SARS-CoV-2 persisted in lung tissue despite disappearance in other clinical samples

Aged brain and neuroimmune responses to COVID-19: post-acute sequelae and modulatory effects of behavioral and nutritional interventions

Advanced age is one of the significant risk determinants for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related mortality and for long COVID complications. The contributing factors may include the age-related dynamical remodeling of the immune system, known as immunosenescence and chronic low-grade systemic inflammation. Both of these factors may induce an inflammatory milieu in the aged brain and drive the changes in the microenvironment of neurons and microglia, which are characterized by a general condition of chronic inflammation, so-called neuroinflammation. Emerging evidence reveals that the immune privilege in the aging brain may be compromised. Resident brain cells, such as astrocytes, neurons, oligodendrocytes and microglia, but also infiltrating immune cells, such as monocytes, T cells and macrophages participate in the complex intercellular networks and multiple reciprocal interactions. Especially changes in microglia playing a regulatory role in inflammation, contribute to disturbing of the brain homeostasis and to impairments of the neuroimmune responses. Neuroinflammation may trigger structural damage, diminish regeneration, induce neuronal cell death, modulate synaptic remodeling and in this manner negatively interfere with the brain functions.In this review article, we give insights into neuroimmune interactions in the aged brain and highlight the impact of COVID-19 on the functional systems already modulated by immunosenescence and neuroinflammation. We discuss the potential ways of these interactions with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and review proposed neuroimmune mechanisms and biological factors that may contribute to the development of persisting long COVID conditions. We summarize the potential mechanisms responsible for long COVID, including inflammation, autoimmunity, direct virus-mediated cytotoxicity, hypercoagulation, mitochondrial failure, dysbiosis, and the reactivation of other persisting viruses, such as the Cytomegalovirus (CMV). Finally, we discuss the effects of various interventional options that can decrease the propagation of biological, physiological, and psychosocial stressors that are responsible for neuroimmune activation and which may inhibit the triggering of unbalanced inflammatory responses. We highlight the modulatory effects of bioactive nutritional compounds along with the multimodal benefits of behavioral interventions and moderate exercise, which can be applied as postinfectious interventions in order to improve brain health.

The pathogenesis of neurologic symptoms of the postacute sequelae of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID) pandemic has resulted in significant mortality and morbidity globally. Patients who survive infection may develop continuing disease collectively known as the postacute sequelae of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection (PASC), which includes neurologic symptoms especially fatigue and cognitive impairment. The pathogenic mechanisms driving PASC are unknown although a postinfectious process, persistent infection, or lasting pathophysiological changes that occur during acute infection are all suspected to contribute.

RECENT FINDINGS

Here we review the current evidence underlying potential pathogenic mechanisms of the neurological complications of PASC with particular emphasis on the evidence for postinfectious immune processes and viral persistence.

SUMMARY

Immune dysregulation favoring persistent inflammation, including neuroinflammation and enhanced autoimmunity, are present in patients with COVID and likely contribute to the development of PASC. Limited evidence of viral persistence exists but may explain the ongoing inflammatory processes and affinity maturation observed in some patients recovering from COVID infections. No specific studies to date have tied persistent infection to PASC. CNS trauma, in particular hypoxic changes in the CNS, and psychiatric complications occur with greater frequency in patients with COVID and may contribute to the development of PASC. Future research is needed to fully understand the pathophysiological mechanisms driving PASC.

Post-acute physical therapy for a patient with critical illness associated with COVID-19: A case report

BACKGROUND

: The COVID-19 pandemic is expected to bring a surge of survivors in need of post-acute rehabilitation. Preliminary research and clinical guidelines suggest patients recovering from critical illness associated with COVID-19 will present compromised function similar to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and ICU-acquired weakness (ICUAW). However, information regarding physical therapy and progressions of physiological and functional outcomes is currently limited. This case report describes the course of recovery of a patient without significant preexisting medical conditions.

CASE DESCRIPTION

: The patient RW (male, age 56) tested positive for COVID-19, and was admitted to ICU for 29 days. After weaning off mechanical ventilation after 2 months of hospitalization, he was transferred to our post-acute rehabilitation facility to recover from the residual effects. Physical therapy evaluation showed that while the patient was cognitively alert, he exhibited impaired general strength and activity intolerance due to severe exertional dyspnea. The patient received physical therapy aimed at improving his functional capacity. During his 16-day stay, the patient was able to significantly improve his capacities (i.e. 600% increase in 30-second chair stand test, 69.5% improvement in walking distance in 6-minute walk test, and 132.4% longer time to exhaustion during level ground ambulation). Dyspnea remained the main factor that limited his activities.

DISCUSSION

: This case demonstrated that post-acute physical therapy appeared to be effective and safe in improving function after critical illness due to COVID-19 for this patient. Physical therapists are encouraged to closely monitor respiratory parameters such as heart rate, oxygen saturation, and levels of dyspnea during treatment for patient response and decisions regarding activity progression.

Tubeless video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery in mediastinal tumor resection

Background

It has been reported that tubeless video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (tubeless-VATS) is feasible and safe for thoracic diseases. Herein, we compared the early outcomes of mediastinal lesion resection between the tubeless and traditional VATS.

Methods

Clinical data of all patients who underwent thoracoscopic mediastinal tumor resection were retrospectively collected. The study involved two groups: tubeless and traditional VATS group. Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to eliminate the population bias. Intraoperative and postoperative variables were compared among matched cohorts.

Results

In total, 43 patients in the tubeless group and 231 patients in the traditional VATS group were included. After 1:1 PSM, baseline characteristics were comparable. Anesthesia time (177.63 vs. 202.53 min; P=0.004) was shorter in tubeless group, while operation time (90.95 vs. 101.47 min; P=0.109) was similar. Overall, the total postoperative morbidity rate was similar in the two groups (15% vs. 12.5%; P=0.556). Specially, 4/43 patients in tubeless VATS group need to be re-put chest tubes postoperatively. A significant lower similar level of visual analogue scale score was observed in tubeless VATS group (1.73±0.48 vs. 3.41±0.87, P<0.001) in postoperative day 1. Meanwhile, the number of patients using postoperative opioid analgesia was also lower in tubeless VATS group (22.88% vs. 48.38%, P=0.016). Furthermore, hospital duration after surgery (2.58 vs. 5.47 days; P=0.002) was shorter in tubeless group.

Conclusions

Compared with traditional VATS, tubeless VATS for mediastinal tumor may shorten the anesthesia time, decrease postoperative pain and fasten postoperative recovery in carefully selected patients.

Fighting the War Against COVID-19 via Cell-Based Regenerative Medicine: Lessons Learned from 1918 Spanish Flu and Other Previous Pandemics

The human population is in the midst of battling a rapidly-spreading virus- Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2, responsible for Coronavirus disease 2019 or COVID-19. Despite the resurgences in positive cases after reopening businesses in May, the country is seeing a shift in mindset surrounding the pandemic as people have been eagerly trickling out from federally-mandated quarantine into restaurants, bars, and gyms across America. History can teach us about the past, and today's pandemic is no exception. Without a vaccine available, three lessons from the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic may arm us in our fight against COVID-19. First, those who survived the first wave developed immunity to the second wave, highlighting the potential of passive immunity-based treatments like convalescent plasma and cell-based therapy. Second, the long-term consequences of COVID-19 are unknown. Slow-progressive cases of the Spanish flu have been linked to bacterial pneumonia and neurological disorders later in life, emphasizing the need to reduce COVID-19 transmission. Third, the Spanish flu killed approximately 17 to 50 million people, and the lack of human response, overcrowding, and poor hygiene were key in promoting the spread and high mortality. Human behavior is the most important strategy for preventing the virus spread and we must adhere to proper precautions. This review will cover our current understanding of the pathology and treatment for COVID-19 and highlight similarities between past pandemics. By revisiting history, we hope to emphasize the importance of human behavior and innovative therapies as we wait for the development of a vaccine. Graphical Abstract.

Prolonged shedding of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in patients with COVID-19

Following acute infection, individuals COVID-19 may still shed SARS-CoV-2 RNA. However, limited information is available regarding the active shedding period or whether infectious virus is also shed. Here, we monitored the clinical characteristics and virological features of 38 patients with COVID-19 (long-term carriers) who recovered from the acute disease, but still shed viral RNA for over 3 months. The median carrying history of the long-term carriers was 92 days after the first admission, and the longest carrying history was 118 days. Negative-positive viral RNA-shedding fluctuations were observed. Long-term carriers were mostly elderly people with a history of mild infection. Infectious SARS-CoV-2 was isolated from the sputum, where high level viral RNA was found. All nine full-length genomes of samples obtained in March–April 2020 matched early viral clades circulating in January–February 2020, suggesting that these patients persistently carried SARS-CoV-2 and were not re-infected. IgM and IgG antibodies and neutralizing-antibody profiles were similar between long-term carriers and recovered patients with similar disease courses. In summary, although patients with COVID-19 generated neutralizing antibodies, they may still shed infectious SARS-CoV-2 for over 3 months. These data imply that patients should be monitored after discharge to control future outbreaks.

Sensitivity of the Molecular Test in Saliva for Detection of COVID-19 in Pediatric Patients With Concurrent Conditions

Background: The reference standard for the molecular diagnostic testing for COVID-19 is the use of nasopharyngeal or combined nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal (NP/OP) swabs. Saliva has been proposed as a minimally invasive specimen whose collection reduces the risks for health care personnel. Objective: To assess the suitability of saliva for COVID-19 diagnosis as a replacement of the reference standard NP/OP swab in the setting of a tertiary care pediatric unit. Study design: A paired study based in the prospective cohort design in patients suspected of having COVID-19. Methods: RT-PCR was used to detect SARS-CoV-2 in paired samples of saliva and NP/OP swab collected from May through August 2020 from 156 pediatric participants, of whom 128 has at least one comorbidity and 91 showed clinical symptoms related to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Additionally, we studied a group of 326 members of the hospital staff, of whom 271 had symptoms related to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Results: In the group of pediatric participants the sensitivity of the diagnostic test in saliva was 82.3% (95% CI 56.6-96.2) and the specificity 95.6% (95% CI 90.8-98.4). The prevalence of COVID-19 was 10.9% (17/156). In 6 of the 23 participants who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 in at least one specimen type, the virus was detected in saliva but not in NP/OP swab, while in 3 participants the NP/OP swab was positive and saliva negative. In the group of adults, the sensitivity of the test in saliva was 77.8% (95% CI 67.2-86.3) and prevalence 24.8% (81/326). Discordant results between the two types of specimens showed a significant association with low viral load in the pharynx of adults but not of pediatric participants. Interpretation: In the context of a pediatric tertiary care hospital, the sensibility of the test in saliva is not high enough to replace the use of NP/OP swab for COVID-19 diagnosis. Neither NP/OP swab nor saliva could detect all the participants infected with SARS-CoV-2.

Testing COVID-19 tests faces methodological challenges

In battling the COVID-19 pandemic, testing is essential. The detection of viral RNA allows the identification of infected persons, whereas the detection of antibodies may reveal a response to a previous infection. Tests for coronavirus should be rigorously evaluated in terms of their analytical and clinical performance. This poses not only logistic challenges, but also methodological ones. Some of these are generic for the diagnostic accuracy paradigm, whereas others are more specific for tests for viruses. Problematic for evaluations of the clinical performance of tests for viral RNA is the absence of an independent reference standard. Many studies lack rigor in terms of the recruitment of study participants. Study reports are often insufficiently informative, which makes it difficult to assess the applicability of study findings. Attempts to summarize the performance of these tests in terms of a single estimate of the clinical sensitivity fail to do justice to the identifiable sources of the large heterogeneity in mechanisms for generating false negative results.