Nedret Hızel

The real target planned is the prevention of COVID-19 using natural treatment tools, other than medical drugs, together with the use of vaccines. Similar to various viruses that lead to upper respiratory diseases, SARS-CoV-2 most frequently enters the body through the nasal cavity and oral cavity. It has been stated that the Oscardia Ledovir Spray can form a mechanical barrier in the mucosa of the nasal and oral cavities, which are the points of entry of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in the body, preventing the bonding of the virus to the receptors, and inhibiting any virus it encounters through direct contact.

COVID‑19 is a devastating disease, and its control is difficult due to its high transmissibility rate and a long incubation average period (6.4 days). Additionally, more than half of the infected patients were asymptomatic young people or children. The asymptomatic virus transmission is the actual challenge to controlling the disease. Because of limited treatment options, diagnosis techniques have been the first focus all over the world, involving q-RT-PCR as a gold standard, serological tests, point of care studies, or RT-LAMP. Generally, nasopharyngeal, and oropharyngeal samples are preferred clinically as sources. However, alternative sources are being researched, particularly for healthcare professionals who have difficulty taking samples, patients who are afraid of giving samples, and pediatric patients. Herein, physiological saline has been utilized to offer an alternative source besides the swab samples for use in q-RT-PCR. In this study, 212 randomly chosen patients’ samples were studied, and we evaluated the concordance and accurate q-RT-PCR results in two different sources, obtained from swab and gargle samples of patients. Herein, physiological saline is utilized, which is widely used medically as a recommended irrigating and wound dressing solution. We obtained in our experiments with this method, the confidence interval determines 74.50% positivity when compared to the routine q-RT-PCR procedure as summarized. In addition, when only the gargle sampling method is studied in low-income countries, the cost of testing for COVID-19 will decrease significantly. Because this method does not require vNAT or VTM transport solution sterile swab sticks as shown. The plastic container with a lid in which the patient can gargle with SF and spit it out is an ideal method for this. Additionally, it provides a great cost-benefit in low-income countries.

Coronavirus disease 2019 or COVID‐19 caused by novel coronavirus/severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2 or 2019‐nCoV) is an ongoing pandemic that has emerging global effects and requires rapid and reliable diagnostic testing. Quantitative reverse transcription‐polymerase chain reaction (q‐RT‐PCR) is the gold standard method for SARS‐CoV‐2 detections. On the other hand, new approaches remedy the diagnosis difficulties gradually. Reverse transcription loop‐mediated isothermal amplification (RT‐LAMP) as one of these novel approaches may also contribute to faster and cheaper field‐based testing. The present study was designed to evaluate this rapid screening diagnostic test that can give results in 30–45 min and to compare the effectiveness of LAMP to the q‐RT‐PCR. The 30 randomly chosen patient samples were generated by nasopharyngeal swabs with a portion of the SARS‐CoV‐2 nucleic sequence. The sample of quantification cycle (Cq) values was tested using RT‐LAMP as well as by conventional q‐RT‐PCR. The patient samples were tested with four different kits (SENSObiz COVID‐19 [SARS‐CoV‐2] LAMP Assay, the QIAseq DIRECT SARS‐CoV‐2 kit, Biospeedy SARS‐CoV‐2 Variant Plus kit, and CoVirion‐CV19‐2 SARS‐CoV‐2 OneStep RT‐PCR kit) and two different PCR devices (GDS Rotor‐Gene Q Thermocycler and Inovia Technologies GenX series). Based on 30 patient samples, the positive/negative ratio (P/N) was 30/0 as Biospeedy and Covirion (positivity 100%), 28/2 as Qiagen kit (positivity 93.3%) for the samples studied on the Inovia device while the same samples on the Rotor‐Gene device were 30/0 as Biospeedy and Covirion (positivity 100%), 29/1 as Qiagen kit at the first day (96.7%). On the fifth day, the samples were studied in the Inovia device and the respective results were obtained: 27/3 as Biospeedy (positivity 90%), 16/14 as Qiagen (positivity 53.3%), 28/2 as Covirion kit (positivity 93.3%). When these samples were studied in the Rotor‐Gene device, it was 29/1 in Biospeedy and Covirion (positivity 96.7%), 19/11 in the Qiagen kit (positivity 63.3%). When these samples were compared with the LAMP method it was found to be 19/11 (positivity 63.3%) on the first day and 18/12 (positivity 60%) on the fifth day. SARS‐CoV‐2 test studies will contribute to a proactive approach to the development of rapid diagnosis systems. The LAMP approach presents promising results to monitor exposed individuals and also improves screening efforts in potential ports of entry.

A novel RNA virus designated hepatitis G virus (HGV) was identified recently in patients with acute and chronic liver disease. Since HGV may be transmitted parenterally, chronic haemodialysis (HD) patients are at increased risk for acquiring this infection. 110 chronic HD patients were studied (56 HCV-RNA and anti-HCV-positive, and 54 HCV-RNA and anti-HCV-negative). HGV-RNA and HCV-RNA were studied by RT-PCR. HCV genotype determination was applied to all 56 HCV-RNA-positive patients. 28 of 110 (25%) patients were found be HGV-RNA-positive. HCV-RNA-positive patients had higher rate of HGV-RNA positivity compared with HCV-RNA-negative patients. The HCV genotypes of HGV-RNA-positive patients were mostly 4 (48%) and 1b (33%). HGV was not linked with HBsAg positivity. While there was a significant correlation between HCV-RNA positivity and the number of blood transfusions and duration of HD, we did not observe this relationship in HGV-RNA-positive patients. These results indicate that the prevalence of HGV is high in HD patients and that HGV-RNA positivity is higher in HCV-RNA-positive patients.