Importance Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in December 2019, causing human coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which has now spread into a worldwide pandemic. The pulmonary manifestations of COVID-19 have been well described in the literature. Two similar human coronaviruses that cause Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS-CoV) and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS-CoV-1) are known to cause disease in the central and peripheral nervous systems. Emerging evidence suggests COVID-19 has neurologic consequences as well. Observations This review serves to summarize available information regarding coronaviruses in the nervous system, identify the potential tissue targets and routes of entry of SARS-CoV-2 into the central nervous system, and describe the range of clinical neurological complications that have been reported thus far in COVID-19 and their potential pathogenesis. Viral neuroinvasion may be achieved by several routes, including transsynaptic transfer across infected neurons, entry via the olfactory nerve, infection of vascular endothelium, or leukocyte migration across the blood-brain barrier. The most common neurologic complaints in COVID-19 are anosmia, ageusia, and headache, but other diseases, such as stroke, impairment of consciousness, seizure, and encephalopathy, have also been reported. Conclusions and Relevance Recognition and understanding of the range of neurological disorders associated with COVID-19 may lead to improved clinical outcomes and better treatment algorithms. Further neuropathological studies will be crucial to understanding the pathogenesis of the disease in the central nervous system, and longitudinal neurologic and cognitive assessment of individuals after recovery from COVID-19 will be crucial to understand the natural history of COVID-19 in the central nervous system and monitor for any long-term neurologic sequelae.

/pdf/neuropathogenesis-and-neurologic-manifestations-of-the-3nzi2nu9la.pdf

Neuropathogenesis and Neurologic Manifestations of the Coronaviruses in the Age of Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Review.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: No systematic review or meta-analysis has yet been conducted to examine the impact of the pandemic on the prevalence of sleep problems among the general population, healthcare workers, or COVID-19 patients. Therefore, this systematic review was conducted to assess the impact and prevalence of sleep problems among those categories. METHODS: APA PsycINFO; Cochrane; Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL); EBSCOhost; EMBASE; Google Scholar; MEDLINE; ProQuest Medical; ScienceDirect; Scopus; and Web of Science from 01 November 2019 to 05 July 2020. Additionally, four preprints servers (medRxiv.org; Preprints.org; psyarxiv.com; arXiv.org; biorxiv.org) were also searched for papers accepted after peer-review but not yet published and indexed. There was no language restriction. The random-effect models meta-analysis model were used with the DerSimonian and Laird methodology. RESULTS: Forty-four papers, involving a total of 54,231 participants from 13 countries, were judged relevant and contributed to the systematic review and meta-analysis of sleep problems during COVID-19. The global pooled prevalence rate of sleep problems among all populations was 35.7% [95%CI 29.4-42.4%]. COVID-19 patients appeared to be the most affected group, with a pooled rate of 74.8% [95%CI 28.7-95.6%]. Healthcare workers and the general population had comparative rates of sleep problems with rates of 36.0% [95%CI 21.1-54.2%] and 32.3% [95%CI 25.3-40.2%], respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of sleep problems during the COVID-19 pandemic is high and approximately affect 40% of people from the general and healthcare populations. COVID-19 active patients appeared to have higher prevalence rates of sleep problems.

Sleep problems during the COVID-19 pandemic by population: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Within two decades, there have emerged three highly pathogenic and deadly human coronaviruses, namely SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2. The economic burden and health threats caused by these coronaviruses are extremely dreadful and getting more serious as the increasing number of global infections and attributed deaths of SARS-CoV-2 and MERS-CoV. Unfortunately, specific medical countermeasures for these hCoVs remain absent. Moreover, the fast spread of misinformation about the ongoing SARS-CoV-2 pandemic uniquely places the virus alongside an annoying infodemic and causes unnecessary worldwide panic. SARS-CoV-2 shares many similarities with SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, certainly, obvious differences exist as well. Lessons learnt from SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, timely updated information of SARS-CoV-2 and MERS-CoV, and summarized specific knowledge of these hCoVs are extremely invaluable for effectively and efficiently contain the outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 and MERS-CoV. By gaining a deeper understanding of hCoVs and the illnesses caused by them, we can bridge knowledge gaps, provide cultural weapons for fighting and controling the spread of MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2, and prepare effective and robust defense lines against hCoVs that may emerge or reemerge in the future. To this end, the state-of-the-art knowledge and comparing the biological features of these lethal hCoVs and the clinical characteristics of illnesses caused by them are systematically summarized in the review.

/pdf/from-sars-and-mers-to-covid-19-a-brief-summary-and-1zb6awuduf.pdf

From SARS and MERS to COVID-19: a brief summary and comparison of severe acute respiratory infections caused by three highly pathogenic human coronaviruses.

The symptoms most commonly reported by patients affected by coronavirus disease (COVID-19) include cough, fever, and shortness of breath. However, other major events usually observed in COVID-19 patients (e.g., high blood pressure, arterial and venous thromboembolism, kidney disease, neurologic disorders, and diabetes mellitus) indicate that the virus is targeting the endothelium, one of the largest organs in the human body. Herein, we report a systematic and comprehensive evaluation of both clinical and preclinical evidence supporting the hypothesis that the endothelium is a key target organ in COVID-19, providing a mechanistic rationale behind its systemic manifestations.

https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/9/5/1417/pdf

Hypertension, thrombosis, kidney failure, and diabetes: Is covid-19 an endothelial disease? a comprehensive evaluation of clinical and basic evidence

Comorbidities and the risk of severe or fatal outcomes associated with coronavirus disease 2019: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

A growing body of literature on the 2019 novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) is becoming available, but a synthesis of available data has not been conducted. We performed a scoping review of currently available clinical, epidemiological, laboratory, and chest imaging data related to the SARS-CoV-2 infection. We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, EMBASE, Scopus and LILACS from 01 January 2019 to 24 February 2020. Study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were performed by two independent reviewers. Qualitative synthesis and meta-analysis were conducted using the clinical and laboratory data, and random-effects models were applied to estimate pooled results. A total of 61 studies were included (59,254 patients). The most common disease-related symptoms were fever (82%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 56%–99%; n = 4410), cough (61%, 95% CI 39%–81%; n = 3985), muscle aches and/or fatigue (36%, 95% CI 18%–55%; n = 3778), dyspnea (26%, 95% CI 12%–41%; n = 3700), headache in 12% (95% CI 4%–23%, n = 3598 patients), sore throat in 10% (95% CI 5%–17%, n = 1387) and gastrointestinal symptoms in 9% (95% CI 3%–17%, n = 1744). Laboratory findings were described in a lower number of patients and revealed lymphopenia (0.93 × 109/L, 95% CI 0.83–1.03 × 109/L, n = 464) and abnormal C-reactive protein (33.72 mg/dL, 95% CI 21.54–45.91 mg/dL; n = 1637). Radiological findings varied, but mostly described ground-glass opacities and consolidation. Data on treatment options were limited. All-cause mortality was 0.3% (95% CI 0.0%–1.0%; n = 53,631). Epidemiological studies showed that mortality was higher in males and elderly patients. The majority of reported clinical symptoms and laboratory findings related to SARS-CoV-2 infection are non-specific. Clinical suspicion, accompanied by a relevant epidemiological history, should be followed by early imaging and virological assay.

https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/9/4/941/pdf

Novel Coronavirus Infection (COVID-19) in Humans: A Scoping Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction Cavin 2 down-regulation is reported in several malignant tumors and is associated with tumor progression. However, the role of Cavin 2 in lung adenocarcinoma is unknown. This study aimed to investigate the prognostic and diagnostic significance of Cavin 2 in lung adenocarcinoma. Material and methods Cavin 2 expression levels were examined in 150 cases of lung adenocarcinoma and matched adjacent normal lung tissues using RNA extraction and reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR), Western blotting and immunohistochemistry (IHC) assays. Then, the relationship of Cavin 2 expression with clinicopathological characteristics and patients' survival was further evaluated in lung adenocarcinoma. Results QPCR and Western blotting analysis indicated that Cavin 2 expression levels were significantly lower in lung adenocarcinoma tissues compared with those in adjacent normal lung tissues (p < 0.0001). The IHC results showed that positive expression of Cavin 2 was mainly located in cytoplasm as brown, but was hard to detect in lung adenocarcinoma tissues. The low-expression rates of Cavin 2 in lung adenocarcinoma and adjacent normal lung tissues were 62.0% and 20.0%, respectively, and the difference was significant (p < 0.0001). Lower expression of Cavin 2 was significantly associated with tumor size, TNM stage and lymph node metastasis (p < 0.05). Conclusions Cavin 2 has low expression in lung adenocarcinoma, which might be regarded as a potential prognostic and diagnostic biomarker.

https://www.termedia.pl/Journal/-19/pdf-36739-10?filename=Prognostic and diagnostic.pdf

Diana Maria Cespedes Arcani

Papers

Novel Coronavirus Infection (COVID-19) in Humans: A Scoping Review and Meta-Analysis

Prognostic and diagnostic significance of Cavin 2 in lung adenocarcinoma.