When Epidemics Collide: Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) and the Opioid Crisis

COVID-19 could cause infection in persons with opioid use disorder, increase opioid overdose rates, reverse system-level gains in expanding access to medication for opioid use disorder, halt critical research, and prevent exacting legal reparations against opioid manufacturers. The authors call for urgent action to counteract these risks.

Diagnostic Testing for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Related Coronavirus 2: A Narrative Review

Diagnostic testing to identify persons infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is central to control the global pandemic of COVID-19 that began in late 2019. In a few countries, the use of diagnostic testing on a massive scale has been a cornerstone of successful containment strategies. In contrast, the United States, hampered by limited testing capacity, has prioritized testing for specific groups of persons. Real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction-based assays performed in a laboratory on respiratory specimens are the reference standard for COVID-19 diagnostics. However, point-of-care technologies and serologic immunoassays are rapidly emerging. Although excellent tools exist for the diagnosis of symptomatic patients in well-equipped laboratories, important gaps remain in screening asymptomatic persons in the incubation phase, as well as in the accurate determination of live viral shedding during convalescence to inform decisions to end isolation. Many affluent countries have encountered challenges in test delivery and specimen collection that have inhibited rapid increases in testing capacity. These challenges may be even greater in low-resource settings. Urgent clinical and public health needs currently drive an unprecedented global effort to increase testing capacity for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Here, the authors review the current array of tests for SARS-CoV-2, highlight gaps in current diagnostic capacity, and propose potential solutions.

Does N-Terminal Pro-B-Type Natriuretic Peptide Improve the Risk Stratification of Emergency Department Patients With Syncope?

BACKGROUND

Studies have reported that natriuretic peptides provide prognostic information for emergency department (ED) syncope.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether adding N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) to the Canadian Syncope Risk Score (CSRS) improves prediction of 30-day serious adverse events (SAEs).

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

6 EDs in 2 Canadian provinces.

PARTICIPANTS

1452 adult ED patients with syncope.

INTERVENTION

Serum NT-proBNP was measured locally at 1 site and batch processed at a central laboratory from other sites. The concentrations were not available to treating physicians or for adjudication of outcomes.

MEASUREMENTS

An adjudicated composite outcome of 30-day SAEs, including death and cardiac (arrhythmic and nonarrhythmic) and noncardiac events.

RESULTS

Of 1452 patients enrolled, 152 (10.5% [95% CI, 9.0% to 12.1%]) had 30-day SAEs, 57 (3.9%) of which were identified after the index ED disposition. Serum NT-proBNP concentrations were significantly higher among patients with SAEs than those without them (median, 626.5 ng/L vs. 81 ng/L; P < 0.001). Adding NT-proBNP values to the CSRS did not significantly improve prognostication (c-statistic, 0.89 and 0.90; P = 0.12 for difference), regardless of SAE subgroup or whether the SAE was identified after the index ED visit. The net reclassification index shows that NT-proBNP would have correctly reclassified 3% of patients with SAEs at the expense of incorrectly reclassifying 2% of patients without SAEs.

LIMITATIONS

Our study was powered to detect a 3% difference in the area under the curve. The heterogeneity of outcomes and robust baseline discrimination by the CSRS will make improvements challenging.

CONCLUSION

Although serum NT-proBNP concentrations were generally much higher among ED patients with syncope who had a 30-day SAE, this blood test added little new information to the CSRS. Routine use of NT-proBNP for ED syncope prognostication is not recommended.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Physicians' Services Incorporated Foundation, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, and The Ottawa Hospital Academic Medical Organization.