The journal of applied laboratory medicine
-
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was formally characterized as a pandemic on March 11, 2020. Since that time, the COVID-19 pandemic has led to unprecedented demand for healthcare resources. The purpose of this study was to identify changes in laboratory test utilization in the setting of increasing local incidence of COVID-19. ⋯ Increasing local incidence of COVID-19 had a profound impact on laboratory operations. While volume increases were seen for laboratory tests related to COVID-19 diagnostics and management, including some with limited evidence to support their use, overall testing volumes decreased substantially. During events such as COVID-19, monitoring of such patterns can help inform laboratory management, staffing, and test stewardship recommendations for managing resource and supply availability.
-
Platelet dysfunction often accompanies trauma-induced coagulopathy. Because soluble fibrin impairs platelet glycoprotein VI (GPVI) signaling and platelets of trauma patients can display impaired calcium mobilization, we explored the role of fibrinolysis on platelet dysfunction during trauma. ⋯ During trauma, D-dimer and FDPs inhibit platelets, potentially via GPVI and integrin αIIbβ3 engagement, contributing to a fibrinolysis-dependent platelet loss-of-function phenotype.
-
Little is known about the performance of the Roche novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 antibody (anti-SARS-CoV-2) assay. We provide an extensive evaluation of this fully automated assay on Cobas e801/e602 immunoassay analyzers. ⋯ The Roche anti-SARS-CoV-2 assay shows excellent performance with minimal cross-reactivity from other viral and confounding antibodies. Antibody development and seroconversion appears quite early.
-
Comparative Study
Head-to-Head Comparison of Two SARS-CoV-2 Serology Assays.
While molecular techniques remain the gold standard for diagnosis of acute SARS-CoV-2 infection, serological tests have the unique potential to ascertain how much of the population has been exposed to the COVID-19 pathogen. There have been limited published studies to date documenting the performance of SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays. ⋯ Overall, the qualitative interpretations afforded by the Roche and DiaSorin assays agreed for 97% of samples evaluated. Minor discrepancies in sensitivity and specificity were observed between methods, with the differences in specificity more clinically significant for our low-prevalence population. For the DiaSorin assay, all disagreements with the Roche assay occurred in samples with quantitative signals near the cut-off determining positivity.