Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Med ; 3(3): 204-215.e6, 2022 Mar 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35128501

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: There is a critical need for rapid viral infection diagnostics to enable prompt case identification in pandemic settings and support targeted antimicrobial prescribing. METHODS: Using untargeted high-resolution liquid chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry, we compared the admission serum metabolome of emergency department patients with viral infections (including COVID-19), bacterial infections, inflammatory conditions, and healthy controls. Sera from an independent cohort of emergency department patients admitted with viral or bacterial infections underwent profiling to validate findings. Associations between whole-blood gene expression and the identified metabolite of interest were examined. FINDINGS: 3'-Deoxy-3',4'-didehydro-cytidine (ddhC), a free base of the only known human antiviral small molecule ddhC-triphosphate (ddhCTP), was detected for the first time in serum. When comparing 60 viral with 101 non-viral cases in the discovery cohort, ddhC was the most significantly differentially abundant metabolite, generating an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.954 (95% CI: 0.923-0.986). In the validation cohort, ddhC was again the most significantly differentially abundant metabolite when comparing 40 viral with 40 bacterial cases, generating an AUC of 0.81 (95% CI 0.708-0.915). Transcripts of viperin and CMPK2, enzymes responsible for ddhCTP synthesis, were among the five genes most highly correlated with ddhC abundance. CONCLUSIONS: The antiviral precursor molecule ddhC is detectable in serum and an accurate marker for acute viral infection. Interferon-inducible genes viperin and CMPK2 are implicated in ddhC production in vivo. These findings highlight a future diagnostic role for ddhC in viral diagnosis, pandemic preparedness, and acute infection management. FUNDING: NIHR Imperial BRC; UKRI.


Assuntos
Infecções Bacterianas , COVID-19 , Viroses , Antivirais/uso terapêutico , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Citidina , Humanos
2.
Lancet Microbe ; 1(7): e300-e307, 2020 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32964211

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Access to rapid diagnosis is key to the control and management of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Laboratory RT-PCR testing is the current standard of care but usually requires a centralised laboratory and significant infrastructure. We describe our diagnostic accuracy assessment of a novel, rapid point-of-care real time RT-PCR CovidNudge test, which requires no laboratory handling or sample pre-processing. METHODS: Between April and May, 2020, we obtained two nasopharyngeal swab samples from individuals in three hospitals in London and Oxford (UK). Samples were collected from three groups: self-referred health-care workers with suspected COVID-19; patients attending emergency departments with suspected COVID-19; and hospital inpatient admissions with or without suspected COVID-19. For the CovidNudge test, nasopharyngeal swabs were inserted directly into a cartridge which contains all reagents and components required for RT-PCR reactions, including multiple technical replicates of seven SARS-CoV-2 gene targets (rdrp1, rdrp2, e-gene, n-gene, n1, n2 and n3) and human ribonuclease P (RNaseP) as sample adequacy control. Swab samples were tested in parallel using the CovidNudge platform, and with standard laboratory RT-PCR using swabs in viral transport medium for processing in a central laboratory. The primary analysis was to compare the sensitivity and specificity of the point-of-care CovidNudge test with laboratory-based testing. FINDINGS: We obtained 386 paired samples: 280 (73%) from self-referred health-care workers, 15 (4%) from patients in the emergency department, and 91 (23%) hospital inpatient admissions. Of the 386 paired samples, 67 tested positive on the CovidNudge point-of-care platform and 71 with standard laboratory RT-PCR. The overall sensitivity of the point-of-care test compared with laboratory-based testing was 94% (95% CI 86-98) with an overall specificity of 100% (99-100). The sensitivity of the test varied by group (self-referred healthcare workers 94% [95% CI 85-98]; patients in the emergency department 100% [48-100]; and hospital inpatient admissions 100% [29-100]). Specificity was consistent between groups (self-referred health-care workers 100% [95% CI 98-100]; patients in the emergency department 100% [69-100]; and hospital inpatient admissions 100% [96-100]). Point of care testing performance was similar during a period of high background prevalence of laboratory positive tests (25% [95% 20-31] in April, 2020) and low prevalence (3% [95% 1-9] in inpatient screening). Amplification of viral nucleocapsid (n1, n2, and n3) and envelope protein gene (e-gene) were most sensitive for detection of spiked SARS-CoV-2 RNA. INTERPRETATION: The CovidNudge platform was a sensitive, specific, and rapid point of care test for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 without laboratory handling or sample pre-processing. The device, which has been implemented in UK hospitals since May, 2020, could enable rapid decisions for clinical care and testing programmes. FUNDING: National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Imperial Biomedical Research Centre, NIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Healthcare Associated Infections and Antimicrobial Resistance at Oxford University in partnership with Public Health England, NIHR Biomedical Research Centre Oxford, and DnaNudge.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Humanos , Testes Imediatos , RNA Viral/genética , Sensibilidade e Especificidade
3.
BJU Int ; 121(3): 437-444, 2018 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28984408

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To perform a cost analysis comparing the cost of robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) with open RC (ORC) in a UK tertiary referral centre and to identify the key cost drivers. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data on hospital length of stay (LOS), operative time (OT), transfusion rate, and volume and complication rate were obtained from a prospectively updated institutional database for patients undergoing RARC or ORC. A cost decision tree model was created. Sensitivity analysis was performed to find key drivers of overall cost and to find breakeven points with ORC. Monte Carlo analysis was performed to quantify the variability in the dataset. RESULTS: One RARC procedure costs £12 449.87, or £12 106.12 if the robot was donated via charitable funds. In comparison, one ORC procedure costs £10 474.54. RARC is 18.9% more expensive than ORC. The key cost drivers were OT, LOS, and the number of cases performed per annum. CONCLUSION: High ongoing equipment costs remain a large barrier to the cost of RARC falling. However, minimal improvements in patient quality of life would be required to offset this difference.


Assuntos
Cistectomia/economia , Custos de Cuidados de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/economia , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos/economia , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Transfusão de Sangue/economia , Custos e Análise de Custo , Cistectomia/efeitos adversos , Cistectomia/métodos , Árvores de Decisões , Feminino , Humanos , Tempo de Internação/economia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Salas Cirúrgicas/economia , Duração da Cirurgia , Anos de Vida Ajustados por Qualidade de Vida , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos/efeitos adversos , Centros de Atenção Terciária/economia , Reino Unido , Adulto Jovem
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA