Background: The search for simple clinical and laboratory markers to help predict the clinical severity of patients presenting with COVID-19 has prompted this study to look at the predictive value of urine L-FABP (Liver Type-Fatty Acid Binding Protein) point-of-care test kit at the initial presentation of COVID-19 patients to the hospital. Methods: The validation study prospectively included 109 consecutive patients with mild to moderate COVID-19, mean age of 52.2 years (range 19-84) presenting at the Emergency Rooms of 4 participating Metro-Manila hospitals from February to April 2021, with available data for analysis for 103 patients. Urine L-FABP POC (Point-of-Care) test and other clinical parameters and the level of severity of COVID-19 were determined at Day 0, Day 4 and Day 7. Computations for Sensitivity, Specificity, Positive and Negative Predictive values and Likelihood ratios were performed. Results: Twenty-three patients tested positive for urine L-FABP, out of the 103 patients analyzed, while 80 tested negative. Of the 23 patients who tested positive for urine L-FABP, 6 has progressed in severity, while 17 did not progressed. Of the 80 patients who tested negative for urine L-FABP, 13 progressed, while 67 did not progressed in severity. Giving a Sensitivity of 31.58%, Specificity of 79.76%, Positive predictive value of 26.09%, Negative predictive value of 83.75%. Combining urine L-FABP and initial clinical parameters like SIRS (Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome) criteria to predict progression of severity yielded a higher Specificity of 91.67 % and Negative Predictive value of 84.62%. Conclusions The study shows the utility of initial urine L-FABP POC test as a negative screening test in triaging adult patients presenting to the ER with mild to moderate COVID-19. Patients at the ER with a negative urine L-FABP test, will most likely not progressed to severe COVID-19. Combining clinical parameters like SIRS Criteria with the urine L-FABP result can increase the negative predictive value.
COVID-19

Background: RT-PCR using respiratory tract specimens, most commonly nasopharyngeal swab (NPS), has been used to confirm the diagnosis of COVID-19. NPS is a relatively invasive procedure that causes patient discomfort and risks viral transmission. Other specimens are therefore being investigated for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA. Objective: To determine the sensitivity of non-respiratory tract specimens in detecting SARS-CoV-2 RNA in patients with COVID-19. Methodology: This review summarized the results of eight studies obtained from a literature search done in May 2020 in PubMed MEDLINE, Cochrane Library and MedRxiv. Two independent investigators reviewed and appraised the studies that were included, and pooled estimates of sensitivity for each specimen were determined using Stata’s Metaprop function Results: The sensitivity in detecting SARS-CoV-2 RNA in non-respiratory tract specimens of diagnosed COVID-19 patients are as follows: Saliva 77% (95% CI 71-83%), stool/rectal swab/anal swab 22% (95% CI 22-37%), blood/serum/plasma 2% (95% CI 1-3%), and urine 22% (95% CI 18-25%). Conclusion SARS-CoV-2 RNA is detected in saliva, stool/rectal swab/anal swab, blood/serum/plasma and urine. Among these, saliva has the highest estimated sensitivity. However, more studies are needed to correct the heterogeneity brought about by factors such as timing of specimen collection, disease severity and treatment.
COVID-19

Background: COVID-19 is an ongoing health concern that hospitals have struggled to keep up with, given its increasing burden with the passage of time. Considerations for the management of COVID-19 should be made especially for pregnant patients and their neonates. Objectives: To determine COVID-19 prevalence and the clinical profile of mothers admitted for childbirth at Chinese General Hospital and Medical Center from May 2020 to July 2020. The profile and outcomes of neonates born to these mothers were likewise studied. Materials and Method: A descriptive cross-sectional study was done that included mothers admitted for childbirth who had SARS-CoV-2 RT PCR swab test and their neonates. A total of 408 medical records of mother and neonate dyads were reviewed. Relevant variables such as the patients’ demographic profile, clinical characteristics, co-morbidities and the maternal and neonatal outcomes were obtained. Frequency distributions were made to assess the prevalence of COVID-19 among the patients, as well as maternal and neonatal outcomes. Results: Twenty-two (5.39%) mothers tested positive for COVID-19, while all neonates (n = 22) that underwent RT-PCR swab at the 24th hour of life had negative results. Of the 22 COVID-19 positive mothers, 2 (9.09%) were symptomatic upon admission while 20 (90.09%) were asymptomatic. The following were the key trends among those mothers who tested positive for COVID-19: (1) 81.82% were from ages 20-39 years old, (2) 72.73% were multigravida mothers, (3) 54.55% had normal spontaneous delivery, (4) diabetes mellitus was the only noted comorbidity. Key findings on the neonatal outcomes observed in the study population of both COVID-19 positive and negative cases, include: (1) majority of neonates had an APGAR score of greater than 7 at 1st and 5th minute of life; (2) higher frequency of neonates with Ballard’s score of more than 37 weeks AOG; (3) more male neonates as compared to female neonates; (4) a normal birth weight for majority of cases; (5) 45.45% of neonates born to COVID positive mothers had a length of stay of <48 hours as compared to 72.8% of neonates born to COVID negative mothers; and (6) neonatal pneumonia as the most common comorbid condition in both cases. Conclusion This study noted a prevalence of 5.39% COVID-19 positive mothers. SARS-CoV-2 virus was not detected in all of the neonates born to COVID-19 affected mothers. Neonates delivered to COVID-19 positive mothers had similar trends in the neonatal outcomes when compared to neonates delivered to mother who were COVID-19 negative.
COVID-19

Rationale. COVID-19 pandemic disease, can be transmitted during gastrointestinal procedures, via aerosolized droplets, and via fecal shedding. Both international and local endoscopy societies have issued strategies to alleviate the risk to endoscopy personnel. However, several barriers against the implementation of these recommendations exist thus individual center’s policies are employed whenever applicable. Objectives. This narrative study aims to describe the current experience and set-up in the endoscopy unit of a COVID referral center, discuss the stratification of patients for endoscopy, the operational management of the personnel and endoscopy unit in line with the adapted local and international guidelines and offer endoscopists a quick reference guide to adapt endoscopy practice during the pandemic in a resource-limited setting. Methodology. This paper reviews and consolidates current endoscopy guidelines and describes the single-center experience of Philippine General Hospital. Results. In resource-limited settings, with uncertainties of prolonged COVID-19 impact to healthcare, modification of practice, adherence to strategies and recommendations, empowerment of workforce, establishing the sustainability of resources, training, and service to patients, are essential components to combat current dilemma brought about by this pandemic. Conclusion. Integration of current local and international guidelines encompass all aspects of endoscopy practice during the pandemic. The recommendations cited are aimed to guide other resource-limited endoscopy units for potential changes and guidance in the overall practice.
COVID-19

This case illustrates the myriad neuropsychiatric symptoms associated with the direct and indirect exposure to COVID-19 infection. The disruption in our daily routines, the uncertainty brought on by the then novel and unknown condition, the specter of death and the “horror” stories that spread through the grapevine during the lockdown shook the foundations of our existence. To make matters even worse, the government protocols required those infected to move away from the comfort of the familiar and the emotional support of family and friends.
COVID-19

This document offers guidance to help the ophthalmologist plan for the safe resumption of elective surgical care. There are 4 sections: (I) COVID-19 Awareness, (II) Preparedness, (III) Patient Issues, and (IV) Delivery of Safe and High-Quality Care. Each section contains key issues to be addressed before elective surgery may be safely reinstituted. Understanding the capabilities of health facilities (e.g., testing, operating rooms) as well as the potential limitations in manpower and supplies will remain important, while keeping an eye out on subsequent waves of COVID-19.
COVID-19

With the resumption of elective surgeries during this COVID-19 pandemic, surgeons and facilities should implement infection prevention and control measures to ensure the safety of patients and health care workers. This advisory highlights the key principles, risk stratification considerations, and recommended approach regarding Covid-19 testing prior to elective ophthalmic surgeries.
COVID-19

Key Findings There is some short-term benefit from the use of mesenchymal stem cell therapy for severe COVID-19 in a lowquality, small randomized controlled trial (RCT). Further studies, ideally with good quality RCTs, are needed to confirm benefit and safety. • Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are non-hematopoietic adult stem cells that are able to self-renew and differentiate into various cells of any cell lineage. MSCs have the ability to migrate (homing) to damaged tissue for repair and regeneration, as well as signal other cells to help in tissue repair. It can effect cellular differentiation, consequently shifting the immune system from Th1 to Th2 responses.1,2 • A recent review showed improved disease-associated parameters in experimental acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).3 • We found three studies (one case report, one prospective cohort, and one small randomized controlled trial) reporting the effects of MSC on COVID-19. Based on low-quality evidence, it appeared that human umbilical cord blood-derived MSC, given after failure to improve with standard treatment, had beneficial effects in terms of earlier onset of clinical improvement among individuals with severe or critical COVID-19. However, 28-day clinical improvement and mortality were not significantly different compared to standard treatment. There was no reported adverse reaction. • There are 52 registered and ongoing clinical trials to investigate the efficacy and safety of mesenchymal stem cells as treatment for COVID-19. • Mesenchymal stem cell therapy is not included in any of the existing guidelines for the treatment of COVID-19.
Covid-19

Key Findings Among patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection and hypertension, there is insufficient evidence that RAS antagonists are associated with mortality or severe COVID-19 disease. • There is uncertainty with regards to the safe use of renin-angiotensin system (RAS) antagonists, such as angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB), for COVID-19 patients with hypertension and other comorbidities (heart failure, chronic kidney disease) because of two possible contradictory mechanisms 1) upregulation of ACE2 receptors that may facilitate the virus entry into the lung. and 2) control of unabated angiotensin II levels reducing acute lung injury. • Based on very low-quality retrospective cohort studies, there is insufficient evidence that RAS antagonists are associated with increased mortality (6 studies) or severe disease (10 studies) among patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection and hypertension. • There are 36 ongoing studies (21 RCTs, 1 single-arm trial, 4 prospective cohorts, 4 retrospective cohorts, 4 casecontrol, and 2 cross-sectional) on this topic. • The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Council on Hypertension, the International Society of Hypertension (ISH) and the joint statement by the American College of Cardiology (ACC), American Heart Association (AHA), and Heart Failure Society of America (HFSA) all caution against discontinuing RAS-related treatments in patients with hypertension who become infected with COVID-19.
Covid-19

Key Findings • Very low-quality evidence from a single retrospective study suggests that continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) may reduce mortality among COVID-19 patients on invasive mechanical ventilation. Guidelines recommend CRRT for critically ill patients to minimize the risk of possible transmission, if this option is available. • Although uncommon, acute kidney injury (AKI) can occur in association with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and is associated with increased in-hospital mortality. • There are currently no published or ongoing clinical trials directly comparing dialysis modalities for acute kidney injury in COVID-19 patients. • In reducing the risk of transmission during dialysis: currently, there are no studies comparing one dialysis modality to another. The method of dialysis is still primarily determined by the clinical picture of the patient, the expertise of the center, and the resources available. The American Society of Nephrology (ASN) recommends CRRT over intermittent hemodialysis (IHD) for critically ill patients with COVID-19 to minimize patient contact when it is available, and resources allow. Otherwise, intermittent hemodialysis may be done provided that, infection control measures are strictly followed. • Several international and local guidelines recommend strict adherence to infection prevention and control measures (e.g. hand hygiene, physical distancing, proper use of personal protective equipment (PPE), and cohorting of patients) who are undergoing dialysis.
Covid-19