Farnaz Karimi1, Amir Abbas Vaezi2, Mostafa Qorbani3,4, Fatemeh Moghadasi5, Saeed Hassani Gelsfid5, Arman Maghoul5, Neda Mahmoodi6, Zahra Eskandari7, Hossein Gholami8, Zakiye Mokhames9, Mahshid Saleh10. 1. Department of Pathology, School of Medicine, Alborz University of Medical Sciences, Karaj, Iran. 2. Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, Alborz University of Medical Sciences, Karaj, Iran. 3. Non-Communicable Diseases Research Center, Alborz University of Medical Sciences, Karaj, Iran. 4. Chronic Diseases Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences Endocrinology and Metabolism Research Institute, Tehran, Iran. 5. Student Research Committee, Alborz University of Medical Sciences, Karaj, Iran. 6. Imam Jafar Sadegh hospital, Alborz University of Medical Sciences, Karaj, Iran. 7. Department of Health in emergencies and disasters, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. 8. Imam Ali hospital, Alborz University of Medical Sciences, Karaj, Iran. 9. Department of molecular diagnostics, Alborz University of Medical Sciences, Karaj, Iran. 10. Department of Applied Cell Sciences, Faculty of Advanced Technologies in Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. m_saleh@razi.tums.ac.ir.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was emergency turned into global public health after the first patients were detected in Wuhan, China, in December 2019. The disease rapidly expanded and led to an epidemic throughout China, followed by the rising number of cases worldwide. Given the high prevalence of COVID-19, rapid and accurate diagnostic methods are immediately needed to identify, isolate and treat the patients as soon as possible, decreasing mortality rates and the risk of public contamination by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2(SARS-CoV-2). METHODS: This case-control study was conducted in two hospitals in Alborz Province in Iran. All recruited cases in this study were symptomatic adults hospitalized as COVID-19 patients with compatible Computed tomographic (CT) scan findings and available rRT-PCR results. The patients were recruited in this study. The patients were categorized into positive and negative rRT-PCR groups and evaluated for symptoms, initial vital signs, comorbidity, clinical and laboratory findings. Finally, the results were assessed by SPSS software. RESULTS: Between March 5 to April 5, 2020, 164 symptomatic COVID-19 patients were studied. In total, there were 111 rRT-PCR positive (67.6%) and 53 rRT-PCR negative patients (32.4%). In terms of statistics, the frequency of symptoms revealed no difference, except for cough (P.V:0.008), dizziness (PV: 0.048), and weakness (P.V:0.022). Among initial vital signs, PR (P.V:0.041) and O2 Saturation (PV: 0.014) were statistically different between the two groups. Evaluation of comorbidities revealed no difference except for hyperlipidemia (P.V:0.024). In the comparison of laboratory findings, only WBC count (PV: 0.001), lymphocyte count (PV: 0.001), and Hb (P.V:0.008) were statistically different between the two groups. CONCLUSION: In case of the negative rRT-PCR result, it is necessary to take a logical approach, and we recommended that the physician decides according to clinical manifestations, laboratory findings, and positive CT results.
BACKGROUND: The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was emergency turned into global public health after the first patients were detected in Wuhan, China, in December 2019. The disease rapidly expanded and led to an epidemic throughout China, followed by the rising number of cases worldwide. Given the high prevalence of COVID-19, rapid and accurate diagnostic methods are immediately needed to identify, isolate and treat the patients as soon as possible, decreasing mortality rates and the risk of public contamination by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2(SARS-CoV-2). METHODS: This case-control study was conducted in two hospitals in Alborz Province in Iran. All recruited cases in this study were symptomatic adults hospitalized as COVID-19patients with compatible Computed tomographic (CT) scan findings and available rRT-PCR results. The patients were recruited in this study. The patients were categorized into positive and negative rRT-PCR groups and evaluated for symptoms, initial vital signs, comorbidity, clinical and laboratory findings. Finally, the results were assessed by SPSS software. RESULTS: Between March 5 to April 5, 2020, 164 symptomatic COVID-19patients were studied. In total, there were 111 rRT-PCR positive (67.6%) and 53 rRT-PCR negative patients (32.4%). In terms of statistics, the frequency of symptoms revealed no difference, except for cough (P.V:0.008), dizziness (PV: 0.048), and weakness (P.V:0.022). Among initial vital signs, PR (P.V:0.041) and O2 Saturation (PV: 0.014) were statistically different between the two groups. Evaluation of comorbidities revealed no difference except for hyperlipidemia (P.V:0.024). In the comparison of laboratory findings, only WBC count (PV: 0.001), lymphocyte count (PV: 0.001), and Hb (P.V:0.008) were statistically different between the two groups. CONCLUSION: In case of the negative rRT-PCR result, it is necessary to take a logical approach, and we recommended that the physician decides according to clinical manifestations, laboratory findings, and positive CT results.
Authors: Roman Wölfel; Victor M Corman; Wolfgang Guggemos; Michael Seilmaier; Sabine Zange; Marcel A Müller; Daniela Niemeyer; Terry C Jones; Patrick Vollmar; Camilla Rothe; Michael Hoelscher; Tobias Bleicker; Sebastian Brünink; Julia Schneider; Rosina Ehmann; Katrin Zwirglmaier; Christian Drosten; Clemens Wendtner Journal: Nature Date: 2020-04-01 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Maroun Khoury; Jimena Cuenca; Fernanda F Cruz; Fernando E Figueroa; Patricia R M Rocco; Daniel J Weiss Journal: Eur Respir J Date: 2020-06-04 Impact factor: 16.671