Institutes
Refine
Document Type
- Article (38)
Language
- English (38) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (38)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (38)
Keywords
- COVID-19 (38) (remove)
Institute
- Medizin (38)
Evaluation of stability and inactivation methods of SARS-CoV-2 in context of laboratory settings
(2021)
The novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 is the causative agent of the acute respiratory disease COVID-19, which has become a global concern due to its rapid spread. Laboratory work with SARS-CoV-2 in a laboratory setting was rated to biosafety level 3 (BSL-3) biocontainment level. However, certain research applications in particular in molecular biology require incomplete denaturation of the proteins, which might cause safety issues handling contaminated samples. In this study, we evaluated lysis buffers that are commonly used in molecular biological laboratories for their ability to inactivate SARS-CoV-2. In addition, viral stability in cell culture media at 4 °C and on display glass and plastic surfaces used in laboratory environment was analyzed. Furthermore, we evaluated chemical and non-chemical inactivation methods including heat inactivation, UV-C light, addition of ethanol, acetone-methanol, and PFA, which might be used as a subsequent inactivation step in the case of insufficient inactivation. We infected susceptible Caco-2 and Vero cells with pre-treated SARS-CoV-2 and determined the tissue culture infection dose 50 (TCID50) using crystal violet staining and microscopy. In addition, lysates of infected cells and virus containing supernatant were subjected to RT-qPCR analysis. We have found that guanidine thiocyanate and most of the tested detergent containing lysis buffers were effective in inactivation of SARS-CoV-2, however, the M-PER lysis buffer containing a proprietary detergent failed to inactivate the virus. In conclusion, careful evaluation of the used inactivation methods is required especially for non-denaturing buffers. Additional inactivation steps might be necessary before removal of lysed viral samples from BSL-3.
Background: Due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, interventions in the upper airways are considered high-risk procedures for otolaryngologists and their colleagues. The purpose of this study was to evaluate limitations in hearing and communication when using a powered air-purifying respirator (PAPR) system to protect against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission and to assess the benefit of a headset. Methods: Acoustic properties of the PAPR system were measured using a head and torso simulator. Audiological tests (tone audiometry, Freiburg speech test, Oldenburg sentence test (OLSA)) were performed in normal-hearing subjects (n = 10) to assess hearing with PAPR. The audiological test setup also included simulation of conditions in which the target speaker used either a PAPR, a filtering face piece (FFP) 3 respirator, or a surgical face mask. Results: Audiological measurements revealed that sound insulation by the PAPR headtop and noise, generated by the blower-assisted respiratory protection system, resulted in significantly deteriorated hearing thresholds (4.0 ± 7.2 dB hearing level (HL) vs. 49.2 ± 11.0
Purpose: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) replicates predominantly in the upper respiratory tract and is primarily transmitted by droplets and aerosols. Taking the medical history for typical COVID-19 symptoms and PCR-based SARS-CoV-2 testing have become established as screening procedures. The aim of this work was to describe the clinical appearance of SARS-CoV-2-PCR positive patients and to determine the SARS-CoV-2 contact risk for health care workers (HCW).
Methods: The retrospective study included n = 2283 SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests from n = 1725 patients with otorhinolaryngological (ORL) diseases performed from March to November 2020 prior to inpatient treatment. In addition, demographic data and medical history were assessed.
Results: n = 13 PCR tests (0.6%) were positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA. The positive rate showed a significant increase during the observation period (p < 0.01). None of the patients had clinical symptoms that led to a suspected diagnosis of COVID-19 before PCR testing. The patients were either asymptomatic (n = 4) or had symptoms that were interpreted as symptoms typical of the ORL disease or secondary diagnoses (n = 9).
Conclusion: The identification of SARS-CoV-2-positive patients is a considerable challenge in clinical practice. Our findings illustrate that taking a medical history alone is of limited value and cannot replace molecular SARS-CoV-2 testing, especially for patients with ORL diseases. Our data also demonstrate that there is a high probability of contact with SARS-CoV-2-positive patients in everyday clinical practice, so that the use of personal protective equipment, even in apparently “routine cases”, is highly recommended.
The new variant of concern (VOC) of SARS-CoV-2, Omicron (B.1.1.529), is genetically very different from other VOCs. We compared Omicron with the preceding VOC Delta (B.1.617.2) and the wildtype (wt) strain (B.1) with respect to their interactions with the antiviral interferon (IFN-alpha/beta) response in infected cells. Our data indicate that IFN induction by Omicron is low and comparable to the wt, whereas Delta showed an increased IFN induction. However, Omicron exceeded both the wt and the Delta strain with respect to the ability to withstand the antiviral state imposed by IFN-alpha.
Previous studies reported on the safety and applicability of mesenchymal stem/stromal cells (MSCs) to ameliorate pulmonary inflammation in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Thus, multiple clinical trials assessing the potential of MSCs for COVID-19 treatment are underway. Yet, as SARS-inducing coronaviruses infect stem/progenitor cells, it is unclear whether MSCs could be infected by SARS-CoV-2 upon transplantation to COVID-19 patients. We found that MSCs from bone marrow, amniotic fluid, and adipose tissue carry angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 and transmembrane protease serine subtype 2 at low levels on the cell surface under steady-state and inflammatory conditions. We did not observe SARS-CoV-2 infection or replication in MSCs at steady state under inflammatory conditions, or in direct contact with SARS-CoV-2-infected Caco-2 cells. Further, indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase 1 production in MSCs was not impaired in the presence of SARS-CoV-2. We show that MSCs are resistant to SARS-CoV-2 infection and retain their immunomodulation potential, supporting their potential applicability for COVID-19 treatment.
Background: Antibody detection of SARS-CoV-2 requires an understanding of its variation, course, and duration.
Methods: Antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 was evaluated over 5–430 days on 828 samples across COVID-19 severity levels, for total antibody (TAb), IgG, IgA, IgM, neutralizing antibody (NAb), antibody avidity, and for receptor-binding-domain (RBD), spike (S), or nucleoprotein (N). Specificity was determined on 676 pre-pandemic samples.
Results: Sensitivity at 30–60 days post symptom onset (pso) for TAb-S/RBD, TAb-N, IgG-S, IgG-N, IgA-S, IgM-RBD, and NAb was 96.6%, 99.5%, 89.7%, 94.3%, 80.9%, 76.9% and 92.8%, respectively. Follow-up 430 days pso revealed: TAb-S/RBD increased slightly (100.0%); TAb-N decreased slightly (97.1%); IgG-S and IgA-S decreased moderately (81.4%, 65.7%); NAb remained positive (94.3%), slightly decreasing in activity after 300 days; there was correlation with IgG-S (Rs = 0.88) and IgA-S (Rs = 0.71); IgG-N decreased significantly from day 120 (15.7%); IgM-RBD dropped after 30–60 days (22.9%). High antibody avidity developed against S/RBD steadily with time in 94.3% of patients after 430 days. This correlated with persistent antibody detection depending on antibody-binding efficiency of the test design. Severe COVID-19 correlated with earlier and higher antibody response, mild COVID-19 was heterogeneous with a wide range of antibody reactivities. Specificity of the tests was ≥99%, except for IgA (96%).
Conclusion: Sensitivity of anti-SARS-CoV-2 assays was determined by test design, target antigen, antibody avidity, and COVID-19 severity. Sustained antibody detection was mainly determined by avidity progression for RBD and S. Testing by TAb and for S/RBD provided the highest sensitivity and longest detection duration of 14 months so far.
Background: The current COVID-19 pandemic has led to a surge of research activity. While this research provides important insights, the multitude of studies results in an increasing fragmentation of information. To ensure comparability across projects and institutions, standard datasets are needed. Here, we introduce the “German Corona Consensus Dataset” (GECCO), a uniform dataset that uses international terminologies and health IT standards to improve interoperability of COVID-19 data, in particular for university medicine.
Methods: Based on previous work (e.g., the ISARIC-WHO COVID-19 case report form) and in coordination with experts from university hospitals, professional associations and research initiatives, data elements relevant for COVID-19 research were collected, prioritized and consolidated into a compact core dataset. The dataset was mapped to international terminologies, and the Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) standard was used to define interoperable, machine-readable data formats.
Results: A core dataset consisting of 81 data elements with 281 response options was defined, including information about, for example, demography, medical history, symptoms, therapy, medications or laboratory values of COVID-19 patients. Data elements and response options were mapped to SNOMED CT, LOINC, UCUM, ICD-10-GM and ATC, and FHIR profiles for interoperable data exchange were defined.
Conclusion: GECCO provides a compact, interoperable dataset that can help to make COVID-19 research data more comparable across studies and institutions. The dataset will be further refined in the future by adding domain-specific extension modules for more specialized use cases.
In the current dismal situation of the COVID-19 pandemic, effective management of patients with pneumonia and acute respiratory distress syndrome is of vital importance. Due to the current lack of effective pharmacological concepts, this situation has caused interest in (re)considering historical reports on the treatment of patients with low-dose radiation therapy for pneumonia. Although these historical reports are of low-level evidence per se, hampering recommendations for decision-making in the clinical setting, they indicate effectiveness in the dose range between 0.3 and 1 Gy, similar to more recent dose concepts in the treatment of acute and chronic inflammatory/degenerative benign diseases with, e.g., a single dose per fraction of 0.5 Gy. This concise review aims to critically review the evidence for low-dose radiation treatment of COVID-19 pneumopathy and discuss whether it is worth investigating in the present clinical situation.
The coronavirus disease 2019 COVID-19 pandemic is rapidly spreading worldwide and is becoming a major public health crisis. Increasing evidence demonstrates a strong correlation between obesity and the COVID-19 disease. We have summarized recent studies and addressed the impact of obesity on COVID-19 in terms of hospitalization, severity, mortality, and patient outcome. We discuss the potential molecular mechanisms whereby obesity contributes to the pathogenesis of COVID-19. In addition to obesity-related deregulated immune response, chronic inflammation, endothelium imbalance, metabolic dysfunction, and its associated comorbidities, dysfunctional mesenchymal stem cells/adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells may also play crucial roles in fueling systemic inflammation contributing to the cytokine storm and promoting pulmonary fibrosis causing lung functional failure, characteristic of severe COVID-19. Moreover, obesity may also compromise motile cilia on airway epithelial cells and impair functioning of the mucociliary escalators, reducing the clearance of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2). Obese diseased adipose tissues overexpress the receptors and proteases for the SARS-CoV-2 entry, implicating its possible roles as virus reservoir and accelerator reinforcing violent systemic inflammation and immune response. Finally, anti-inflammatory cytokines like anti-interleukin 6 and administration of mesenchymal stromal/stem cells may serve as potential immune modulatory therapies for supportively combating COVID-19. Obesity is conversely related to the development of COVID-19 through numerous molecular mechanisms and individuals with obesity belong to the COVID-19-susceptible population requiring more protective measures.
The consequences of the current COVID-19 pandemic for mental health remain unclear, especially regarding the effects on suicidal behaviors. To assess changes in the pattern of suicide attempt (SA) admissions and completed suicides (CS) in association with the COVID-19 pandemic. As part of a longitudinal study, SA admissions and CS are systematically documented and analyzed in all psychiatric hospitals in Frankfurt/Main (765.000 inhabitants). Number, sociodemographic factors, diagnoses and methods of SA and CS were compared between the periods of March–December 2019 and March–December 2020. The number of CS did not change, while the number of SA significantly decreased. Age, sex, occupational status, and psychiatric diagnoses did not change in SA, whereas the percentage of patients living alone while attempting suicide increased. The rate and number of intoxications as a SA method increased and more people attempted suicide in their own home, which was not observed in CS. Such a shift from public places to home is supported by the weekday of SA, as the rate of SA on weekends was significantly lower during the pandemic, likely because of lockdown measures. Only admissions to psychiatric hospitals were recorded, but not to other institutions. As it seems unlikely that the number of SA decreased while the number of CS remained unchanged, it is conceivable that the number of unreported SA cases increased during the pandemic. Our data suggest that a higher number of SA remained unnoticed during the pandemic because of their location and the use of methods associated with lower lethality.