Covid-19

Coronavirus Antibody Tests—What They Tell Us
The pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to affect much of the world. Knowledge of diagnostic tests for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is still evolving, and a clear understanding of the nature of the tests and interpretation of their findings is important. This Viewpoint describes how to interpret 2 types of diagnostic tests commonly in use for SARS-CoV-2 infections—reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and IgM and IgG enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)—and how the results may vary over time (Figure).

Figure. Estimated Variation Over Time in Diagnostic Tests for Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Infection Relative to Symptom Onset
View LargeDownload
Estimated Variation Over Time in Diagnostic Tests for Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Infection Relative to Symptom Onset
Estimated time intervals and rates of viral detection are based on data from several published reports. Because of variability in values among studies, estimated time intervals should be considered approximations and the probability of detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection is presented qualitatively. SARS-CoV-2 indicates severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2; PCR, polymerase chain reaction.

aDetection only occurs if patients are followed up proactively from the time of exposure.

bMore likely to register a negative than a positive result by PCR of a nasopharyngeal swab.

Detection of Viral RNA by RT-PCR

Thus far, the most commonly used and reliable test for diagnosis of COVID-19 has been the RT-PCR test performed using nasopharyngeal swabs or other upper respiratory tract specimens, including throat swab or, more recently, saliva. A variety of RNA gene targets are used by different manufacturers, with most tests targeting 1 or more of the envelope (env), nucleocapsid (N), spike (S), RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp), and ORF1 genes. The sensitivities of the tests to individual genes are comparable according to comparison studies except the RdRp-SARSr (Charité) primer probe, which has a slightly lower sensitivity likely due to a mismatch in the reverse primer.1

In most individuals with symptomatic COVID-19 infection, viral RNA in the nasopharyngeal swab as measured by the cycle threshold (Ct) becomes detectable as early as day 1 of symptoms and peaks within the first week of symptom onset. The Ct is the number of replication cycles required to produce a fluorescent signal, with lower Ct values representing higher viral RNA loads. A Ct value less than 40 is clinically reported as PCR positive. This positivity starts to decline by week 3 and subsequently becomes undetectable. However, the Ct values obtained in severely ill hospitalized patients are lower than the Ct values of mild cases, and PCR positivity may persist beyond 3 weeks after illness onset when most mild cases will yield a negative result.2 However, a “positive” PCR result reflects only the detection of viral RNA and does not necessarily indicate presence of viable virus.3

In some cases, viral RNA has been detected by RT-PCR even beyond week 6 following the first positive test. A few cases have also been reported positive after 2 consecutive negative PCR tests performed 24 hours apart. It is unclear if this is a testing error, reinfection, or reactivation. In a study of 9 patients, attempts to isolate the virus in culture were not successful beyond day 8 of illness onset, which correlates with the decline of infectivity beyond the first week.3 That is in part why the “symptom-based strategy” of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) indicates that health care workers can return to work, if “at least 3 days (72 hours) have passed since recovery defined as resolution of fever without the use of fever-reducing medications and improvement in respiratory symptoms (e.g., cough, shortness of breath); and, at least 10 days have passed since symptoms first appeared.”4

The timeline of PCR positivity is different in specimens other than nasopharyngeal swab. PCR positivity declines more slowly in sputum and may still be positive after nasopharyngeal swabs are negative.3 In one study, PCR positivity in stool was observed in 55 of 96 (57%) infected patients and remained positive in stool beyond nasopharyngeal swab by a median of 4 to 11 days, but was unrelated to clinical severity.2 Persistence of PCR in sputum and stool was found to be similar as assessed by Wölfel et al.3

In a study of 205 patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection, RT-PCR positivity was highest in bronchoalveolar lavage specimens (93%), followed by sputum (72%), nasal swab (63%), and pharyngeal swab (32%).5 False-negative results mainly occurred due to inappropriate timing of sample collection in relation to illness onset and deficiency in sampling technique, especially of nasopharyngeal swabs. Specificity of most of the RT-PCR tests is 100% because the primer design is specific to the genome sequence of SARS-CoV-2. Occasional false-positive results may occur due to technical errors and reagent contamination.

Detection of Antibodies to SARS-CoV-2

COVID-19 infection can also be detected indirectly by measuring the host immune response to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Serological diagnosis is especially important for patients with mild to moderate illness who may present late, beyond the first 2 weeks of illness onset. Serological diagnosis also is becoming an important tool to understand the extent of COVID-19 in the community and to identify individuals who are immune and potentially “protected” from becoming infected.

The most sensitive and earliest serological marker is total antibodies, levels of which begin to increase from the second week of symptom onset.6 Although IgM and IgG ELISA have been found to be positive even as early as the fourth day after symptom onset, higher levels occur in the second and third week of illness.

For example, IgM and IgG seroconversion occurred in all patients between the third and fourth week of clinical illness onset as measured in 23 patients by To et al7 and 85 patients by Xiang et al.8 Thereafter IgM begins to decline and reaches lower levels by week 5 and almost disappears by week 7, whereas IgG persists beyond 7 weeks.9 In a study of 140 patients, combined sensitivity of PCR and IgM ELISA directed at nucleocapsid (NC) antigen was 98.6% vs 51.9% with a single PCR test. During the first 5.5 days, quantitative PCR had a higher positivity rate than IgM, whereas IgM ELISA had a higher positivity rate after day 5.5 of illness.10

ELISA-based IgM and IgG antibody tests have greater than 95% specificity for diagnosis of COVID-19. Testing of paired serum samples with the initial PCR and the second 2 weeks later can further increase diagnostic accuracy. Typically, the majority of antibodies are produced against the most abundant protein of the virus, which is the NC. Therefore, tests that detect antibodies to NC would be the most sensitive. However, the receptor-binding domain of S (RBD-S) protein is the host attachment protein, and antibodies to RBD-S would be more specific and are expected to be neutralizing. Therefore, using one or both antigens for detecting IgG and IgM would result in high sensitivity.7 Antibodies may, however, have cross-reactivity with SARS-CoV and possibly other coronaviruses.

Rapid point-of-care tests for detection of antibodies have been widely developed and marketed and are of variable quality. Many manufacturers do not reveal the nature of antigens used. These tests are purely qualitative in nature and can only indicate the presence or absence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. The presence of neutralizing antibodies can only be confirmed by a plaque reduction neutralization test. However, high titers of IgG antibodies detected by ELISA have been shown to positively correlate with neutralizing antibodies.7 The long-term persistence and duration of protection conferred by the neutralizing antibodies remains unknown.

Conclusions

Using available evidence, a clinically useful timeline of diagnostic markers for detection of COVID-19 has been devised (Figure). Most of the available data are for adult populations who are not immunocompromised. The time course of PCR positivity and seroconversion may vary in children and other groups, including the large population of asymptomatic individuals who go undiagnosed without active surveillance. Many questions remain, particularly how long potential immunity lasts in individuals, both asymptomatic and symptomatic, who are infected with SARS-CoV-2.

Back to topArticle Information
Corresponding Author: Sundararaj Stanleyraj Jeremiah, MD, Department of Microbiology and Molecular Biodefense Research, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, 3-9 Fukuura, Kanazawa-ku, Yokohama 236-0004, Japan (rediffjerry@gmail.com).

Published Online: May 6, 2020. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.8259

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.

References
1.
Nalla AK, Casto AM, Huang MW, et al. Comparative performance of SARS-CoV-2 detection assays using seven different primer/probe sets and one assay kit.  J Clin Microbiol. 2020;JCM.00557-20. Published online April 8, 2020. doi:10.1128/JCM.00557-20PubMedGoogle Scholar
2.
Zheng S, Fan J, Yu F, et al. Viral load dynamics and disease severity in patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 in Zhejiang province, China, January-March 2020: retrospective cohort study.  BMJ. 2020;369:m1443. Published online April 21, 2020. doi:10.1136/bmj.m1443PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
3.
Wölfel R, Corman VM, Guggemos W, et al. Virological assessment of hospitalized patients with COVID-2019.  Nature. 2020. Published online April 1, 2020. doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2196-xPubMedGoogle Scholar
4.
CDC. Return-to-work criteria for healthcare workers. Updated April 30, 2020. Accessed May 3, 2020. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/return-to-work.html
5.
Wang W, Xu Y, Gao R, et al. Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in different types of clinical specimens.  JAMA. 2020. Published online March 11, 2020. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.3786
ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
6.
Lou B, Li T, Zheng S, et al Serology characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 infection since the exposure and post symptoms onset. medRxiv. Preprint posted March 27, 2020. doi:10.1101/2020.03.23.20041707
7.
To KK-W, Tsang OT-Y, Leung W-S, et al. Temporal profiles of viral load in posterior oropharyngeal saliva samples and serum antibody responses during infection by SARS-CoV-2: an observational cohort study.  Lancet Infect Dis. 2020;20(5):565-574. doi:10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30196-1PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
8.
Xiang F, Wang X, He X, et al. Antibody detection and dynamic characteristics in patients with COVID-19.  Clin Infect Dis. 2020;ciaa461. Published online April 19, 2020. doi:10.1093/cid/ciaa461PubMedGoogle Scholar
9.
Xiao AT, Gao C, Zhang S. Profile of specific antibodies to SARS-CoV-2: the first report.  J Infect. 2020;S0163-4453(20)30138-9. Published online March 21, 2020. doi:10.1016/j.jinf.2020.03.012PubMedGoogle Scholar
10.
Guo L, Ren L, Yang S, et al. Profiling early humoral response to diagnose novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19).  Clin Infect Dis. 2020;ciaa310. Published online March 21, 2020. doi:10.1093/cid/ciaa310PubMedGoogle Scholar
Comment
6 Comments for this articleEXPAND ALL
May 8, 2020
Interpreting a Variety of Diagnostic Tests for SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19
Michael McAleer, PhD (Econometrics), Queen's | Asia University, Taiwan
The detailed and informative paper on interpreting diagnostic tests for the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes the COVID-19 disease is based on two types of diagnostics in common use, namely :

(1) Reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR);

(2) IgM and IgG enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).

It is striking that the results of the diagnostic tests can and do vary over time, which lends itself to the possibility of rigorous time series analysis, if appropriate data were to be made available.

The null hypothesis of any diagnostic test of the virus and the associated disease, as given in (1), is thata negative test is presumed, namely:

Null Hypothesis (H0): No confirmation of the virus.

The critical issue in using any diagnostic test, or combination of a variety of tests, is how to achieve a correct diagnosis of a positive outcome.

For a detailed discussion of diagnostic testing of COVID-19, see (2), which suggests a number of diagnostics of the viral infection, none of which seems to have been used in the invaluable Viewpoint.

It is well known that the purpose of any diagnostic test is to achieve high power, which involves the rejection of a false null hypothesis, leading to a true positive diagnosis.

In cases where several diagnostic tests are available, with none being paramount, the use of a variety of tests will lead to a more accurate diagnosis by increasing the number of tests.

Based on available data for adult populations without being immunocompromised, the estimated variation over time in the outcomes of the diagnostic tests is considerable, in terms of amplitude, shape, and the length of time since the onset of the disease symptoms.

As the estimated time intervals and rates of detection are based on separate reports, each of which has different assumptions and distinct methodologies, the data are approximations, such that the probability of detection of the disease, based on maximizing the power of the various test procedures, is presented qualitatively rather than quantitatively.

The collection and availability of time series data from different studies, according to the age of patients, existing comorbidities, types of preexisting conditions, including the various stages such as for cancer patients, their current treatments, and genetic markers, would lead to an invaulable unbalanced panel data set.

Such a rich set of data could be used to predict the probability of a more accurate detection of infections through a range of diagnostic tests.

References

1. McAleer, M. 2020. Is one diagnostic test for COVID-19 enough? Journal of Risk and Financial Management, 13(4:77), 1-3.

2. Sharfstein, Joshua M., Becker. S, and Michelle M. Mello. 2020. Diagnostic testing for the novel coronavirus. JAMA. Published online March 9, 2020. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.3864.CONFLICT OF INTEREST: None ReportedREAD MORE
May 9, 2020
Role of IgA in the Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibody Response
Ger Rijkers, PhD | Laboratory for Medical Microbiology and Immunology, St. Elisabeth Hospital, Tilburg, The Netherlands
In their Viewpoint on Interpreting Diagnostic Tests for SARS-CoV-2 Sethuraman and colleagues may have left out a major player of the humoral immune response against respiratory viruses, and that is IgA. By now there are a number of publications which demonstrate a clear-cut IgA anti-SARS-CoV-2 response (1-3). In our own series of over 35 patients, close analysis (3 serum samples per week) showed a robust IgA response with a kinetic pattern similar to that of the IgG response: on average 10 days after onset of symptoms, 50% of patients were positive for IgA and IgG antibodies and by week 3plateau levels for IgA and IgG were reached. In the Figure of this paper the legend thus could be adapted by labeling of the green dashed curve as representing IgG and IgA antibodies.

References

1. Padoan A, Sciacovelli L, Basso D, et al. IgA-Ab response to spike glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2 in patients with COVID-19: A longitudinal study. Clin Chim Acta. 2020; 507:164-166. doi: 10.1016/j.cca.2020.04.026.

2. Béné MC, de Carvalho M, Eveillard M, Lebri Y. Good IgA bad IgG in SARS-CoV-2 infection? Clin Infect Dis. 2020. pii: ciaa426. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciaa426.

3. Okba NMA, Müller MA, Li W, Wang C, et al. Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2- Specific Antibody Responses in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients. Emerg Infect Dis. 2020;26(7).CONFLICT OF INTEREST: None ReportedREAD MORE
May 9, 2020
Looking Forward to Updating This With Results of Newly Emerging Antigen Test
William Prendergast, MD | Retired Ophthalmologist, former Clin. Asst. Prof. @ OHSU
Excellent summary of testing available up to now. Brings together a lot of useful information. I sincerely hope that we can look forward to the authors updating this survey with information about antigen testing, which, I am reading in today's newspaper, was just given emergency approval by the FDA.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST: None Reported
May 11, 2020
Prognostic Value of Antibody-Relevance
Liz Jenny-Avital, MD | Jacobi Medical Center
I would love to see an analysis of Ab (even neutralizing Ab) among those who survive and those who die. Neutralizing Ab may not be protective, at least not in patients already sick enough to be hospitalized. Such an analysis might better inform our current belief in the value of convalescent plasma (CP). I believe that checking Ab in sick patients admitted to hospital might temper the enthusiasm for use of CP.

That said, I think Ab may be useful for diagnosing some later COVID-associated morbidity (eg clot) when nasopharyngeal PCR is negative.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST: None Reported
May 11, 2020
Synchronous Seroconversion of IgG and IgM
Vedat Aslan, MD | Antalya Education and Research Hospital
If antigen on the surface T cell receptor matches the B cells' MHC receptor, it triggers proliferation and antibody production.

Some B cells that are approved by T cells turn to short-life plasma cells that produce only IgM antibodies. This takes a short time. IgM antibodies are less specific and have low affinity. They can not pass through normal tissues.

Some of these B cells go to germinal centers of lymphoid tissues. After somatic hypermutation and class switch, they turn to long-lived plasma cells and memory cells that produce IgA, IgG or IgE. This takes a longertime.

Synchronous seroconversion of IgG and IgM means SARS-CoV-2 is not a new virus for the patient because the IgG response needs about two weeks in response to new antigens.

There are two possibilities:

1: SARS or another coronaviruses' surface antigens are the same as SARS-CoV-2 and so the antibody response is the same. Most Chinese people are immune to most of the coronaviruses. They can carry the virus but do not develop serious pneumonia more than European and American people.

2: The antibody test used for diagnosis has cross reactivity to other coronaviruses.CONFLICT OF INTEREST: None ReportedREAD MORE
May 14, 2020
Humoral Response in Asymptomatic Patients
Bader Alwadaany, MSN | Kuwait PAAET, college of Nursing
As it is still empirically baffling to pinpoint the factors influencing display of COVID 19 symptoms it would be informative to examine seroconversion for IgG, A and M and their titre levels in asymptomatic patients.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST: None Reported
See More About
Infectious Diseases Pathology and Laboratory Medicine Coronavirus (COVID19)
Download PDF
Cite This
PermissionsComment
CME & MOC
Coronavirus Resource Center

Trending
Research is learning
Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2–Specific Antibodies in Los Angeles County, California
June 16, 2020
Research is learning
Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in Different Types of Clinical Specimens
May 12, 2020
Research is learning
Possible Vertical Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 From an Infected Mother to Her Newborn
May 12, 2020
Select Your Interests

JOB LISTINGS ON JAMA CAREER CENTER®
Clinical Researcher
Bethesda, Maryland, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
ALLERGIST/IMMUNOLOGIST
Shreveport, Louisiana
Physician (Telemedicine)
NYC, Boston, Houston, Atlanta, Los Angeles, Dallas, Miami, Charlotte, -All Urban/Metro Areas in US
Allergist/Immunologist
Berkeley Heights, New Jersey
Allergy and Immunology Physician (St. Joseph Health Medical Group)
Eureka, California
See more at JAMA Career Center
Others Also Liked
Three Novel Real-Time RT-PCR Assays for Detection of COVID-19 Virus
Peihua Niu et al., China CDC Weekly, 2020
NGS-Based Target Capture for SARS-CoV-2 Detection and Characterization
GenomeWeb
The SARS-CoV-2 Panel (RUO): A High-Throughput and Robust Assay with a Low Limit of Detection for Use on the MassARRAY System
GenomeWeb
Powered by
I consent to the use of Google Analytics and related cookies across the TrendMD network (widget, website, blog). Learn more Yes No
Trending
Seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2–Specific Antibodies in Los Angeles County, California
JAMA Research June 16, 2020
Possible Vertical Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 From an Infected Mother to Her Newborn
JAMA Research May 12, 2020
Gastrointestinal Symptoms and Fecal Viral Shedding in Patients With COVID-19 Infection
JAMA Network Open Research June 11, 2020
JAMA
CONTENT
Home New Online Current Issue
JOURNAL INFORMATION
For Authors Editors & Publishers RSS Contact Us
JN Learning / CME Store Apps Jobs Institutions Reprints & Permissions
Journal Cover
Subscribe
Go
JAMA Network
PUBLICATIONS
JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry (1919-1959)
SITES
AMA Manual of Style Art and Images in Psychiatry Breast Cancer Screening Guidelines Colorectal Screening Guidelines Declaration of Helsinki Depression Screening Guidelines Evidence-Based Medicine: An Oral History Fishbein Fellowship Genomics and Precision Health Health Disparities Hypertension Guidelines JAMA Network Audio JAMA Network Conferences Machine Learning Med Men Medical Education Opioid Management Guidelines Peer Review Congress Research Ethics Sepsis and Septic Shock Statins and Dyslipidemia Topics and Collections
FEATURED ARTICLES
ACS Breast Cancer Screening Guideline CDC Guideline for Prescribing Opioids CDC Guideline for Prevention of Surgical Site Infections Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock Global Burden of Cancer, 1990-2016 Global Burden of Disease in Children, 1990-2013 Global Burden of Hypertension, 1990-2015 Global Firearm Mortality, 1990-2016 Health Care Spending in the US and Other High-Income Countries Income and Life Expectancy in the US JNC 8 Guideline for Management of High Blood Pressure President Obama on US Health Care Reform Screening for Colorectal Cancer Screening for Depression in Adults Screening for Prostate Cancer Statins for Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease The State of US Health, 1990-2016 US Burden of Cardiovascular Disease, 1990-2016 WMA Declaration of Helsinki, 7th Revision
BLOGS
JAMA Health Forum AMA Style Insider
INFORMATION FOR
Authors Institutions & Librarians Advertisers Subscription Agents Employers & Job Seekers Media
JAMA NETWORK PRODUCTS
AMA Manual of Style JAMAevidence JN Listen Peer Review Congress
JN LEARNING
Home CME Quizzes State CME Audio / Podcast Courses Clinical Challenge CME Atrial Fibrillation Course Marijuana Course Penicillin Allergy Course Cervical Cancer Screening Course CME / MOC Reporting Preferences About CME & MOC
Help
Subscriptions & Renewals Email Subscriptions Update Your Address Contact Us Frequently Asked Questions
JAMA CAREER CENTER
Physician Job Listings

Get the latest from JAMA
Email address
Sign Up
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use
Jama Network Logo
© 2020 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.
Terms of Use| Privacy Policy| Accessibility Statement

Κορωνοϊός SARS-CoV-2 και λοίμωξη Covid-19 - Τι πρέπει να γνωρίζουμε

Περίοδος επώασης κατά μέσο όρο 5,1 ημέρες (από τη στιγμή που θα έρθουμε σε επαφή με τον ασθενή μέχρι να εκδηλώσουμε τη νόσο).

Το 97% των περιστατικών θα έχουν νοσήσει σε 11,5 ημέρες μετά από την επαφή με τον ιό. Για τον λόγο αυτό η περίοδος καραντίνας 14 ημερών θεωρείται ασφαλής.

Περίοδος μεταδοτικότητας (περίοδος κατά την οποία ένας ασθενής θεωρείται δυνητικά μεταδοτικός) :

Mέση περίοδος 20 ημέρες, με μεγαλύτερη περίοδο τις 37 ημέρες.

Ο ιός μεταδίδεται και από ασυμπτωματικούς φορείς.

Παιδιά:

Συχνά ασυμπτωματικά ή ελάχιστα συμπτώματα και μεταδίδουν τον ιό για μεγαλύτερο χρονικό διάστημα.

Πολύ σημαντικό ότι απεκκρίνεται στις κενώσεις σε ένα ποσοστό 30%, οπότε καλό πλύσιμο των χεριών.

Ποσοστό μετάδοσης :

Μέσος όρος 2,79 (ένας φορέας θα μολύνει σχεδόν τρεις άλλους ανθρώπους), ποσοστό που θα μπορούσε να μεταβληθεί και να μειωθεί όπως συνήθως γίνεται στις πανδημίες.

ΔΙΑΓΝΩΣΗ

RT - PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction)

Ειδικότητα της εξέτασης 100% (σημαίνει ότι σε αυτούς που το τεστ θα είναι θετικό, όλοι θα έχουν τον συγκεκριμένο ιό).

Ευαισθησία 71% (δηλαδή από τους 100 που νοσούν θα βρούμε τους 71).

Παρουσία 3-4 ημέρες μετά την έναρξη της νόσου.

Εξαιτίας των δυσκολίων στη λήψη και στη μεταφορά των δειγμάτων, η ευαισθησία της μεθόδου είναι στο 71%.

Υπάρχουν μεγάλες διαφορές ανάλογα το σημείο λήψης του δείγματος, με σημαντικές διακυμάνσεις : Μεγαλύτερο ποσοστό ανίχνευσης για το βρογχικό έκπλυμα (93%),ακολουθούν τα πτύελα (72%) και το ρινικό επίχρισμα (63%), εν συνεχεία φάρυγγας(32%) και κόπρανα (29%) σε μικρότερο ποσοστό στα ούρα και πάρα πολύ σπάνια στο αίμα (1%).

Ανοσοσφαιρίνες:

Ανίχνευση της παρουσίας αντισωμάτων IgG – IgM, πολύ πιο απλή μέθοδος από την PCR, εκμηδενίζει επίσης τα ψευδώς θετικά και αρνητικά της μεθόδου PCR. Η παρουσία αντισωμάτων φτάνει στο 93%

Παρουσία αντισωμάτων 7 ημέρες κατά μέσο όρο από την έναρξη της νόσου.

Ο συνδυασμός PCR και ανίχνευση αντισωμάτων βελτίωσε την ευαισθησία της διάγνωσης ακόμα και στην πρώιμη φάση (1η εβδομάδα).

Σε μια μελέτη αναφέρεται ότι τα IgG εμφανίζονται μονάχα μία ή δύο ημέρες μετά την εμφάνιση των IgM πολύ πριν απ’ ότι συνήθως.

Αξονική θώρακος :

Μεγαλύτερη ευαισθησία (98%) και από την PCR (ευαισθησία 71%).

Αμφοτερόπλευρα πολυλοβωτές πυκνωτικές αλλοιώσεις τύπου «θολής υάλου», με περιφερική ή οπίσθια κατανομή. Παρόλα αυτά δεν ενδείκνυται ως μέθοδος ανίχνευσης της νόσου.

ΣΤΡΑΤΗΓΙΚΗ ΓΙΑ ΔΙΑΓΝΩΣΤΙΚΑ ΤΕΣΤ ΣΕ ΠΕΡΙΟΔΟ ΕΠΙΔΗΜΙΑΣ:

Συστηματικά τεστ δε γίνονται για όλο τον πληθυσμό παρά μονάχα:

Σε νοσηλευόμενους με ύποπτη συμπτωματολογία νόσου από τον κορωνοϊό SARS-CoV-2, για να ληφθούν τα απαραίτητα μέτρα αποφυγής μετάδοσης της ασθένειας.

Στους επαγγελματίες υγείας.

Σε εγκύους.

Στους ασθενείς που ανήκουν σε ευπαθείς ομάδες με συμπτώματα και σταδιακά επιδεινούμενη κλινική εικόνα.

Ευπαθείς ομάδες, ασθενείς υψηλού κινδύνου:

Ασθενείς 70 ετών και άνω.

Αναπνευστική ανεπάρκεια με οξυγονοθεραπεία ή άσθμα.

Χρόνια αναπνευστικά νοσήματα, που μπορούν να επιδεινωθούν σε περίπτωση ιογενούς συνδρομής.

Χρόνια Νεφρική Ανεπάρκεια.

Καρδιακή ανεπάρκεια σταδίου NYHA III ή IV.

Κίρρωση ήπατος σταδίου Β και άνω.

Ασθενείς με καρδιαγγειακή νόσο : αρτηριακή υπέρταση, ιστορικό αγγειακών εγκεφαλικών επεισοδίων, στεφανιαία νόσος, ιστορικό διαδερμικής αγγειοπλαστικής ή χειρουργηθείσας στεφανιαίας νόσου.

Ασθενείς με ανοσοκαταστολή φαρμακευτική (υπό χημειοθεραπεία, άλλη ανοσοκατασταλτική αγωγή ή ισχυρή κορτικοθεραπεία).

Παχυσαρκία (ΔΜΣ>40).

Κύηση (ως προληπτικό μέτρο).

Για τους υπόλοιπους συμπτωματικούς ασθενείς ο κλινικός έλεγχος είναι πολύ σημαντικός για τη σωστή ταξινόμηση και αντιμετώπισή τους.

Συμπωματική θεραπεία και αυτο-παρακολούθηση.

Θεραπεία κατ' οίκον (σε περίπτωση που δεν υπάρχουν σημεία επιδείνωσης της κλινικής εικόνας).

Παραπομπή σε νοσηλευτικό ίδρυμα.

Τα σημεία βαρύτητας:

Ταχύπνοια (αναπνευστική συχνότητα >22/λεπτό), κορεσμός οξυγόνου (SpO2 <90 br="">
Αρτηριακή πίεση <90mmhg .="" br="">
Διαταραχή συνείδησης, υπνηλία, αφυδάτωση, γενική επιδείνωση της κατάστασης σε έναν ηλικιωμένο.

Αυτοπαρακολούθηση σε άτομα που βρίσκονται σε κατ' οίκον περιορισμό:

Μέτρηση θερμοκρασία και ζωτικών σημείων (αρτηριακής πίεσης και σφύξεων) 2 φορές την ημέρα, μέτρηση αναπνοών ανά λεπτό. Σε περίπτωση επιδείνωσης Παραπομπή στο νοσοκομείο

Κριτήριο ίασης : Απουσία συμπτωμάτων για 48 ώρες ή αρνητική PCR 48 ώρες μετά την εξαφάνιση των συμπτωμάτων.

Προφύλαξη του ιατρικού προσωπικού:

Μάσκα.

Απολύμανση στηθοσκοπίου μετά από κάθε ασθενή.

Αποφυγή εξέτασης ΩΡΛ με γλωσσοπίεστρο, παρά μονάχα σε περίπτωση συμπτωμάτων φαρυγγίτιδας.

Καθαρισμός γραφείου, χερούλια, τηλέφωνο, πληκτρολόγιο, εκτυπωτές 2-3 φορές την ημέρα.

Συμβουλές για τους ασθενείς σε κατ' οίκον νοσηλεία:

Μέτρηση θερμοκρασίας και ζωτικών σημείων (αρτηριακής πίεσης και σφύξεων) 2 φορές την ημέρα, μέτρηση αναπνοών ανά λεπτό. Σε περίπτωση επιδείνωσης παραπομπή στο νοσοκομείο, επικοινωνία με τον ιατρό σας, με το 1135 ή το ΕΚΑΒ.

Απομόνωση:

Σε δωμάτιο με καλό αερισμό, ώστε να αποφεύγουμε την επαφή με τους υπόλοιπους και τις επιφάνειες του σπιτιού.

Να αερίζουμε καλά την επιφάνεια 3 φορές την ημέρα.

Αν υπάρχουν πάνω από μία τουαλέτα, να υπάρχει συγκεκριμένη τουαλέτα για το άτομο, διαφορετικά σύσταση για καλή απολύμανση με χρήση χλωρίνης.

Αποφυγή κοντινών επαφών και διατήρηση της απόστασης των 2 μέτρων.

Πλύσιμο χεριών 6 φορές την ημέρα με σαπούνι ή με αλκοολούχα σκευάσματα.

Συστάσεις για τα σεντόνια και τα ρούχα:

Μέσα στα πλαίσια του εφικτού θα πρέπει ο ίδιο ο ασθενής να επιμελείται της καθαριότητας των ρούχων και σεντονιών και του χώρου του.

Πλύσιμο ρούχων και σεντονιών από τον ίδιο τον ασθενή κατευθείαν στο πλυντήριο,χωρίς να εναποτίθενται σε άλλους χώρους. Πλύσιμο τουλάχιστον για 30 λεπτά και σε θερμοκρασία τουλάχιστον 60 βαθμών.

Αποφεύγουμε το τίναγμα των ρούχων και των σκεπασμάτων, καθώς και τη χρήση ηλεκτρικής σκούπας.

Χρήση χλωρίνης 2,5% (1 lt προς 4 lt νερού) και μίγματα αιθανόλης 62-71%.



Ζαμπετάκης Φάνης Μιξάκη Ιωάννα

Καρδιολόγος Ειδικός Παθολόγος