scholarly journals A systematic review on involvement of medicinal physics tools, techniques and effect of other parameters in diagnosis of novel corona virus, sars-cov-2

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashutosh Tiwari
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Corona Virus

scholarly journals Detection of three pandemic causing coronaviruses from non-respiratory samples: systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chandan Mishra ◽  
Suneeta Meena ◽  
Jitendra Kumar Meena ◽  
Suman Tiwari ◽  
Purva Mathur
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Detection Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Total Sample ◽  
Urine Samples ◽  
Pathogenic Potential ◽  
Clinical Specimens ◽  
Qrt Pcr ◽  
Corona Virus ◽  
Positive Rate

AbstractSARS-CoV-2 has posed an unprecedented challenge to the world. Pandemics have been caused previously by viruses of this family like Middle East Respiratory Corona Virus (MERS CoV), Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Corona Virus (SARS CoV). Although these viruses are primarily respiratory viruses, but they have been isolated from non-respiratory samples as well. Presently, the detection rate of SARS‐CoV‐2 RNA from different clinical specimens using Real Time Reverse Transcriptase Polymerized Chain Reaction (qRT‐PCR) after onset of symptoms is not yet well established. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review was to establish the profile of detecting SARS‐CoV‐2, MERS CoV, SARS CoV from different types of clinical specimens other than the respiratory using a standard diagnostic test (qRT‐PCR). A total of 3429 non-respiratory specimens were recorded: SARS CoV (total sample—802), MERS CoV (total sample—155), SARS CoV-2 (total sample—2347). Out of all the samples studied high positive rate was seen for saliva with 96.7% (14/14; 95% CI 87.6–100.0%) for SARS CoV and 57.5% (58/250; 95% CI − 1.2 to 116.2%) for SARS CoV-2, while low detection rate in urine samples for SARS CoV-2 with 2.2% (8/318; 95% CI 0.6–3.7%) and 9.6% (12/61; 95% CI − 0.9 to 20.1%) for SARS CoV but there was relatively higher positivity in urine samples for MERS CoV with detection rate of 32.4% (2/38; 95% CI − 37.3 to 102.1%). In Stool sample positivity was 54.9% (396/779; 95% CI 41.0–68.8%), 45.2% (180/430; 95% CI 28.1–62.3%) and 34.7% (4/38; 95% CI − 29.5 to 98.9%) for SARS CoV-2, MERS CoV, and SARS CoV, respectively. In blood sample the positivity was 33.3% (7/21; 95% CI 13.2–53.5%), 23.7% (42/277; 95% CI 10.5–36.9%) and 2.5% (2/81; 95% CI 0.00–5.8%) for MERS CoV, SARS CoV-2 and SARS CoV respectively. SARS‐CoV‐2 along with previous two pandemic causing viruses from this family, were highly detected stool and saliva. A low positive rate was recorded in blood samples. Viruses were also detected in fluids along with unusual samples like semen and vaginal secretions thus highlighting unique pathogenic potential of SARS‐CoV‐2.

scholarly journals Routes of Transmission of Newly Emerging SARS-CoV-2: A Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
pp. S18-S31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mahmuda Yeasmin ◽  
Jannatut Tasnim ◽  
Arifa Akram ◽  
Md Abdullah Yusuf ◽  
AKM Shamsuzzaman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Citation Index ◽  
Virus Disease ◽  
Scientific Basis ◽  
Atypical Pneumonia ◽  
Highly Pathogenic ◽  
Current Review ◽  
Corona Virus ◽  
Route Of Transmission ◽  
The World

Background: In December 2019, a novel corona virus (SARS-CoV-2) causes atypical pneumonia now known as “corona virus disease 2019” (COVID-19) emerged in Wuhan, China and spread rapidly throughout the world. Objective: The purpose of the present study was to identify the different plausible routes of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 into the human body. Methodology: We searched electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index and Chinese database) checked documents and references. We included all the studies regarding potential routes of transmission of SARS-CoV-2. All reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, assessed studies for inclusion, appraised quality, and extracted data. Result: SARS-CoV-2 has been found to have higher level of transmissibility than other two pathogenic CoVs. Sustained human to human transmission of SARS-CoV-2 has already been established though the exact route of transmission is yet to be determined. Similar to other CoVs, respiratory droplet and contact with contaminated surfaces are considered as principle route of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 whereas aerosol, feco-oral, perinatal, ocular surface and transfusion transmissions are the plausible route of spreading of this highly pathogenic CoVs. Conclusion: In the current review, we summarize the potential route of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in the light of previous SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV outbreaks to solidify the scientific basis on which important decisions can be made. Bangladesh Journal of Infectious Diseases, April 2020;7(suppl_1):S18-S31

scholarly journals A systematic review of etiology, epidemiology, clinical manifestations, image findings, and medication of 2019 Corona Virus Disease-19 in Wuhan, China

Medicine ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 99 (42) ◽  
pp. e22688
Author(s):  
Jia Xu ◽  
Xue-Ping Ma ◽  
Long Bai ◽  
Miao Wang ◽  
Wu Deng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Virus Disease ◽  
Clinical Manifestations ◽  
Corona Virus

scholarly journals Drug for corona virus: A systematic review

2020 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. 56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bikash Medhi ◽  
Manisha Prajapat ◽  
Phulen Sarma ◽  
Nishant Shekhar ◽  
Pramod Avti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Corona Virus

scholarly journals Risk factors for severe corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients : a systematic review and meta analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lizhen Xu ◽  
Yaqian Mao ◽  
Gang Chen
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Virus Disease ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
High Body Mass Index ◽  
Elderly Male ◽  
Corona Virus ◽  
Laboratory Test Results ◽  
Male Patients ◽  
Underlying Diseases

AbstractImportanceWith the increasing number of infections for COVID-19, the global health resources are deficient. At present, we don’t have specific medicines or vaccines against novel coronavirus pneumonia (NCP) and our assessment of risk factors for patients with severe pneumonia was limited. In order to maximize the use of limited medical resources, we should distinguish between mild and severe patients as early as possible.ObjectiveTo systematically review the evidence of risk factors for severe corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients.Evidence ReviewWe conducted a comprehensive search for primary literature in both Chinese and English electronic bibliographic data bases including China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, Weipu, Chinese Biomedicine Literature Database (CBM-SinoMed), MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register, and Web of science. The American agency for health research and quality (AHRQ) tool were used for assessing risk of bias. Mata-analysis was undertaken using STATA version 15.0.Results20 articles (N=4062 participants) were eligible for this systematic review and meta-analysis. First in this review and meta-analysis, we found that elderly male patients with a high body mass index, high breathing rate and a combination of underlying diseases (such as hypertension, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) were more likely to develop into critically ill patients. second, compared with ordinary patients, severe patients had more significant symptom such as fever and dyspnea. Besides, the laboratory test results of severe patients had more abnormal than non-severe patients, such as the elevated levels of white-cell counts, liver enzymes, lactate dehydrogenase, creatine kinase, c-reactive protein and procalcitonin, etc, while the decreased levels of lymphocytes and albumin, etc.InterpretationThis is the first systematic review investigating the risk factors for severe corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. The findings are presented and discussed by different clinical characteristics. Therefore, our review may provide guidance for clinical decision-making and optimizes resource allocation.Key PointsQuestionWhat are the risk factors for severe patients with corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19)?FindingsFirst in this review and meta-analysis, we found that elderly male patients with a high body mass index, high breathing rate and a combination of underlying diseases were more likely to develop into critically ill patients. second, compared with ordinary patients, severe patients had more significant symptom such as fever and dyspnea. Last, we also found that the laboratory test results of severe patients had more abnormal than non-severe patients.MeaningThis review summaried the risk factors of severe COVID-19 patients and aim to provide a basis for early identification of severe patients by clinicians.

scholarly journals Pivoting Dental Practice Management during the COVID-19 Pandemic—A Systematic Review

Medicina ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 56 (12) ◽  
pp. 644
Author(s):  
Syed Sarosh Mahdi ◽  
Zohaib Ahmed ◽  
Raheel Allana ◽  
Alessandro Peretti ◽  
Francesco Amenta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Infection Control ◽  
Practice Management ◽  
Main Theme ◽  
Dental Practice ◽  
Substantial Impact ◽  
Corona Virus ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Novel Coronavirus ◽  
Dental Professionals

Background and Objectives: The aims of this systematic review were to identify additional infection control measures implemented in dental practice globally to prevent cross-infection and evaluate the psychological impacts of the pandemic among dental professionals. Materials and Methods: A sequential systematic literature search was conducted from December 2019 to 30 April 2020 through PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Google Scholar, Embase, and Web of Science databases. The search yielded the following results: “COVID-19” (n = 12,137), “Novel corona virus” (n = 63), “COVID-19 and dentistry” (n = 46), “COVID-19 and oral health” (n = 41), “Novel Corona virus and Dentistry” (n = 0), “dental health and Novel Coronavirus” (n = 26), and “dental practice and Novel Coronavirus” (n = 6). Results: After a careful review and eliminating articles based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, the final review included 13 articles. Management of infection control is discussed extensively in the literature and remains the main theme of many Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) articles on dentistry. Telephone triage using a questionnaire, hand hygiene, personal protective equipment (PPE) for clinical and nonclinical staff, a preprocedural mouth rinse, and aerosol management have been discussed and implemented in few countries. Three studies recommended that elective treatments for patients with a temperature of >100.4 F or 38 °C should be postponed or performed in an airborne infection isolation room (AIIR) or negative-pressure room. Limiting the number of patients in the waiting area, the removal of shared objects, proper ventilation, and physical distancing were highly recommended. Psychological distress among dental professionals in relation to existing medical conditions and self-efficacy has been discussed. Conclusions: Although the COVID-19 pandemic has had a substantial impact on the dental profession worldwide, our review highlights many practice management approaches to adopt the new norm. More research highlighting evidence-based safety practices and multisectoral collaboration is required to help dental professionals make informed decisions and make the profession safe, both for the patient and dental professionals.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document