key: cord-0736095-x0b9lrgy authors: Turan, Caner; Gökçe Basa, Elif; Elitez, Duygu; Yılmaz, Özlem; Gümüş, Ece; Anıl, Murat title: The Comparison of Children Who Were Diagnosed with COVID-19 in the First and the Second Waves of the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic date: 2021-11-01 journal: Turk Arch Pediatr DOI: 10.5152/turkarchpediatr.2021.21162 sha: 453238a0b7d6bb98a48d3ad6731a8021d5a1f3ea doc_id: 736095 cord_uid: x0b9lrgy OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical and laboratory findings and short-term outcomes of those children diagnosed with COVID-19 in the first and second waves of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted at a suburban community hospital during a 1-year period. All children who were less than 18 years of age and confirmed with COVID-19 were included in the study population. The demographics, clinical features, laboratories, treatments given, hospitalizations, and outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 198 patients were enrolled; median age was 9.3 years. One-hundred four patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 disease in the first wave and 94 (47.5%) patients were diagnosed in the second wave of the pandemic. Those patients who were diagnosed with COVID-19 in the first wave of the pandemic were significantly younger than those in the second wave (medians: 2.7 years vs. 15 years respectively, P < .001). Intra-familial contact was detected in 66.4% vs. 33.6% in the first and second waves of the pandemic, respectively (P < .001). Asymptomatic patients were higher in the second wave than in the first wave (P < .001). Additionally, moderate-to-critically ill patients were significantly higher in the first wave than in the second wave (P < .001). The rate of multisystem inflammatory syndrome (MIS-C) cases was 0.32% in this study. CONCLUSION: In children, COVID-19 disease affected older children, there was less intra-familial contact and the severity of the disease was milder in the second wave of the pandemic in comparison to the first wave. MIS-C was encountered in the second wave of the pandemic. In patients diagnosed with pneumonia in December 2019 in Wuhan, China, a new type of coronavirus was detected as the etiological agent and the manifestations of pneumonia caused by this type of coronavirus was named "severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2)." 1 As a result of this new type of coronavirus spreading all over the world and affecting many countries, it was defined as "coronavirus-related disease-2019 (COVID-19)" by the World Health Organization (WHO) and accepted as a pandemic. 2, 3 The first COVID-19 case in our country (Turkey) was seen on March 11, 2020 , and more than 2.5 million cases had been reported nationwide as of February 2021. 4 While the incidence of COVID-19 disease in children was reported to be 1-2% in the early reports from China, the United States of America and Italy, it was stated that this rate was What is already known on this topic? • COVID- 19 1-8% worldwide in subsequent reports. [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] In the light of the information obtained from countries heavily affected by the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, it has been observed that the effects of COVID-19 disease in children are different and milder than in adults, and it rarely causes severe and/or critical illness or death in children. 5, 10, 11 The effects, treatment modalities, outcomes, and mortality rates of the first and second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients have been reported in several countries. Accordingly, in the second wave, it was observed that the age groups, the severity of disease and also treatment methods (drugs, invasive, and/or non-invasive ventilation) changed. In paediatric populations, there is very little data regarding differences in the symptoms, clinical findings, treatments, and prognoses between the first and the second waves of the pandemic. In Turkey, the first wave of COVID-19 began in March 2020. Since the first case was seen, the Turkish government progressively increased social distance and mask measures. Preschools were closed between March 2020 and June 2020. In addition, primary schools, secondary schools, and universities were closed until 2021. A complete lockdown was implemented in May 2020 but life returned to relative normality with only social distancing and mask measures in July 2020. At the end of August 2020, the number of COVID-19 started to increase again. The Turkish government started to reimplement stricter measures such as banning closed area social activities, closing entertainment premises such as bars, and weekend and nighttime regional and national lockdowns as well as travel related measures were implemented. The differences and/or similarities between the first and second waves in terms of clinical characteristics, laboratories, outcomes, and fatalities with regards to children are not wellknown and no studies had been conducted on this issue in our country as of the time of this study. In this study, we aimed to compare the clinical and laboratory findings of those children who were diagnosed with COVID-19 in the first and second waves of the disease. Secondly, we also aimed to investigate the differences between the treatments given and outcomes achieved for these children in the first and second waves. This study was retrospectively conducted in Buca Seyfi Demirsoy Teaching and Research Hospital, Pediatric Emergency Department between March 11, 2020 and March 11, 2021 . In this study, the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic from March 11, 2020 to August 31, 2020 was accepted as the "First Wave," and the period of the disease from September 1, 2020 to March 11, 2021 as the 'Second Wave" of the pandemic. Official approval to conduct this study was obtained from the Health Ministry and the Ethical Committee of Ege University (2020-05-20T12-55-46 and 20-7T/7). This study was conducted in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. All patients aged 0-18 years whose nasopharyngeal samples were obtained for polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test according to the COVID-19 disease guidelines for children published by the Ministry of Health of the Republic of Turkey were included in this study. Nasopharyngeal sampling indications were as follows: a patient (1) who had traveled within the previous 14 days to a location where there was community transmission of SARS-CoV-2; (2) who lived with someone who had traveled to a pandemic area within the previous 14 days; (3) whose relatives had been hospitalized for respiratory disease within the previous 14 days; or (4) whose relatives had been diagnosed with COVID-19 within the previous 14 days. Also, children who had fever and/or cough and/or respiratory distress were identified as suspected cases and tested. Patients with positive PCR test results, and those with negative PCR but positive anti-SARS-CoV-2 total antibodies were included in this study. Those patients whose medical records were missing were excluded from the study. Those patients diagnosed with COVID-19 were classified into 5 groups according to the severity of disease: (1) Asymptomatic: patients who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 by virologic testing using a PCR or total antibody test, but have no symptoms; (2) Mild: patients who have any of the various signs and symptoms of COVID-19 (e.g., fever, cough, sore throat, malaise, headache, and muscle pain) without shortness of breath, dyspnoea, or abnormal chest imaging; (3) Moderate: patients who have evidence of lower respiratory disease by clinical assessment or imaging and an oxygen saturation (SpO 2 ) ≥94%; (4) Severe: patients who have tachypnoea, SpO 2 <94% on room air at sea level, a ratio of the arterial partial pressure of oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO 2 /FiO 2 ) <300 mmHg, or lung infiltrates >50%; or (5) Critically ill: patients who have respiratory failure, septic shock, and/or multiple organ dysfunction. 12 Also, patients are diagnosed with multisystem inflammatory syndrome (MIS-C) if the following criteria are present: fever (>38.0°C) ≥24 hours, severe disease which requires hospitalization, evidence of inflammation in laboratory tests, multiple system involvement, no alternative diagnosis, and previous history evidence of SARS-CoV2 disease or a history of contact with a SARS-CoV2 positive person within the previous 4 weeks. The demographic data (gender and age) of those patients diagnosed with COVID-19 disease in the first and second waves of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, their complaints at admission and the severity of their disease were compared. In both pandemic waves, the oxygen and ventilation support [oxygen support (mask, high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC), Bilevel Positive Airway Pressure (BIPAP) or use of invasive mechanical ventilator)] received and the drug treatment preferences used according to national guidelines (hydroxychloroquine, oseltamivir, azithromycin, favipiravir, intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), and methylprednisolone) were evaluated. The rates of hospitalization and paediatric intensive care unit (PICU) admittance and length of stay in the first and second waves and also the patients' short-term outcomes (morbidity, mortality) were compared. In addition, the treatments given and prognoses made of those patients who were diagnosed with MIS-C due to COVID-19 were analyzed. Continuous variables were expressed as mean ± standard deviation, median (interquartile range, IQR), and categorical variables as numbers (n) and percentages (%). When the parametric test assumptions were met, t-test was used to compare differences between independent groups. When parametric test assumptions were not met, Mann-Whitney U-test was used to compare differences between independent groups. The chisquared or Fisher's exact probability tests were used to compare demographics. In all analyses, P <.05 was considered statistically significant. During this study period, 2479 patients who were admitted to a paediatric ED were examined. Among these patients, 225 patients in whom PCR tests were performed due to a suspicion of COVID-19 were included in this study. Six patients with missing medical records and 21 patients with negative PCR test results were excluded from the study (Figure 1 ). One-hundred four (52.5%) patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 in the first wave and 94 (47.5%) patients were diagnosed in the second wave of the pandemic (Figure 1 ). During the study period, the rate of COVID-19 positivity was found to be 7.9%. The distribution of diagnoses of COVID-19 during the study period are shown in Figure 2 . The final analysis was performed for 198 patients; 56.1% (n = 111) were male. The male/female ratio was 1.3/1, and their median age was 9.3 years (minimum 4 days -maximum 18 years, IQR 1.4-15.6 years) ( Table 1) . Only 36 (18.2%) patients were younger than 12 months. Those patients who were diagnosed with COVID-19 in the first wave of the pandemic were significantly younger than those in the second wave (median, 2.7 years vs. 15 years, respectively) (P < .001) (Table 1) . Also, 131 (66.2%) patients had a history of family contact. Intra-familial contact was detected in 87 (66.4%) and 44 (33.6%) patients in the first and second wave of the pandemic, respectively (P < .001). When the severity of the disease was evaluated, over half of patients (61.1%) had mild disease, 18.7% had moderate, 1.5% had severe, and only 1 patient had critical disease, while 18.2% of the patients were asymptomatic (Table 1) . However, the number of asymptomatic patients was higher in the second wave than in the first wave (P < .001). Additionally, moderate to critically ill patients were significantly higher in the first wave than in the second wave (P < .001) ( Table 1 ). The treatment modalities used in both pandemic waves are shown in Table 2 . The frequency of using combined azithromycin and oseltamivir or only hydroxychloroquine was significantly higher in the first wave than in the second wave (P < .001) ( Table 2 ). In the first wave, while HFNC was applied to 8.7% of the patients, BIPAP to 1.9% and endotracheal intubation was applied to 1 patient; in the second wave of the pandemic, HFNC was applied to only 2 (2.0%) patients ( Table 3 ). The use of invasive/ non-invasive oxygen modalities was higher in the first wave than in the second wave (Table 3 ). In the second wave of the pandemic, 8 patients were diagnosed with MIS-C ( Table 4) . Half of these patients were treated with IVIG. Methylprednisolone treatment was applied to the other half due to the lack of IVIG (Table 4) . Additionally, acetylsalicylic acid (3-5 mg/kg/day) was used in all patients. No child death was observed due to COVID-19 or MIS-C in either period. The outcomes and hospitalizations of the patients during the study period are shown in Table 3 . Most patients (78.2%) were discharged from the ED. Twenty-eight (26.9%) patients were hospitalized in the first wave of the pandemic, and 6 (6.4%) patients in the second wave. In addition, 9 (8.6%) patients were admitted to the PICU in the first wave while no patient was admitted to the PICU in the second wave. The current study is the first national report to compare the epidemiological and clinical findings of the first and second waves of the COVID-19 pandemic in children. The clinical severity of COVID-19 in the first wave was higher than in the second wave. However, MIS-C diagnosis emerged in the second wave. Other studies on this subject in the literature are extremely limited. COVID-19, which emerged in the form of pneumonia due to SARS-CoV2 in December 2019, turned into a global epidemic in which more than 113 million people had been infected and more than 2.5 million people had died as of February 28, 2021. 13 Although COVID-19 is more common in the adult population, it has been detected in children of all ages. 11, 12, 14 In the literature, although the PCR positivity rates in children differ from country to country, it has been reported as 0.6% in Lithuania, 5% in France, 9% in Italy, and 11.2% in Spain. 15, 16 In our study, the PCR positivity rate was 7.6%. The PCR positivity rate in our study was lower than in southern Europe. This was thought to be related to lifestyle, relationship contacts, and the closure of schools. Additionally, the fact that each country has different indications for taking PCR samples may lead to different PCR positivity rates by country. The median age of the COVID-19 patients included in our study (7.2 years) was higher than in studies conducted in *Patients were significantly younger in the first wave than the second wave of the pandemic (P < .001) (Mann-Whitney U-Test); φ Intra-familial contact was significantly higher in the first wave than the second wave (P < .001) (chi-square test); δ Although the asymptomatic patients was more higher in the second wave than the first wave, moderate-to-critically ill patients were significantly higher in the first wave than second wave (P < .001 and P < .001) (Fisher's exact test). in the second wave of the pandemic, and COVID-19 was found more frequently in adolescents. In our study, the average age of children diagnosed with COVID-19 in the paediatric ED was significantly higher in the second wave than in the first wave. During the first and second waves, primary schools, secondary schools, and universities were generally closed and only pre-schools were open. For this reason, it was not thought that there was any difference in school-age children in the first and second waves of the pandemic. Based on our clinical experience, this finding may be related to the parents' preference of monitoring their small children at home, but admission to hospital for their older children. At the onset of the pandemic, the most common cause of COVID-19 in children was reported to be in contact with other family members. 18, 22 Krajcar et al. 17 found that the rate of intrafamilial contact was lower in the second wave of the pandemic. Similar results were obtained in our study and children had less intra-familial contact during the second wave. The opening of schools after the first wave of the pandemic, less adherence to isolation measures, and increased contact of children with other people as a result of geographical and seasonal changes may explain these results. In studies conducted in many European countries, and also Iran, South Korea, and the USA, it has been reported that asymptomatic children are in the range of 4-28%. 14, 17, [23] [24] [25] [26] Similar to the literature, 16 .4% of patients in our study were asymptomatic. Krajcar et al. 17 reported that drug use in children was at a higher rate in the first wave of the pandemic. Similar to Krajcar et al., 17 due to the higher number of asymptomatic patients but lower number of severely ill patients, drug therapy was used less frequently in the second wave of the pandemic. Parallel to this finding, medical treatment, oxygen support, and hospitalization in COVID positive paediatric patients were less often used in the second wave compared to the first wave. The experience of physicians after the first wave of the pandemic, better recognition of the disease, better knowledge of the approach to and management of the disease, and the implementation of isolation rules can explain these lower rates in the second wave. MIS-C cases were first reported in children in April 2020, and its incidence has been reported to be 0.14%. 27, 28 In the literature, IVIG treatment is recommended primarily and frequently according to the severity of the disease in MIS-C cases; methylprednisolone treatment is used as an alternative treatment. [29] [30] [31] In our study, rates of MIS-C cases were higher (0.32%) when compared to the literature. This situation can be explained as follows; information on MIS-C disease is increasing day by day and physicians are aware of this disease. Although IVIG was preferred as the first choice in treatment, methylprednisolone was used in 50% of the patients due to the cost and difficulty in availability of IVIG. Clinical response was obtained in all patients, and no treatment-related complications developed. Our study has some limitations. First, the retrospective design of our study is the most crucial limitation. Secondly, it reflects the experience of a single center. Despite its limitations, this report is one of the pioneering studies comparing pediatric cases diagnosed with COVID-19 in 2 periods of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in the world. In conclusion, compared to the first wave of the pandemic, those children diagnosed with COVID-19 in the second wave were older, the rate of intra-familial contact was lower, and the clinical severity of the disease was milder. MIS-C was encountered in the second wave of the pandemic. We believe that the most important result of this study is that the characteristics of the disease are better known day by day and also that the continuous new publications and updated and more effective approaches have been effective on the results. Ethical Committee Approval: Official approval to conduct this study was obtained from the Health Ministry and the Ethics Committee of Ege University (2020-05-20T12-55-46 and 20-7T/7). Informed Consent: Informed consent was not obtained due to the retrospective design of this study. Peer Review: Externally peer-reviewed. A new coronavirus associated with human respiratory disease in China Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Situation Reports. Geneva: World Health Organization Evaluation of SARS-CoV-2 PCR Positive Cases in the Pediatric Emergency Department. Mikrobiyol Bul General coronavirus chart. TR Ministry of Health: COVID-19 Information Platform Characteristics of and important lessons from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in China: summary of a report of 72 314 cases from the Chinese center for disease control and prevention Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Italy MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep COVID −19 in children and the dynamics of infection in families Features of 20 133 UK patients in hospital with COVID-19 using the ISARIC WHO clinical characterisation protocol: prospective observational cohort study COVID-19 in children: analysis of the first pandemic peak in England Coronavirus infections in children including COVID-19: an overview of the epidemiology, clinical features, diagnosis, treatment and prevention options in children Epidemiology of COVID-19 among children in China Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) situation reports. Geneva: World Health Organization SARS-CoV-2 infection in children A cross-sectional study of screening for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) at the pediatric emergency department in Vilnius during the first wave of the pandemic Systematic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 screening at hospital admission in children: a French prospective multicenter study Epidemiological and clinical features of Croatian children and adolescents with a PCR-confirmed coronavirus disease 2019: differences between the first and second epidemic wave COVID-19 in children and adolescents in Europe: a multinational, multicentre cohort study Coronavirus Infection in Pediatric Emergency Departments (CONFIDENCE) Research Group. Children with COVID-19 in pediatric emergency departments in Italy Clinical characteristics of children and young people admitted to hospital with COVID-19 in United Kingdom: prospective multicentre observational cohort study First and second waves of coronavirus disease-19: a comparative study in hospitalized patients in Reus Novel coronavirus infection in hospitalized infants under 1 year of age in China CDC COVID-19 Response Team. Severe outcomes among patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): United States Clinical and epidemiological features of 36 children with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Zhejiang, China: an observational cohort study Clinical characteristics and viral RNA detection in children with coronavirus disease 2019 in the Republic of Korea SARS-COV-2 infection in children and newborns: a systematic review Hyperinflammatory shock in children during COVID-19 pandemic COVID-19 in 7780 pediatric patients: a systematic review American College of Rheumatology clinical guidance for multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children associated with SARS-CoV-2 and hyperinflammation in pediatric COVID-19: Version 1 COVID-19: immunopathology and its implications for therapy Pharmacologic treatments for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): a review The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. The authors declared that this study has received no financial support.