Effectiveness of filtering or decontaminating air to reduce or prevent respiratory infections: A systematic review.

Installation of technologies to remove or deactivate respiratory pathogens from indoor air is a plausible non-pharmaceutical infectious disease control strategy. OBJECTIVE: We undertook a systematic review of worldwide observational and experimental studies, published 1970-2022, to synthesise evidence about the effectiveness of suitable indoor air treatment technologies to prevent respiratory or gastrointestinal infections. METHODS: We searched for data about infection and symptom outcomes for persons who spent minimum 20 h/week in shared indoor spaces subjected to air treatment strategies hypothesised to change risk of respiratory or gastrointestinal infections or symptoms. RESULTS: Pooled data from 32 included studies suggested no net benefits of air treatment technologies for symptom severity or symptom presence, in absence of confirmed infection. Infection incidence was lower in three cohort studies for persons exposed to high efficiency particulate air filtration (RR 0.4, 95%CI 0.28-0.58, p < 0.001) and in one cohort study that combined ionisers with electrostatic nano filtration (RR 0.08, 95%CI 0.01-0.60, p = 0.01); other types of air treatment technologies and air treatment in other study designs were not strongly linked to fewer infections. The infection outcome data exhibited strong publication bias. CONCLUSIONS: Although environmental and surface samples are reduced after air treatment by several air treatment strategies, especially germicidal lights and high efficiency particulate air filtration, robust evidence has yet to emerge that these technologies are effective at reducing respiratory or gastrointestinal infections in real world settings. Data from several randomised trials have yet to report and will be welcome to the evidence base.

Large-scale sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 genomes from one region allows detailed epidemiology and enables local outbreak management.

The COVID-19 pandemic has spread rapidly throughout the world. In the UK, the initial peak was in April 2020; in the county of Norfolk (UK) and surrounding areas, which has a stable, low-density population, over 3200 cases were reported between March and August 2020. As part of the activities of the national COVID-19 Genomics Consortium (COG-UK) we undertook whole genome sequencing of the SARS-CoV-2 genomes present in positive clinical samples from the Norfolk region. These samples were collected by four major hospitals, multiple minor hospitals, care facilities and community organizations within Norfolk and surrounding areas. We combined clinical metadata with the sequencing data from regional SARS-CoV-2 genomes to understand the origins, genetic variation, transmission and expansion (spread) of the virus within the region and provide context nationally. Data were fed back into the national effort for pandemic management, whilst simultaneously being used to assist local outbreak analyses. Overall, 1565 positive samples (172 per 100 000 population) from 1376 cases were evaluated; for 140 cases between two and six samples were available providing longitudinal data. This represented 42.6 % of all positive samples identified by hospital testing in the region and encompassed those with clinical need, and health and care workers and their families. In total, 1035 cases had genome sequences of sufficient quality to provide phylogenetic lineages. These genomes belonged to 26 distinct global lineages, indicating that there were multiple separate introductions into the region. Furthermore, 100 genetically distinct UK lineages were detected demonstrating local evolution, at a rate of ~2 SNPs per month, and multiple co-occurring lineages as the pandemic progressed. Our analysis: identified a discrete sublineage associated with six care facilities; found no evidence of reinfection in longitudinal samples; ruled out a nosocomial outbreak; identified 16 lineages in key workers which were not in patients, indicating infection control measures were effective; and found the D614G spike protein mutation which is linked to increased transmissibility dominates the samples and rapidly confirmed relatedness of cases in an outbreak at a food processing facility. The large-scale genome sequencing of SARS-CoV-2-positive samples has provided valuable additional data for public health epidemiology in the Norfolk region, and will continue to help identify and untangle hidden transmission chains as the pandemic evolves.

CoronaHiT: high-throughput sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 genomes.

We present CoronaHiT, a platform and throughput flexible method for sequencing SARS-CoV-2 genomes (≤ 96 on MinION or > 96 on Illumina NextSeq) depending on changing requirements experienced during the pandemic. CoronaHiT uses transposase-based library preparation of ARTIC PCR products. Method performance was demonstrated by sequencing 2 plates containing 95 and 59 SARS-CoV-2 genomes on nanopore and Illumina platforms and comparing to the ARTIC LoCost nanopore method. Of the 154 samples sequenced using all 3 methods, ≥ 90% genome coverage was obtained for 64.3% using ARTIC LoCost, 71.4% using CoronaHiT-ONT and 76.6% using CoronaHiT-Illumina, with almost identical clustering on a maximum likelihood tree. This protocol will aid the rapid expansion of SARS-CoV-2 genome sequencing globally.

Assessment of Oxidative Stress in Septic and Obese Patients Using Markers of Oxidation-reduction Potential.

BACKGROUND/AIM: The novel static (sORP) and capacity (cORP) oxidation-reduction potential markers were examined for assessing oxidative stress in plasma of patients with sepsis. Moreover, the possible effect of obesity-induced oxidative stress on patients with sepsis was investigated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: sORP and cORP markers, as well as the conventional oxidative stress biomarkers total antioxidant capacity (TAC), thiobarbituric acid-reactive substances (TBARS) and protein carbonyls (CARB), were assessed in plasma. RESULTS: sORP marker was increased significantly in the sepsis group, while cORP was significantly lower compared to the control group, indicating oxidative stress. Furthermore, in patients with sepsis, TAC was significantly lower compared to control group. However, obesity had no effect on sORP, cORP and TAC in patients with sepsis, although it increased levels of CARB and TBARS. CONCLUSION: The present results suggest, for the first time, that ORP markers could be used for assessing oxidative stress in patients with sepsis.