Efficient SARS-CoV-2 detection in unextracted oro-nasopharyngeal specimens by rRT-PCR with the Seegene Allplex™ 2019-nCoV assay.

BACKGROUND: The fight against the COVID-19 pandemic has created an urgent need to rapidly detect infected people. The challenge for clinical laboratories has been finding a high throughput, cost-efficient, and accurate testing method in the context of extraction reagents shortage on a global scale. To answer this need, we studied SARS-CoV-2 detection in oro-nasopharyngeal (ONP) swabs stored in Universal Transport Media (UTM) or in RNase-free water by rRT-PCR with Seegene Allplex™ 2019-nCoV assay without RNA extraction. RESULTS: Optimal results were obtained when swabs stored in UTM were diluted 1/5 and 1/2 in RNase-free water. Thermal lysis before rRT-PCR testing slightly improved detection rate. In addition, proteinase K (PK) treatment allowed for a significant reduction of invalid results and increased sensitivity for detection of low viral load specimens. In a panel of positive samples with all 3 viral genes amplified and N gene Cycle threshold values (Ct values) from 15 to 40, our detection rate was 98.9% with PK and 94.4% without. In a challenging panel of low positive samples with only the N gene being detectable at Ct values > 30, detection rate was increased from 53.3 to 76.7% with the addition of PK, and invalid rate fell off from 18.3 to 0%. Furthermore, we demonstrated that our method reliably detects specimens with Ct values up to 35, whereas false negative samples become frequent above this range. Finally, we show that swabs should be stored at - 70 °C rather than 4 °C when testing cannot be performed within 72 h of collection. CONCLUSION: We successfully optimized the unextracted rRT-PCR process using the Seegene Allplex™ 2019-nCoV assay to detect SARS-CoV-2 RNAs in nasopharyngeal swabs. This improved method offers cost savings and turnaround time advantages compared to automated extraction, with high efficiency of detection that could play an important role in the surveillance of Covid-19.

Severe MRSA Enterocolitis Caused by a Strain Harboring Enterotoxins D, G, and I.

We describe a case of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) enterocolitis in a healthy adult with previous antibiotic exposure. Colonoscopy revealed diffuse colitis and mild ileitis without ulceration. Stool cultures demonstrated abundant growth of MRSA and absent normal flora. Oral vancomycin treatment was effective and seems to be the consensus choice for therapy.

A case of primary COVID-19 pneumonia: plausible airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2.

BACKGROUND: The different clinical manifestations, from none to severe, and the variability in efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis by upper respiratory tract testing, make diagnosis of COVID-19 and prevention of transmission especially challenging. In addition, the ways by which the virus can most efficiently transmit still remain unclear. CASE PRESENTATION: We report the case a 48-year-old man who presents primary COVID-19 pneumonia. He was initially admitted for cholecystitis but, upon review of his abdominal CT scan, a segmental zone of ground glass opacity was identified in the right lower lobe. A bronchoalveolar lavage proved positive to SARS-CoV-2 by RT-qPCR, even if he tested negative by oro-nasopharyngeal swab at admission and the day after he underwent bronchoscopy. The near absence of the virus in his saliva 2 days after, combined with a very sharp increase in salivary viral load on the third day, also rule out the possibility of prior viral replication in the upper airway and clearance. In addition, rapidly increasing bilateral alveolar lung infiltrates appeared as the upper respiratory tests begin to detect the virus. CONCLUSIONS: For this patient to have developed primary COVID-19 pneumonia, a contagious aerosol must have traveled to the lower respiratory system. This case gives indirect but compelling evidence that aerosol may spread the virus. It also highlights the limitations of oral and nasal testing methods and the importance of anatomical considerations when studying infections by SARS-CoV-2.

Validation of saliva sampling as an alternative to oro-nasopharyngeal swab for detection of SARS-CoV-2 using unextracted rRT-PCR with the Allplex 2019-nCoV assay.

Introduction. The current severe acute respiratory syndrome-associated coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has stressed the global supply chain for specialized equipment, including flocked swabs.Hypothesis. Saliva could be a potential alternative specimen source for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection by reverse-transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR).Aim. To compare the detection efficiency of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in saliva and oro-nasopharyngeal swab (ONPS) specimens.Methodology. Patients recruited from hospital provided paired saliva and ONPS specimens. We performed manual or automated RT-PCR with prior proteinase K treatment without RNA extraction using the Seegene Allplex 2019 nCoV assay.Results. Of the 773 specimen pairs, 165 (21.3 %) had at least one positive sample. Additionally, 138 specimens tested positive by both sampling methods. Fifteen and 12 cases were detected only by nasopharyngeal swab and saliva, respectively. The sensitivity of ONPS (153/165; 92.7 %; 95 % CI: 88.8-96.7) was similar to that of saliva (150/165; 90.9 %; 95 % CI: 86.5-95.3; P=0.5). In patients with symptoms for ≤ 10 days, the sensitivity of ONPS (118/126; 93.7 %; 95 % CI: 89.4-97.9) was similar to that of saliva (122/126; 96.8 %; 95 % CI: 93.8-99.9 %; P=0.9). However, the sensitivity of ONPS (20/22; 95.2 %; 95 % CI: 86.1-100) was higher than that of saliva (16/22; 71.4 %; 95 % CI: 52.1-90.8) in patients with symptoms for more than 10 days.Conclusions. Saliva sampling is an acceptable alternative to ONPS for diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infection in symptomatic individuals displaying symptoms for ≤ 10 days. These results reinforce the need to expand the use of saliva samples, which are self-collected and do not require swabs.

Natural spring water gargle and direct RT-PCR for the diagnosis of COVID-19 (COVID-SPRING study).

BACKGROUND: Nasopharyngeal swab has long been considered the specimen of choice for the diagnosis of respiratory viral infections, including SARS-CoV-2 infection, but it suffers from several drawbacks: its discomfort limits screening acceptability, and it is vulnerable to shortages in both specialized materials and trained healthcare workers in the context of a pandemic. METHODS: We prospectively compared natural spring water gargle to combined oro-nasopharyngeal swab (ONPS) for the diagnosis of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in paired clinical specimens (1005 ONPS and 1005 gargles) collected from 987 unique early symptomatic as well as asymptomatic individuals from the community. RESULTS: Using a direct RT-PCR method with the Allplex™ 2019-nCoV Assay (Seegene), the clinical sensitivity of the gargle was 95.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 90.2 - 98.3%), similar to the sensitivity of the ONPS (93.8%; 95% CI, 88.2 - 97.3%), despite significantly lower viral RNA concentration in gargles, as reflected by higher cycle threshold values. No single specimen type detected all COVID-19 cases. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was stable in gargles at room temperature for at least 7 days. CONCLUSION: The simplicity of this sampling method coupled with the accessibility of spring water are clear advantages in a pandemic situation where testing frequency, turnaround time and shortage of consumables and trained staff are critical elements.

Real-life experience with ceftobiprole in Canada: Results from the CLEAR (CanadianLEadership onAntimicrobialReal-life usage) registry.

OBJECTIVES: Ceftobiprole is an advanced-generation cephalosporin with a favourable safety profile. Published data on the clinical use of ceftobiprole are limited. We report use of ceftobiprole in Canadian patients using data captured by the CLEAR registry. METHODS: The CLEAR registry uses the web-based research data management program REDCap™ (online survey) to facilitate clinicians entering details associated with their clinical experiences using ceftobiprole. RESULTS: Data were available for 38 patients treated with ceftobiprole. The most common infections treated were endocarditis (42.1% of patients), bone and joint infection (23.7%) and hospital-associated bacterial pneumonia (15.8%). 92.1% of patients had bacteraemia and 21.1% were in intensive care. Ceftobiprole was used because of failure of (71.1%), resistance to (18.4%) or adverse effects from (10.5%) previously prescribed antimicrobial agents. Ceftobiprole was primarily used as directed therapy for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections (94.7% of patients). Ceftobiprole susceptibility testing was performed on isolates from 47.4% of patients. It was used concomitantly with daptomycin in 55.3% of patients and with vancomycin in 18.4% of patients. Treatment duration was primarily >10 days (65.8% of patients) with microbiological success in 97.0% and clinical success in 84.8% of patients. 2.6% of patients had gastrointestinal adverse effects. CONCLUSION: In Canada to date, ceftobiprole is used as directed therapy to treat a variety of severe infections caused by MRSA. It is primarily used in patients failing previous antimicrobials, is frequently added to, and thus used in combination with daptomycin or vancomycin with high microbiological and clinical cure rates and an excellent safety profile.

Antibiotic prophylaxis for transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate needle biopsy: Compared efficacy of ciprofloxacin vs. the ciprofloxacin/fosfomycin tromethamine combination.

INTRODUCTION: Some authors advocate an increase in post-prostate needle biopsy (PNB) infections associated with emergent quinolone resistance in E. coli, urging re-evaluation of antibiotic prophylaxis (antibioprophylaxis). In this study, we compared rates of post-PNB urosepsis associated with two oral regimens of antibioprophylaxis: ciprofloxacin (CIP) vs. ciprofloxacin and fosfomycin tromethamine combination (CIP/FOS). METHODS: This retrospective pre-/post-intervention study included all patients who underwent PNB in two Canadian hospitals from January 2012 to December 2015. The primary outcome was urosepsis within one month of PNB. Urosepsis rates were analyzed according to antibioprophylaxis using log-binomial regression, considering the propensity score weights of collected risk factor data. RESULTS: We reviewed 2287 PNB patients. A total of 1090 received CIP and 1197 received CIP/FOS. Urosepsis incidence with CIP was 1.1% (12/1090) and fell to 0.2% (2/1197) with CIP/FOS. Our analysis indicates that CIP/FOS significantly decreased the risk of urosepsis compared to CIP alone (adjusted relative risk [aRR] 0.16; p=0.021). The isolated pathogen was E. coli in 12/14 cases, including seven bacteremias. Among E. coli cases, seven strains were CIP-resistant. Eleven of 12 E. coli, including all CIP-resistant strains, were isolated in patients on CIP alone. One case of B. fragilis bacteremia occurred in the CIP/FOS group. No cases of C. difficile were identified in the three months post-PNB. CONCLUSIONS: The adoption of CIP/FOS antibiotic prophylaxis significantly lowered the rate of post-PNB urosepsis. Conveniently, this regimen is oral, single-dose, and low-cost.

Frequency of 16S ribosomal RNA methyltransferase detection among Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae clinical isolates obtained from patients in Canadian hospitals (CANWARD, 2013-2017).

Pan-aminoglycoside (amikacin, gentamicin, tobramycin, plazomicin)-resistant Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae clinical isolates from patients in Canadian Hospitals (2013-2017) were evaluated by whole genome sequencing for 16S ribosomal RNA methyltransferase genes. The rmtB gene was detected in 2 isolates (1 of 3094 E. coli [0.03%], 1 of 1039 K. pneumoniae [0.1%]).