IgM) on 1494 factory employees living in the Split-Dalmatia and Šibenik-Knin County (Croatia). We analysed antibody seroprevalence on the level of the company, county, and separately for employees living at the factory premises with limited mobility during the lockdown measures. RESULTSIn a total sample of tested company employees, we detected antibodies in 1.27% of participants (95% CI 0.77-1.98%). In Split facility 13/1316 (0.99%, 95% CI 0.53-1.68%) of participants were tested positive, of which 13/1079 (1.20%, 95% CI 0.64-2.05%) of those living outside the facility and 0/237 (0%, 95% CI 0-1.26%) of those living inside the facility. In Knin facility, 6/178 (3.37%, 95% CI 1.25-7.19%) participants were tested positive for antibodies. The difference between Split (no mobility restrictions) and Knin, was not statistically significant (χ2 = 3.47, P = 0.062). CONCLUSIONSThe study showed relatively small SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence in the DIV Group population sample. When the study findings are interpreted on the county levels, they could indicate that most of the counties' population was not exposed to the virus.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence in industry workers in Split-Dalmatia and Šibenik-Knin County, Croatia

Jerković

Ljubić

Bašić

et al. 2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The first case of COVID-19 in Croatia was confirmed on 25 February 2020 [3][4][5]. Over the next 2 weeks, sporadic new cases were registered.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Antibody response and the clinical presentation of patients with COVID-19 in Croatia: the importance of a two-step testing approach

Rode

Kurolt

Puljiz

et al. 2020

Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to anti-SARS-CoV-2 seroresponse in patients with COVID-19 from Croatia, we emphasised the issue of different serological tests and need for combining diagnostic methods for COVID-19 diagnosis. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 IgA and IgG ELISA and IgM/IgG immunochromatographic assay (ICA) were used for testing 60 sera from 21 patients (6 with severe, 10 moderate, and 5 with mild disease). The main clinical, demographic, and haemato-biochemical data were analysed. The most common symptoms were cough (95.2%), fever (90.5%), and fatigue and shortness of breath (42.9%). Pulmonary opacities showed 76.2% of patients. Within the first 7 days of illness, seropositivity for ELISA IgA and IgG was 42.9% and 7.1%, and for ICA IgM and IgG 25% and 10.7%, respectively. From day 8 after onset, ELISA IgA and IgG seropositivity was 90.6% and 68.8%, and for ICA IgM and IgG 84.4% and 75%, respectively. In general, sensitivity for ELISA IgA and IgG was 68.3% and 40%, and for ICA IgM and IgG 56.7% and 45.0%, respectively. The anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody distributions by each method were statistically different (ICA IgM vs. IgG, p = 0.016; ELISA IgG vs. IgA, p < 0.001). Antibody response in COVID-19 varies and depends on the time the serum is taken, on the severity of disease, and on the type of test used. IgM and IgA antibodies as early-stage disease markers are comparable, although they cannot replace each other. Simultaneous IgM/IgG/IgA anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing followed by the confirmation of positive findings with another test in a two-tier testing is recommended. Keywords COVID-19 diagnostics. Clinical and laboratory findings. Anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody response. Serological methods. Two-step testing approach. Croatia

show abstract

“…The very next day (day 8) patient health conditions became much better. He was afebrile and all symptoms improved except mild cough side by side his viral load also lowered to Ct (real time PCR gene expression) 37-40 which was Ct 18-20 on day 4 of his hospitalization [5]. Another in vitro (Vero E6 cells) study suggested the combination of remdesivir and chloroquine could be a choice.…”

Section: Present Covid-19 Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%