Background A marked increase in the number of cases of Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) infection occurred in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, in early 2014. We evaluated patients with MERS-CoV infection in Jeddah to explore reasons for this increase and to assess the epidemiologic and clinical features of this disease. Methods We identified all cases of laboratory-confirmed MERS-CoV infection in Jeddah that were reported to the Saudi Arabian Ministry of Health from January 1 through May 16, 2014. We conducted telephone interviews with symptomatic patients who were not health care personnel, and we reviewed hospital records. We identified patients who were reported as being asymptomatic and interviewed them regarding a history of symptoms in the month before testing. Descriptive analyses were performed. Results Of 255 patients with laboratory-confirmed MERS-CoV infection, 93 died (case fatality rate, 36.5%). The median age of all patients was 45 years (interquartile range, 30 to 59), and 174 patients (68.2%) were male. A total of 64 patients (25.1%) were reported to be asymptomatic. Of the 191 symptomatic patients, 40 (20.9%) were health care personnel. Among the 151 symptomatic patients who were not health care personnel, 112 (74.2%) had data that could be assessed, and 109 (97.3%) of these patients had had contact with a health care facility, a person with a confirmed case of MERS-CoV infection, or someone with severe respiratory illness in the 14 days before the onset of illness. The remaining 3 patients (2.7%) reported no such contacts. Of the 64 patients who had been reported as asymptomatic, 33 (52%) were interviewed, and 26 of these 33 (79%) reported at least one symptom that was consistent with a viral respiratory illness. Conclusions The majority of patients in the Jeddah MERS-CoV outbreak had contact with a health care facility, other patients, or both. This highlights the role of health care–associated transmission. (Supported by the Ministry of Health, Saudi Arabia, and by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.)

Direct exposure to camels, diabetes mellitus, heart disease, and smoking were independently associated with this illness.

Casual contact was not associated with transmission, and serologic methods were more sensitive than real-time reverse transcription-PCR.

Background: Serologic testing provides better understanding of SARS-CoV-2 prevalence and its transmission. This study was an investigation of the prevalence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 among blood donors in Saudi Arabia. Objective: To estimate the seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among blood donors in Saudi Arabia during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Serology results and epidemiological data were analyzed for 837 adult blood donors, with no confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, in Saudi Arabia from 20th to 25th May 2020. Seroprevalence was determined using electrochemical immunoassay to detect anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Results: The overall seroprevalence of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was 1.4% (12/837). Non-citizens had higher seroprevalence compared with citizens (OR 13.6, p = 0.001). Secondary education was significantly associated with higher seroprevalence compared with higher education (OR 6.8, p = 0.005). The data showed that the highest seroprevalence was in Makkah (8.1%). Uisng Makkah seroprevalence as the reference, the seroprevalence in other areas was: Madinah 4.1% (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.12À1.94), Jeddah 2.3% (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.31À2.25), and Qassim 2.9 % (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.04À2.89) and these were not statistically different from seroprevalence in the Makkah region. Conclusions: At the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic in Saudi Arabia, the seroprevalence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 among blood donors was low, but was higher among non-citizens. These findings may indicate that non-citizens and less educated individuals may be less attentive to preventive measures. Monitoring seroprevalence trends over time require repeated sampling.

Purpose To conduct an in vitro comparison of the amount of three‐dimensional (3D) deviation of 3D printed casts generated from digital implant impressions with an intraoral scanner (IOS) to stone casts made of conventional impressions. Material and Methods A maxillary master cast with partially edentulous anterior area was fabricated with two internal connection implants (Regular CrossFit, Straumann). Stone casts (n = 10) that served as a control were fabricated with the splinted open‐tray impression technique. Twenty digital impressions were made using a white light IOS (TRIOS, 3shape) and the Standard Tesselation Language (STL) files obtained were saved. Based on the STL files, a digital light processing (DLP) and a stereolithographic (SLA) 3D printer (Varseo S and Form 2) were used to print casts (n = 10 from each 3D printer). The master cast and all casts generated from each group were digitized using the same IOS. The STL files obtained were superimposed on the master cast STL file (reference) to evaluate the amount of 3D deviation with inspection software using the root mean square value (RMS). The independent‐samples Kruskal‐Wallis test and Dunn's test with Bonferroni correction (for post hoc comparisons) were used for statistical analyses. Results The Varseo S group had the lowest median RMS value [77.5 µm (IQR = 91.4‐135.4)], followed closely by the Conventional group [77.7 µm (IQR = 61.5‐93.4)]. The Form 2 had the highest mean value [98.8 µm (IQR = 57.6‐87.9)]. The independent‐samples Kruskal‐Wallis test revealed a significant difference between the groups (p = 0.018). Post hoc testing revealed a significant difference between Varseo S and Form 2 (p = 0.009). Conclusion The casts generated from the Varseo S 3D printer had better 3D accuracy than did those from the Form 2 3D printer. Both the Varseo S group and the conventional stone casts groups had similar 3D accuracy.