This study was a small-scale, "quasirandomized," controlled trial carried out to determine the effectiveness and safety of cervical cerclage performed using the McDonald technique in patients with symptomatic placenta previa. Outcomes were compared in 18 women undergoing cerclage and 19 control women. Criteria for admission to the study included painless vaginal bleeding, a gestational age of 20 to 34 weeks, and sonographic confirmation of the diagnosis. Gross congenital anomalies, other complications, type 1 placenta previa more than 2 cm from the internal os, and a cervical length less than 3 cm, noted on speculum examination 24 hours after bleeding stopped, were criteria for exclusion.Patients were placed on bedrest, sedated if bleeding was present, and given steroids weekly from 28 to 34 weeks gestation. Blood was transfused as needed. The McDonald stitch was placed under antibiotic prophylaxis and tocolysis that began 1 hour before cerclage and continued for 48 hours postoperatively. If placenta previa was characterized as "minor," patients were discharged 3 days after cerclage. Pregnancies were terminated at 37 weeks gestation.All but one of the end points recorded differed significantly between the cerclage and control groups, the exception being the amount of blood transfused. Cerclage patients had fewer major hemorrhagic episodes and fewer episodes associated with blood clots or signs of hypovolemia. In none of 10 patients with minor placenta previa who had cerclage and subsequent normal-term vaginal delivery was the placenta felt on pelvic examination after removal of the stitch. Pregnancies were prolonged by a mean of 53 days in the cerclage group and 19 days in control women. The respective mean gestational ages at delivery were 37 and 31 weeks. Mean birth weights were substantially greater in the cerclage group (2549 g vs 1568 g). Eight of the 19 control pregnancies ended in perinatal death, but there were no such deaths in the 18 cerclage cases.These promising results deserve a large randomized, controlled trial that would distinguish between the effect of cerclage in women with minor and major placenta previa.
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been emerged as a global health emergency with consequences of magnitude both at health, social, and economy level. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), as for May 25, 2021, more than 167,000,000 confirmed COVID-19 cases have been confirmed, including 3,472,068 deaths. 1 Several risk factors, both modifiable and nonmodifiable, could influence the susceptibility of acquiring severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. The severity of the symptoms among infected patients varies considerably from being asymptomatic to developing a critical illness with lethal complications, and some genetic and clinical characteristics of patients have been proposed as determinants of poor outcomes. 2 SARS-CoV-2 uses the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor for cell entry, and thus it has been suggested that host genetic factors may play a role in susceptibility to COVID-19. According to published evidence, people with ACE2 polymorphism who have type 2 transmembrane serine proteases (TMPRSS2) would be at a higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. In addition, patients possessing HLA-B*15:03 genotype may become immune to the infection. 3
Background-The aim of this study was to describe the variability in caesarean rates in the public hospitals in the Valencia Region, Spain, and to analyse the association between caesarean sections and clinical and extra-clinical factors. Methods-Analysis of data contained in the Minimum Basic Data Set (MBDS) compiled for all births in 11 public hospitals in Valencia during 1994-1995 (n=36 819). Bivariate and multivariate analyses were used to evaluate the association between caesarean section rates and specific risk factors. The multivariate model was used to construct predictions about caesarean rates for each hospital, for comparison with rates observed. Results-Caesarean rates were 17.6% (inter-hospital range: 14.7% to 25.0%), with ample variability between hospitals in the diagnosis of maternal-fetal risk factors (particularly dystocia and fetal distress), and the indication for caesarean in the presence of these factors. Multivariate analysis showed that maternal-fetal risk factors correlated strongly with caesarean section, although extra-clinical factors, such as the day of the week, also correlated positively. After adjusting for the risk factors, the inter-hospital variation in caesarean rates persisted. Conclusions-Although certain limitations (imprecision of some diagnoses and information biases in the MBDS) make it impossible to establish unequivocal conclusions, results show a high degree of variability among hospitals when opting for caesarean section. This variability cannot be justified by diVerences in obstetric risks. (J Epidemiol Community Health 2000;54:631-636)
Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the ABO blood group has been described as a possible biological marker of susceptibility for the disease. This study evaluates the role of ABO group on the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and related complications in a population-based cohort including 87,090 subjects from the Navarre population (Northern Spain) with no history of SARS-CoV-2 infection and with known ABO blood group, after one year of the pandemic (May 2020 – May 2021). The risk of infection, hospitalization, Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission and death was analyzed using multivariate logistic regression, adjusting for possible confounding variables. A lower risk of infection was observed in group 0 vs non-0 groups [OR 0.94 (95%CI 0.90-0.99)], a higher risk of infection in group A vs non-A groups [OR 1.09 (95%CI 1.04-1.15)] and a higher risk of infection in group A vs group 0 [OR 1.08 (95CI 1.03-1.14)] (when the 4 groups are analyzed separately). No association was observed between blood groups and hospitalization, ICU admission, or death in SARS-CoV-2 infected subjects. Regarding the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, we observed a protective role of group O and a greater risk in the A group.
Background: Electrical auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) is an emerging therapy. Stimuli are transported to brainstem nuclei, whereby its multiple projections reach to many subcortical and cortical areas, thus allowing the neuromodulation of several systemic physiological processes. We aim to define the best auricular target for taVNS through vagus somatosensory evoked potential (VSEP) elicited stimulating different auricular areas with different electrode sizes.Methods: Twenty-six subjects were enrolled. Three stimulation areas were studied: simultaneous cymba and cavum (CC), cymba (C) and earlobe (L); and two electrode sizes: extra-large (X) and small (S). We studied the effect of five combinations (CCX, CCS, CS, LX and LS) on VSEPt's latency and amplitude, and sensory and pain threshold (Pt) using a lineal mixed model regression analysis. We used CS combination, used in a commercial device, as reference model. Results:Valid VSEP were obtained for CCX, CCS and CS but not in LX and LS. Both CCS and CCX tests showed significant amplitude increases. The same effect was observed in CCX using CCS as reference. Significant increases in Pt were found for CCX and LX.The same effect was observed in CCX using LX as reference. Conclusion:The results suggest that CC and C areas are active targets for taVNS but not for earlobe, as anatomical data support. Considering that amplitude reflects the synchronized electrical activity generated, we conclude the most effective topography is the simultaneous stimulation of cymba and concha. The use of X-sized electrodes increases the amplitudes and makes the stimulation more comfortable. K E Y W O R D Sauricular branch of vagus nerve (ABVN), evoked potential, nucleus of solitary tract, transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation, vagus sensory evoked potential (VSEP) This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Algunas características sociales, médicas o funcionales se asocian a mayor consumo de recursos sanitarios, sin que esto signifique un uso inapropiado de éstos. El objetivo de este trabajo es conocer la influencia del estado de salud y otros factores sobre las estancias hospitalarias y las estancias inapropiadas en la población mayor de 64 años. Método: Una cohorte representativa de la población mayor de 64 años del Partido Judicial de Toledo (n=3.214) en la que se había valorado el estado de salud, fue seguida durante 18 meses, identificando sus ingresos y estancias hospitalarias, cuya adecuación fue evaluada con el Appropiateness Evaluation Protocol. Se analizaron las asociaciones entre las características socio-demográficas, de estado de salud y morbilidad de la cohorte con las tasas de frecuentación y hospitalización y con la proporción de estancias e ingresos inadecuados. Resultados: Durante los 18 meses de seguimiento fueron hospitalizados 410 individuos (12,8%), que generaron 546 ingresos (tasa de frecuentación=17,0 ingresos/100 habitantes) y 7.015 días de estancia (tasa de hospitalización = 218,3 estancias/100 habitantes). El 18,9% de los ingresos y el 49,9% de las estancias fueron evaluadas como inadecuados. La hospitalización se asoció al peor estado de salud, institucionalización, género masculino, determinadas patologías y a la utilización previa de servicios sanitarios. No se hallaron asociaciones entre características de los pacientes y proporción de estancias inadecuadas. El 97,5% de las estancias innecesarias fue atribuido a problemas de programación hospitalaria y estilo de practica de los médicos. Conclusiones: Los factores socio-demográficos, de morbilidad, estado de salud y utilización previa de servicios se muestran como buenos predictores de hospitalización en las personas mayores, pero no se relacionan con el uso inadecuado de la hospitalización.
BackgroundCorticosteroids are the cornerstone of the treatment of patients with COVID-19 admitted to hospital. However, whether corticosteroids can prevent respiratory worsening in hospitalized COVID-19 patients without oxygen requirements is currently unknown.AimsTo assess the efficacy of methylprednisolone pulses (MPP) in hospitalized COVID-19 patients with increased levels of inflammatory markers not requiring oxygen at baseline.MethodsMulticenter, parallel, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted in Spain. Patients admitted for confirmed SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia with raised inflammatory markers (C-reactive protein >60 mg/L, interleukin-6 >40 pg/ml, or ferritin >1,000 μg/L) but without respiratory failure after the first week of symptom onset were randomized to receive a 3-day course of intravenous MPP (120 mg/day) or placebo. The primary outcome was treatment failure at 14 days, a composite variable including mortality, the need for ICU admission or mechanical ventilation, and clinical worsening, this last parameter defined as a PaO2/FiO2 ratio below 300; or a 15% decrease in the PaO2 from baseline, together with an increase in inflammatory markers or radiological progression. If clinical worsening occurred, patients received tocilizumab and unmasked corticosteroids. The secondary outcomes were 28-day mortality, adverse events, need for ICU admission or high-flow oxygen, length of hospital stay, SARS-CoV-2 clearance, and changes in laboratory parameters.ResultsA total of 72 patients were randomized and 71 patients were analyzed (34 in the MPP group and 37 in the placebo group). Twenty patients presented with treatment failure (29.4 in the MPP group vs. 27.0% in the placebo group, p = 0.82), with no differences regarding the time to treatment failure between groups. There were no cases of death or mechanical ventilation requirements at 14 days post-randomization. The secondary outcomes were similar in MPP and placebo groups.ConclusionsA 3-day course of MPP after the first week of disease onset did not prevent respiratory deterioration in hospitalized COVID-19 patients with an inflammatory phenotype who did not require oxygen.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
334 Leonard St
Brooklyn, NY 11211
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.