4.7 Article

Differences between COVID-19 and suspected then confirmed SARS-CoV-2-negative pneumonia: A retrospective study from a single center

期刊

JOURNAL OF MEDICAL VIROLOGY
卷 92, 期 9, 页码 1572-1579

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jmv.25810

关键词

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19); laboratory test; procalcitonin; suspected then confirmed SARS-CoV-2-negative pneumonia; symptoms

类别

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of China [81972416, 81672554, 81472417]
  2. [2020CDJYGRH-YJ03]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) broke out in Wuhan, Hubei, China in December 2019. Tens thousands of people have been infected with the disease. Our aim was to distinguish severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-positive patients from SARS-CoV-2-negative patients. We retrospectively compared the data of COVID-19 patients with those of suspected and confirmed SARS-CoV-2-negative patients (control patients). There were 78 COVID-19 patients and 26 control patients, whose median ages were significantly different (P = .001). The percentage of COVID-19 patients admitting exposure to Wuhan was obviously higher than that of control patients (X-2 = 29.130;P < .001). Fever and cough appeared more frequently in COVID-19 patients than in the control patients. The routine blood workup parameters of COVID-19 patients did not change much and their mean counts were in the normal range. There were 38.5% of control patients had higher procalcitonin (PCT) levels than 0.5 ng/mL, which was significantly higher than that percentage of COVID-19 patients (X-2 = 22.636;P < .05), and COVID-19 patients were also more likely to have decreased or normal urea and creatinine levels than control patients (X-2 = 24.930, 8.480;P < .05).Younger age, exposure to Wuhan, fever, cough, and slight changes in routine blood workup parameters, urea and creatinine were important features discriminating COVID-19 from control patients. Slightly increased, but far less than 0.5 ng/mL, PCT levels also differentiated COVID-19 patients from control patients.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据