scholarly journals The Radiological Images and the Diagnostic of COVID-19

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-90
Author(s):  
Cesar Augusto de Araújo Neto
Keyword(s):  
Gold Standard ◽  
Clinical Investigation ◽  
World Health ◽  
Imaging Method ◽  
Minimal Risk ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Gold Standard Method ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Inflammatory Phase ◽  
Novel Coronavirus

The gold-standard method to identify the presence of COVID-19 is the RT-PCR. However, the imaging diagnostic has been requested when there is suspicion of disease’s presence and/or the inflammatory phase of the disease begins. Ths artices described the most common manifestations and patterns of lung abnormality on computed X-Ray (CXR), computer tomography (CT) and Ultrasound of the chest in COVID-19. Notwithstanding the RT-PCR is the gold-standard diagnostic method for COVID-19, the CT has been shown an essential tool to identify pneumonia and the complications of COVID-19 in a patient. This review article aimed to summarize the radiological findings of COVID-19 researches for the following three principal areas: (1) radiological performance in the detection of COVID-19; (2) radiological role in the diagnosis of COVID-19; and (3) radiological function in the monitoring of COVID-19. We searched the articles in the main database (PubMed/Medline, Elsevier Science Direct, Scopus, Isi Web of Science, Embase, Exerpta Medica, UptoDate, Lilacs, Novel Coronavirus Resource Directory from Elsevier), in the high-impact international scientific Journals (Scimago Journal and Country Rank - SJR - and Journal Citation Reports - JCR), such as The Lancet, Science, Nature, The New England Journal of Medicine, Physiological Reviews, Journal of the American Medical Association, Plos One, Journal of Clinical Investigation, and in the data from Center for Disease Control (CDC), National Institutes of Health (NIH), National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and World Health Organization (WHO). We prior selected meta-analysis, systematic reviews, article reviews and original articles in this order. We reviewed 121 articles and used 57 for this paper from March to May 2020, using the terms coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, novel coronavirus, Wuhan coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome, 2019-nCoV, 2019 novel coronavirus, n-CoV-2, covid, n-Sars-2, COVID-19, corona virus, coronaviruses, diagnostic, radiology, imaging, computed tomography, chest, CT, X-Ray, with the tools MeSH (Medical Subject Headings), AND, OR, and characters [,“,; /., to ensure the best review topics. We concluded that the imaging method to detect the features of COVID-19 plays an important role in the diagnosis and follow up of the patient with COVID-19 pneumonia. Despite CT has a better sensitivity when compared to CRX and ultrasound, the portable CRX and portable ultrasound could be a new tool with minimal risk of contamination and with good sensitivity.

scholarly journals Diagnostic of COVID-19: Chest Computer Tomography or RT-PCR?

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 177-183
Author(s):  
ISI-SENAI-CIMATEC Group
Keyword(s):  
Standard Method ◽  
Computer Tomography ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
Clinical Investigation ◽  
Diagnostic Methods ◽  
World Health ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Medical Subject Headings ◽  
Gold Standard Method ◽  
Novel Coronavirus

In this review article, we presented a gold-standard method to detect the SARS-CoV-2, the novel virus that is causing the COVID-19 outbreak, and the use of a computer tomography (CT) method to detect the complications of the disease. We showed the controversial analysis about which method is the best to detect the disease earlier due to the COVID-19 complications. We searched the articles in the main database (PubMed/Medline, Elsevier Science Direct, Scopus, Isi Web of Science, Embase, Excerpta Medica, UptoDate, Lilacs, Novel Coronavirus Resource Directory from Elsevier), in the high-impact international scientific Journals (Scimago Journal and Country Rank - SJR - and Journal Citation Reports - JCR), such as The Lancet, Science, Nature, The New England Journal of Medicine, Physiological Reviews, Journal of the American Medical Association, Plos One, Journal of Clinical Investigation, and in the data from Center for Disease Control (CDC), National Institutes of Health (NIH), National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and World Health Organization (WHO). We prior selected meta-analysis, systematic reviews, article reviews, and original articles in this order. We reviewed 96 articles and used 45 from March to June 2020, using the terms coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, novel coronavirus, Wuhan coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome, 2019-nCoV, 2019 novel coronavirus, n-CoV-2, covid, n-SARS-2, COVID-19, corona virus, coronaviruses, RT-PCR, computer tomography (CT), diagnostic methods, with the tools MeSH (Medical Subject Headings), AND, OR, and the characters [,“,; /., to ensure the best review topics. We concluded that chest CT plays an important role in the timely detection of lung infection abnormalities in the early phase of COVID-19 infection. However, the RT-PCR is the gold standard method to detect SARS-CoV-2.  

scholarly journals Evaluation of two RT-PCR techniques for SARS-CoV-2 RNA detection in serum for microbiological diagnosis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra Martin Ramirez ◽  
Nelly Daniella Zurita Cruz ◽  
Ainhoa Gutierrez-Cobos ◽  
Diego Anibal Rodriguez Serrano ◽  
Isidoro Gonzalez Alvaro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Predictive Value ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Serum Samples ◽  
Rna Detection ◽  
Gold Standard Method ◽  
Study Evaluation ◽  
Novel Coronavirus ◽  
Pcr Techniques ◽  
New Strategies

Presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in serum (viraemia) in COVID-19 patients has been related to poor prognosis and death. The aim of this study was to evaluate the ability of two commercial reverse real-time-PCR (rRT-PCR) kits, cobas SARS-CoV-2 (Cobas test) and TaqPath COVID-19 CE-IVD RT-PCR Kit (Taqpath test), to detect viraemia in COVID-19 patients and their implementation as routine diagnosis in microbiology laboratory. This retrospective cohort study was conducted with 203 adult patients admitted to Hospital Universitario de La Princesa, (89 Intensive Care Unit and 114 ward) with at least one serum sample collected in the first 48 hours from admission. A total 265 serum samples were included for study. Evaluation of both rRT-PCR techniques was performed comparing with the gold standard, a Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Nucleic Acid Diagnostic Kit; considering at least one target as a positive result. Comparison of Cobas test and Taqpath test with the gold standard method, showed high values of specificity (93.75 and 92.19 respectively) and Positive Predictive Value (92.92 and 99.88 respectively). Nevertheless, sensitivity (53.72 and 73.63 respectively) and Negative Predictive Value (32.53 and 42.99 respectively) were lower; Kappa values were 0.35 for cobas test and 0.56 for Taqpath test. For both techniques, differences of viraemia detection between the ICU and non-ICU patients were significant (p<0.001). Consequently, SARS-CoV-2 viraemia positive results obtained by both rRT-PCR should be considered good tools and may help in handling COVID-19 patients. Moreover, these methods could be easily integrated in the routine laboratory COVID-19 diagnosis and may open new strategies based on an early COVID-19 treatment.

How Fast Can Acute Promyelocytic Leukemia Be Diagnosed? - Evaluation of PML Immunofluorescence, Flowcytometric Immunophenotypic Analysis and RT-PCR for PML/RARa.

Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (22) ◽  
pp. 4674-4674
Author(s):  
Neelam Varma ◽  
Chetna Agarwal ◽  
Subhash Varma ◽  
Pankaj Malhotra
Keyword(s):  
Acute Promyelocytic Leukemia ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
Promyelocytic Leukemia ◽  
Leukemic Cells ◽  
Nuclear Staining ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Gold Standard Method ◽  
Speckled Pattern ◽  
Hla Dr ◽  
Morphological Criteria

Abstract Abstract 4674 Introduction Acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL) constitutes nearly 5-8% of all leukemias, however its frequency is higher in some populations. It is essential to diagnose APL rapidly and accurately as it often presents as a devastating coagulopathy and shows unique sensitivity to all-trans retinoic acid (ATRA). A great deal of morphological, immunophenotypic and cytogenetic heterogeneity of APL adversely affects efforts for providing an accurate and rapid diagnosis. APL is associated with t(15;17)(q22;q12) with generation of a novel PML/RARa fusion protein in 95% cases. Cases positive for t(15;17)/ PML/RARa are ATRA sensitive, while some of those without it [eg t(11;17)(q23:q21)] are not. Several techniques such as karyotyping, fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH), and reverse –transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), used for its detection are time consuming, laborious, costly and require specialized laboratories. Lately, immunnostaining methods have been described using PML antibodies for faster diagnosis of APL. The distinction between APL (AML-M3) and non AML-M3 AML is based upon microgranular versus speckled pattern observed in the nuclei of leukemic cells. Only few studies have described use of PML monoclonal antibody (Moab) – PG-M3. Typical flowcytometric (FCM) immunophenotype of APL cells reveals positivity for CD33 and CD13, with negativity for HLA-DR and CD34. RT-PCR (gold standard method) is used to detect classical APL genetic abnormality PML/RARa hybrid transcripts resulting from t(15;17)(q22;q21) and also the alternate translocations associated with APL. We undertook this study to assess the role of PML immunoflourescence (IF), flowcytometry and RT-PCR for quick diagnosis of APL. Patients and methods During last 17 months, peripheral blood and/or bone marrow samples from 93 consecutive acute non-lymphocytic leukemia (ANLL) cases were obtained after informed consent. All the cases were classified using standard morphological criteria (FAB classification). RT-PCR for PML/RARa, FCM immunophenotyping (IP) (Moab panel comprising of CD13, CD33, CD34, HLA-DR, CD56, CD2, CD19, CD14 and CD64) and PML IF (using anti-PML Moab PG-M3 clone) were performed. In the PML IF study, staining pattern of leukemic cells was noted within 2 hours of staining, using Leica DM LB2 epifluorescence microscope equipped with chilled digital color camera and Leica FW 4000 software. In our experience PML-IF could be completed in 2-4 hrs, FCM-IP in 3-5 hrs and RT-PCR in 12-24 hrs. Results 27/93 (29%) cases belonged to AML-M3 category and rest to different categories of AML (M0:1, M1:9, M2: 39, M4:10, M5:6, M6:1). RT–PCR for PML/RARa was positive in 24/27 (88.88%) cases with morphological diagnosis of AML-M3. bcr1 transcripts were detected in 2 (8.33%), bcr2 transcripts in 8 (33.33%) and bcr3 transcripts in 14 (58.33%) among 24 cases. 22/24 cases positive for PML/RARa by RT-PCR showed typical microgranular pattern of nuclear staining on PML IF (91.66% concordance). PML IF did not give any signal in one case and another one showed speckled pattern. In non AML-M3 cases, RT-PCR for PML-RARa was negative in all and PML immunoflourescence staining revealed speckled pattern in 59/66 (89.39%) cases. Typical FCM signature for APL was seen in 86.66% cases positive for PML/RARa by RT-PCR. Two cases were HLA DR positive and one out of these was positive for PML-RARa RT-PCR. Conclusions Immunostaining with PML-antibody was found to be a rapid, simple, cost effective & less time consuming technique to detect PML-RARA with high rate of concordance with the gold standard RT-PCR. This could be routinely applied as an upfront investigation to pick up the APL cases. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

scholarly journals Review on Diagnostic Methods for SARS-CoV-2

Coronaviruses ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 01 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chandrashekhar Chauriya ◽  
Mahesh Sahu ◽  
Anuj Kumar Singh ◽  
Amita Verma
Keyword(s):  
Disease Control ◽  
Diagnostic Methods ◽  
World Health ◽  
Diagnostic Strategy ◽  
Serological Testing ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Control And Prevention ◽  
Antigen Tests ◽  
Novel Coronavirus

Background: In December 2019, a large number of patients with a novel coronavirus were identified in Wuhan, China. The novel coronavirus (COVID-19) is highly contagious and increasing the rate of mortality day by day. The World Health Organization declared COVID-19 as a worldwide pandemic on March 11, 2020. Early diagnosis, of SARS-CoV-2, can restrict the COVID-19 pandemic. Objective: We aim to study the currently available diagnostic methods for COVID-19. Methods: World Health Organisation portal, Centre for Disease control and prevention portal, Indian Council of Medical Research portal, Chinese Centre for Disease Control and prevention portal, Science Direct, Google Scholar, Research Gate, etc. were searched for obtaining data. Results: Rapid diagnosis and prompt treatment can reduce the number of prospective cases. The diagnostic strategy encompasses the screening of virus with nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) such as real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assays. Serological testing is a diagnostic procedure used for identifying the presence of an immune responses. Radiological findings in individuals with COVID-19 were characterised by multiple areas of consolidation in chest. Rapid antigen tests are in- vitro diagnostics have been designed to give results within 10–20 min. Conclusion: Rapid, simple, and safe diagnosis of COVID-19 has a great impact on deciding clinical and epidemiological factors. RT-PCR results often require 5 to 6 hours. Diagnosis of by serological testing is not suitable but they are important epidemiologically. At present, the best radiological strategy remains undefined. Rapid antigen tests have limitations on sensitivity.

scholarly journals An atypical case: RT-PCR-negative, sero-positive covid-19 patient

Pneumologia ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 69 (2) ◽  
pp. 107-114
Author(s):  
William Suriady ◽  
Andika Chandra Putra ◽  
Wiwien Heru Wiyono ◽  
Mohammad Fahmi Alatas ◽  
Bettia Bermawi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
False Negative ◽  
Severe Pneumonia ◽  
World Health ◽  
Diagnostic Process ◽  
The Novel ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Atypical Case ◽  
Polymerase Chain ◽  
Novel Coronavirus ◽  
Health Organization

Abstract The novel coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), has become a public health emergency of international concern. The first confirmed COVID-19 case in Indonesia was announced on 2 March 2020, and later on, 11,192 confirmed cases were reported as of 3 May. The World Health Organization has stated that performing a real-time reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) specific for SARS-CoV-2 on specimens from the upper and the lower respiratory tracts, especially nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs, is the standard diagnostic procedure for COVID-19. In Indonesia, we also use other diagnostic tests, such as rapid antibody tests specific for SARS-CoV-2. Herein, we report an atypical case of COVID-19 and describe the diagnostic process, the clinical course, with progression to severe pneumonia on Week 3 of illness and the case management. We also try to highlight the possibility of false-negative RT-PCR tests.

scholarly journals Assessment of the Rapid Immunochromatographic Test as a Diagnostic Tool for Norovirus Related Diarrhea in Children

2019 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
pp. 48
Author(s):  
Reza Gunadi Ranuh ◽  
Alpha Fardah Athiyyah ◽  
Deanty Ayu PA ◽  
Andy Darma ◽  
Dadik Rahardjo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
Diagnostic Tool ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
Pediatric Patients ◽  
Immunochromatographic Test ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Gold Standard Method ◽  
Stool Samples ◽  
Sensitivity Specificity

In developing countries, Norovirus is the second-leading cause of acute diarrhea, after rotavirus. The approved gold standard method for diagnosis of norovirus infection is RT-PCR. The rapid immunochromatographic test is a novel and expedient method for diagnosing norovirus that is relatively affordable. However, the use of the rapid immunochromatographic test remains controversial because of its accuracy. This study aimed to explore whether the rapid immunochromatographic test could be used for diagnosing norovirus-related diarrhea in children. Rapid immunochromatographic test (QuickNaviTM-Norovirus2) and RT-PCR on stool samples was used to diagnose norovirus. Stool samples were obtained from pediatric patients aged between 1 and 60 months who had diarrhea and were admitted to the pediatric ward at Dr. Soetomo General Hospital Surabaya, between April 2013 and March 2014. Ninety-four subjects provided stool samples that were tested using QuickNaviTM-Noro2 and RT-PCR. Using the test, 64 samples tested positive for norovirus and 30 tested negatives. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of the rapid immunochromatographic test were consecutively 90.3%, 42.9%, 43.8%, 90%, and 58.5%. RT-PCR was used to test all samples to assess the accuracy, which showed that one from 31 samples contained the GI strain (1.1%), while 30 samples (32%) contained the GII strain. This study definitively establishes that the rapid immunochromatography test is not sufficiently accurate for use as a screening or diagnostic tool in norovirus-related diarrhea cases in children.

scholarly journals The Value of Pre-operative Testing for COVID-19 in Urological Patients

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. e29-e34
Author(s):  
Vasileios Bonatsos ◽  
Asif Raza
Keyword(s):  
Gold Standard ◽  
Diagnostic Tests ◽  
Acute Infection ◽  
World Health Organisation ◽  
World Health ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Chain Reaction ◽  
The World ◽  
Polymerase Chain ◽  
Pcr Assays

According to the World Health Organisation there have been 30,055,710 confirmed COVID-19 cases and 933,433 confirmed deaths across 216 countries globally. The availability of the complete SARS-CoV-2 genome relatively early in the epidemic has enabled the development of tests for the diagnosis of COVID-19. There are two broad categories of SARS-CoV-2 diagnostic tests currently in use or development: (1) Real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests and (2) serology tests. RT-PCR is considered the gold standard and preferred method of diagnosis of acute infection. There is, however, a plethora of laboratory-developed and commercial RT-PCR assays with different gene targets. We discuss the value of pre-operative testing for COVID-19 before urological surgery.

scholarly journals Combating the Coronavirus Pandemic: Early Detection, Medical Treatment, and a Concerted Effort by the Global Community

Research ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zichao Luo ◽  
Melgious Jin Yan Ang ◽  
Siew Yin Chan ◽  
Zhigao Yi ◽  
Yi Yiing Goh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Respiratory Illness ◽  
Viral Disease ◽  
Disease Diagnosis ◽  
World Health ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Sudden Loss ◽  
Difficulty Breathing ◽  
Polymerase Chain ◽  
Novel Coronavirus ◽  
Health Organization

The World Health Organization (WHO) has declared the outbreak of 2019 novel coronavirus, known as 2019-nCoV, a pandemic, as the coronavirus has now infected over 2.6 million people globally and caused more than 185,000 fatalities as of April 23, 2020. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) causes a respiratory illness with symptoms such as dry cough, fever, sudden loss of smell, and, in more severe cases, difficulty breathing. To date, there is no specific vaccine or treatment proven effective against this viral disease. Early and accurate diagnosis of COVID-19 is thus critical to curbing its spread and improving health outcomes. Reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is commonly used to detect the presence of COVID-19. Other techniques, such as recombinase polymerase amplification (RPA), loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP), clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR), and microfluidics, have allowed better disease diagnosis. Here, as part of the effort to expand screening capacity, we review advances and challenges in the rapid detection of COVID-19 by targeting nucleic acids, antigens, or antibodies. We also summarize potential treatments and vaccines against COVID-19 and discuss ongoing clinical trials of interventions to reduce viral progression.

scholarly journals X-ray versus computerized tomography (CT) images for detection of COVID-19 using deep learning

F1000Research ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 1292
Author(s):  
Nandish Siddeshappa ◽  
Tejashri Varur ◽  
Krithika Subramani ◽  
Siddhi Puranik ◽  
Niranjana Sampathila
Keyword(s):  
Deep Learning ◽  
Health Care Systems ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Ct Images ◽  
Alternative Methods ◽  
World Health ◽  
Rt Pcr ◽  
Training Time ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Time Required

Background: The recent outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and the disease corresponding to it (coronavirus disease 2019; COVID-19) has been declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization. COVID-19 has become a global crisis, shattering health care systems, and weakening economies of most countries. The current methods of testing that are employed include reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), rapid antigen testing, and lateral flow testing with RT-PCR being used as the golden standard despite its accuracy being at a mere 63%. It is a manual process which is time consuming, taking about an average of 48 hours to obtain the results. Alternative methods employing deep learning techniques and radiologic images are up and coming. Methods: In this paper, we used a dataset consisting of COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 folders for both X-Ray and CT images which contained a total number of 17,599 images. This dataset has been used to compare 3 (non-pre-trained) CNN models and 5 pre-trained models and their performances in detecting COVID-19 under various parameters like validation accuracy, training accuracy, validation loss, training loss, prediction accuracy, sensitivity and the training time required, with CT and X-Ray images separately. Results: Xception provided the highest validation accuracy (88%) when trained with the dataset containing the X- ray images while VGG19 provided the highest validation accuracy (81.2%) when CT images are used for training. Conclusions: The model, VGG16, showed the most consistent performance, with a validation accuracy of 76.6% for CT images and 87.76% for X-ray images. When comparing the results between the modalities, models trained with the X-ray dataset showed better performances than the same models trained with CT images. Hence, it can be concluded that X-ray images provide a higher accuracy in detecting COVID-19 making it an effective method for detecting COVID-19 in real life.

scholarly journals Therapies Against COVID-19: a Running to a Treatment

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 184-248
Author(s):  
ISI-SENAI-CIMATEC Group ◽  
Development and Innovation Laboratory of Butantan Institute
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Guidelines ◽  
Clinical Investigation ◽  
Combined Therapy ◽  
Alternative Therapies ◽  
World Health ◽  
Medical Subject Headings ◽  
Antiinflammatory Drugs ◽  
Cell Receptors ◽  
Novel Coronavirus

There is no specific drug or therapy against COVID-19. Since the beginning of the pandemic, scientists are running to discover a drug or therapy that can treat the disease. What we found until now are a combined drug and therapies that can mitigate the effects of the disease in the human body and how to manage the patient better. In this article, we tried to join the new discoveries and presented the drugs and therapies and their mechanisms to combat the SARS-CoV-2. We showed the immunomodulators, parasiticides, antiviral drugs (focused on Remdesivir), antimalarial drugs, anti-cytokine drugs focused on the role of IL-6, Reumathological drugs, inhibitors of cell-receptors, antiinflammatory drugs, especially the role of corticosteroids (dexamethasone), antibiotics (azithromycin), anti-thrombotic drugs, blood derivates therapies and alternative therapies currently used against COVID-19. Also, we listed the main results of clinical trials of new therapies presented by Recommended Panel Treatment Guidelines [NIAID-RML (USA)]. We searched the data in the main database (PubMed/Medline, Elsevier Science Direct, Scopus, Isi Web of Science, Embase, Excerpta Medica, UptoDate, Lilacs, Novel Coronavirus Resource Directory from Elsevier), in the high-impact international scientific Journals (Scimago Journal and Country Rank - SJR - and Journal Citation Reports - JCR), such as The Lancet, Science, Nature, The New England Journal of Medicine, Physiological Reviews, Journal of the American Medical Association, Plos One, Journal of Clinical Investigation, and in the data from Center for Disease Control (CDC), National Institutes of Health (NIH), National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and World Health Organization (WHO). We prior selected meta-analysis, systematic reviews, article reviews, and original articles in this order. We used 302 articles from March to June 2020, using the terms coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, novel coronavirus, Wuhan coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome, 2019-nCoV, 2019 novel coronavirus, n-CoV-2, covid, n-SARS-2, COVID-19, corona virus, coronaviruses, immunomodulators, parasiticides, antiviral, antimalarial, anti-thrombotic and anti-cytokine, antiinflammatory, Reumathological drugs, inhibitors of cell-receptors, antibiotics, blood derivates therapies and alternative therapies, with the tools MeSH (Medical Subject Headings), AND, OR, and the characters [,“,; /., to ensure the best review topics. We concluded that despite there is no treatment or drugs against the COVID-19, a combined therapy can help and mitigate the effects of the disease, helping the immune system to combat the virus.  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document