Discrepant serological findings in SARS-CoV-2 PCR-negative hospitalized patients with fever and acute respiratory symptoms during the pandemic.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) serology has an evolving role in the diagnosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. However, its use in hospitalized patients with acute respiratory symptoms remains unclear. Hospitalized patients with acute respiratory illness admitted to an isolation ward were recruited. All patients had negative nasopharyngeal swab polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for SARS-CoV-2. Serological studies using four separate assays (cPass: surrogate neutralizing enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay [ELISA]; Elecsys: N-antigen based chemiluminescent assay; SFB: S protein flow-based; epitope peptide-based ELISA) were performed on stored plasma collected from patients during the initial hospital stay, and a convalescent visit 4-12 weeks later. Of the 51 patients studied (aged 54, interquartile range 21-84; 62.7% male), no patients tested positive on the Elecsys or cPass assays. Out of 51 patients, 5 had antibodies detected on B-cell Epitope Assay and 3/51 had antibodies detected on SFB assay. These 8 patients with positive serological test to COVID-19 were more likely to have a high-risk occupation (p = 0.039), bacterial infection (p = 0.028), and neutrophilia (p = 0.013) during their initial hospital admission. Discrepant COVID-19 serological findings were observed among those with recent hospital admissions and bacterial infections. The positive serological findings within our cohort raise important questions about the interpretation of sero-epidemiology during the current pandemic.

Low Relative Valve Load is Associated With Paradoxical Low-Flow Aortic Stenosis Despite Preserved Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction and Adverse Clinical Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Paradoxical low-flow (LF) severe aortic stenosis (AS) despite preserved left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (LVEF) has been shown to be distinct from normal-flow (NF) AS, with a poorer prognosis. Relative valve load (RVL) is a novel echocardiographic haemodynamic index based on the ratio of transaortic mean pressure gradient to the global valvulo-arterial impedance (Zva) in order to estimate the contribution of the valvular afterload to the global LV load. We aimed to determine the usefulness of RVL in LF AS versus NF AS. METHOD: A total of 450 consecutive patients with medically managed severe AS (aortic valve area <1.0 cm2) with preserved LVEF (>50%) were studied. Patients were divided into LF (stroke volume index <35 mL/m2) or NF, and high RVL or low RVL. Baseline clinical and echocardiographic profiles, as well as clinical outcomes, were compared. RESULTS: There were 149 (33.1%) patients with LF. Despite higher global impedance in LF (Zva 6.3±2.4 vs 3.9±0.9 mmHg/mL/m2; p<0.001) compared with NF, the RVL in LF AS was significantly lower (5.4±2.7 vs 9.8±5.1 mL/m2; p<0.001). On multivariable analysis, low RVL (≤7.51) remained independently associated with poor clinical outcomes on Cox regression (hazard ratio, 1.31; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-1.68), with 53.2% sensitivity and 70.3% specificity. This was comparable to other prognostic indices in AS. Kaplan-Meier curves demonstrated that low RVL was associated with increased mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Increased systemic arterial afterload may be important in the pathophysiology of LF AS. Low RVL was an independent predictor of poor clinical outcomes in medically managed severe AS. There may be a greater role in the attenuation of systemic arterial afterload in AS to improve outcomes.