Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Placental Infection Is Associated With Massive Perivillous Fibrin Deposition at the Maternal-Fetal Interface: A Preliminary Study.

We observed an increased frequency of massive perivillous fibrin deposition (MPFD) during the second coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic wave dominated by the Alpha variant of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). MPFD associated with 100% reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) positivity for SARS-CoV-2 and detection by immunohistochemistry. The Alpha variant was identified in all placentas with MPFD that could be sequenced.

High prevalence of coinfection of azithromycin-resistant Mycoplasma genitalium with other STIs: a prospective observational study of London-based symptomatic and STI-contact clinic attendees.

OBJECTIVES: Azithromycin treatment of Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) may not be adequate to treat concomitant Mycoplasma genitalium (MG) infection, and particularly if MG has macrolide resistance-associated mutations (MG-MRAMs). We estimated prevalence of coinfections of CT with MG carrying MRAM, and risk factors for MG-MRAM among a sexual health clinic population. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Among symptomatic and STI-contact clinic attendees in London, prevalence of CT-MG coinfection and MG-MRAM were estimated using nucleic acid amplification testing and Sanger sequencing, respectively, and their associated risk factors analysed using logistic regression. RESULTS: MG prevalence was 7.5% (23/307), 17.3% (30/173), and 11.4% (8/70) in females, men who have sex with women (MSW) and men who have sex with men (MSM), respectively; MG coinfection in CT-infected participants represented 28.0% (7/25), 13.5% (5/37), 0.0% (0/0), respectively. Presence of MG-MRAM was 39.1% (9/23) in female swabs, 70.0% (21/30) in MSW urine and 83.3% (5/6) in MSM rectal swabs. In multivariate analyses, coinfection with another STI was strongly associated with MG-MRAM (OR: 7.19; 95% CI: 2.4 to 21.5). CONCLUSION: A significant proportion of participants in our study of symptomatic patients and STI contacts were infected with macrolide-resistant MG, suggesting that testing for MG and MRAM, for MG positives, might be clinically useful. The findings also suggest services explore potential benefits of testing CT positive samples for MG in these patient groups. Where MG testing is not available, potential high rates of MG coinfection should be borne in mind when considering azithromycin in the treatment of CT among STI contacts and symptomatic patients.

Antimicrobial resistance point-of-care testing for gonorrhoea treatment regimens: cost-effectiveness and impact on ceftriaxone use of five hypothetical strategies compared with standard care in England sexual health clinics.

BackgroundWidespread ceftriaxone antimicrobial resistance (AMR) threatens Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG) treatment, with few alternatives available. AMR point-of-care tests (AMR POCT) may enable alternative treatments, including abandoned regimens, sparing ceftriaxone use. We assessed cost-effectiveness of five hypothetical AMR POCT strategies: A-C included a second antibiotic alongside ceftriaxone; and D and E consisted of a single antibiotic alternative, compared with standard care (SC: ceftriaxone and azithromycin).AimAssess costs and effectiveness of AMR POCT strategies that optimise NG treatment and reduce ceftriaxone use.MethodsThe five AMR POCT treatment strategies were compared using a decision tree model simulating 38,870 NG-diagnosed England sexual health clinic (SHC) attendees; A micro-costing approach, representing cost to the SHC (for 2015/16), was employed. Primary outcomes were: total costs; percentage of patients given optimal treatment (regimens curing NG, without AMR); percentage of patients given non-ceftriaxone optimal treatment; cost-effectiveness (cost per optimal treatment gained).ResultsAll strategies cost more than SC. Strategy B (azithromycin and ciprofloxacin (azithromycin preferred); dual therapy) avoided most suboptimal treatments (n = 48) but cost most to implement (GBP 4,093,844 (EUR 5,474,656)). Strategy D (azithromycin AMR POCT; monotherapy) was most cost-effective for both cost per optimal treatments gained (GBP 414.67 (EUR 554.53)) and per ceftriaxone-sparing treatment (GBP 11.29 (EUR 15.09)) but with treatment failures (n = 34) and suboptimal treatments (n = 706).ConclusionsAMR POCT may enable improved antibiotic stewardship, but require net health system investment. A small reduction in test cost would enable monotherapy AMR POCT strategies to be cost-saving.

"It's not a time spent issue, it's a 'what have you spent your time doing?' issue " A qualitative study of UK patient opinions and expectations for implementation of Point of Care Tests for sexually transmitted infections and antimicrobial resistance.

Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) continue to be a major public health concern in the United Kingdom (UK). Epidemiological models have shown that narrowing the time between STI diagnosis and treatment may reduce the population burden of infection, and rapid, accurate point-of-care tests (POCTs) have potential for increasing correct treatment and mitigating the spread of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). We developed the Precise social science programme to incorporate clinician and patient opinions on potential designs and implementation of new POCTs for multiple STIs and AMR detection. We conducted qualitative research, consisting of informal interviews with clinicians and semi-structured in-depth interviews with patients, in six sexual health clinics in the UK. Interviews with clinicians focused on how the new POCTs would likely be implemented into clinical care; these new clinical pathways were then posed to patients in in-depth interviews. Patient interviews showed acceptability of POCTs, however, willingness to wait in clinic for test results depended on the context of patients' sexual healthcare seeking. Patients reporting frequent healthcare visits often based their expectations and opinions of services and POCTs on previous visits. Patients' suggestions for implementation of POCTs included provision of information on service changes and targeting tests to patients concerned they are infected. Our data suggests that patients may accept new POCT pathways if they are given information on these changes prior to attending services and to consider implementing POCTs among patients who are anxious about their infection status and/or who are experiencing symptoms.