BackgroundA conservative approach to fluid resuscitation improves survival in children with severe malaria; however, this strategy has not been formally evaluated in adults with the disease.MethodsAdults hospitalised with malaria at two tertiary referral hospitals in Myanmar received intravenous fluid replacement with isotonic saline, administered at a maintenance rate using a simple weight-based algorithm. Clinical and biochemical indices were followed sequentially.ResultsOf 61 adults enrolled, 34 (56%) had Plasmodium falciparum mono-infection, 17 (28%) Plasmodium vivax mono-infection and 10 (16%) mixed infection; 27 (44%) patients were at high risk of death (P. falciparum infection and RCAM score ≥ 2). In the first six hours of hospitalisation patients received a mean 1.7 ml/kg/hour (range: 1.3–2.2) of intravenous fluid and were able to drink a mean of 0.8 ml/kg/hour (range: 0–3). Intravenous fluid administration and oral intake were similar for the remainder of the first 48 hours of hospitalisation. All 61 patients survived to discharge. No patient developed Adult Respiratory Distress Syndrome, a requirement for renal replacement therapy or hypotension (mean arterial pressure < 60mmHg). Plasma lactate was elevated (> 2 mmol/L) on enrolment in 26 (43%) patients but had declined by 6 hours in 25 (96%) and was declining at 24 hours in the other patient. Plasma creatinine was elevated (> 120 μmol/L) on enrolment in 17 (28%) patients, but was normal or falling in 16 (94%) at 48 hours and declining in the other patient by 72 hours. There was no clinically meaningful increase in plasma lactate or creatinine in any patient with a normal value on enrolment. Patients receiving fluid replacement with the conservative fluid replacement algorithm were more likely to survive than historical controls in the same hospitals who had received fluid replacement guided by clinical judgement in the year prior to the study (p = 0.03), despite having more severe disease (p < 0.001).ConclusionsA conservative fluid resuscitation strategy appears safe in adults hospitalised with malaria.

BackgroundData collected in clinical trials have been used to develop scoring systems that identify adults with malaria at greatest risk of death. One of these, the RCAM score, can be simply determined by measuring a patient’s Glasgow Coma Score and respiratory rate on admission to hospital. However the safety of using the RCAM score to define high-risk patients has not been assessed outside of the clinical trial setting.MethodsA retrospective audit of medical records of all adults admitted with a diagnosis of malaria to two tertiary referral hospitals in Lower Myanmar in 2013 was undertaken. An RCAM score was calculated in all patients and related to their subsequent clinical course.ResultsThe recent decline in malaria hospitalizations at both sites continued in 2013. During the year 90 adults were hospitalized with malaria; 62 (69%) had Plasmodium falciparum mono-infection, 11 (12%) had Plasmodium vivax mono-infection, 17 (19%) had mixed infection. All seven (7.7%) deaths occurred in patients infected with P. falciparum. An admission RCAM score <2 identified all the patients that would survive to discharge (positive predictive value (95% confidence interval (CI)) 100% (94.9-100%) and also predicted a requirement for less supportive care: 9/70 (13%) patients with an admission RCAM score <2 required supportive care (blood transfusion, vasopressor support or oxygen supplementation) during their hospitalization compared with 12/20 (60%) patients with an admission RCAM score ≥2 (p < 0.0001). No patient with P. vivax mono-infection required supportive care during their hospitalization. Patients with an oxygen saturation ≤95% on room air on admission were more likely to die before discharge (odds ratio 17.3 (95% CI: 2.9-101.2) than patients with a higher oxygen saturation (p = 0.002).ConclusionsEven outside a clinical trial setting the RCAM score reliably identifies adults with malaria who are at greatest risk of death and can be safely used in the initial triage and management of these patients.

Background: Although Remdesivir has been evaluated for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), few study has yet shown effective mortality reduction. It might be because, in almost all those studies, remdesivir therapy was started beyond 7 th days from the onset of symptoms when the active viral replications have already gone. Methods: This study reviewed the effectiveness of early remdesivir therapy during viral phase of COVID-19 and safety of its administration at home or community care during the outbreak of COVID-19 from July to September 2021 in Myanmar. We retrospectively reviewed clinical records of 204 high risk COVID-19 patients who had received remdesivir therapy within 7 days from the onset of illness and before oxygen desaturation. Findings: All patients received remdesivir therapy according to standard five days course of 200 mg loading dose on day 1, followed by 100 mg daily for up to 4 additional days. Out of 204 patients, 60.75% (124/204) were aged 60 years and above with comorbidity; 21.1% (43/204) aged under 60 years with comorbidity and 18.1% (37/204) were aged more than 60 years old without comorbidity. The patients who received RDSV therapy within 1-4 days and within 5-7 days were 50.5% (103/204) and 49.5% (101/204) respectively. All patients survived to 21 days without ICU admission or mechanical ventilation. Eighty six percent of patients had no hypoxia and only five percent had moderate to severe hypoxia, requiring oxygen. Those who received RDSV therapy within 1 to 4 days from the onset of symptoms had significantly lower rate of hypoxia compared to those who received remdesivir therapy on 5 to 7 days. After RDSV therapy, increased lymphocyte count and decreased CPR were observed in 74.5% (152/204) and 52.9% (108/204) of the patients respectively. There was no report of major adverse events. Conclusion: Remdesivir, if given within first 4 days from the onset of symptoms, is the most effective strategy for prevention of oxygen desaturation, further progression of COVID-19 and death although it is still beneficial if given later, days 5 to 7. It is a safe drug to be prescribed in hospital at home care. It may be cost-benefit if high-risk group of patients with COVID-19 were selected for early remdesivir therapy in the community.

A young farmer, tenth standard student, helping his grandfather during holiday, developed anuria after viper bite. Because of headache, non-enhanced CT scan head was done on admission which showed a small pituitary haemorrhage with normal ventricles. Later, he had generalized fits and second non-enhanced CT scan head was repeated which revealed a small pituitary haemorrhage with dilated ventricles. He also had acute kidney injury, septicaemia, cellulitis and DIC. The serum level of TSH, free T3 & free T4 were low; thus, replacement was done. Cerebrospinal fluid study (protein, sugar, cells) including culture was normal. Renal replacement therapy (haemodialysis), platelets transfusion and antibiotics were given. He had torrential polyuria (urine output 12 liter per day) when he recovered from renal failure and it improved dramatically with desmopressin replacement. There was improvement in third non-enhanced CT scan head and fourth one was consistent with normal ventricle and reduction in size of pituitary haemorrhage.

Background: In COVID-19 pandemic, the diagnosis and treatment must be as early as possible to save the life of each patient. Moreover, screening of asymptomatic carriers, close contacts or healthy subjects must not be delay to prevent transmission to publics. For confirmation of diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection, nasopharyngeal swab must be tested either by real-time Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) tests or Rapid Antigen Test (RAT). RAT is faster, easier and cheaper; thus, it is suitable for health service in developing country. Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of Roche SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Test (RAT) in diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods: Hospital based exploratory study was done in out-patient department and fever clinic, and molecular laboratory of No. (1) Defence Services General Hospital. Nasopharyngeal swabs were taken, and the Roche SARS- CoV-2 RAT was conducted in parallel with RT-PCR test (reference standard). Results: Among the 932 patients/subjects recruited, RT-PCR was positive in 468 individuals, corresponding to a prevalence of 50.2%. The RAT was positive in 363 patients (60.4%), false positive in 120 patients; it was negative in 569 individuals (39.6%), false negative in 225 patients. The overall sensitivity of the RAT was 51.9% (95% Confidence Interval [CI] 47.29-56.53) and, the specificity was 74.1% (95% CI 69.9-78.07); positive predictive value was 66.9% and negative predictive value was 60.5%. The sensitivity varied with Ct value; 78% in clinical samples with Ct values < 20, 57.5% in those with Ct values between 21 and 25, 41.8% in samples with Ct values between 26 and 30, and, 36.4% in samples with Ct value > 30. Conclusion: The accuracy of the SARS-CoV-2 Roche RAT in diagnosing SARS-CoV-2 infections was inferior to RT-PCR and manufacturer’s data. The sensitivity was with low Cycle threshold values < 20 which were inversely related to the viral load. RAT test should be used in association with clinical impression of physicians. In hospital setting especially in emergency department, the role of RAT should be reconsidered in those patients presenting with anosmia and some cases of dyspnoea, late symptoms in the course of disease, as the RAT results would be false negative. Other errors may arise if the operator for RAT has to handle more than recommended tests per hour especially in the peak of epidemics.