Background Tissue fillers are among the most popular cosmetic procedures performed and notably, cases of filler reactions after COVID‐19 vaccination have been reported. Objective The objective was to determine the characteristics of patients with filler reaction after COVID‐19 vaccination and address several considerations that have to be taken into practice. Methods A PRISMA compliant systematic search was conducted in Scopus, Web of Science, and PubMed/MEDLINE databases for articles published from inception up to October 21, 2021. Results Out of 106 initially retrieved articles, four of them were included in our study, and a total number of 13 cases were analyzed. In this study, we found that all of the patients who developed delayed‐type reaction (DTR) following COVID‐19 vaccination were middle‐aged women without any known history of allergy to foods or drugs. All patients had a history of hyaluronic acid (HA) filler injection in their head and neck and demonstrated symptoms particularly swelling, from <1 day up to 10 days after the first or second doses of vaccines. Lisinopril, hyaluronidase, and corticosteroids seemed to have good results in management. Conclusion Although rare, DTR to fillers after COVID‐19 vaccination can happen. Physicians should be aware of the pathogenesis and management of this phenomenon.
Background Research shows impaired endothelial function in patients with vascular diseases and improved endothelial function following revascularization and medical treatment. There is, however, a dearth of data on the effects of different endovascular therapeutic strategies on endothelial function. We sought to compare the effects of two endovascular strategies of drug-coated balloons versus stenting on endothelial function. Methods The reactive hyperemia index, the ankle-brachial index, and the toe-brachial index were measured in patients undergoing endovascular revascularization preprocedurally and on the 90th postprocedural day. After adjusting for baseline line characteristics, reactive hyperemia index were compared between the two groups at baseline and at 90 days. Results Between January 2018 and March 2019, 86 patients were prospectively included in a non-randomized manner. Drug-coated ballooning alone was carried out on 46 patients, and bailout stenting after plain balloon angioplasty was performed on the remaining 40 patients The post-revascularization reactive hyperemia index exhibited a significant rise in both groups (1.58 ± 0.21 vs. 1.43 ± 0.20; P = 0.0001). There was no difference in the postprocedural reactive hyperemia index between the two treatment groups. Additionally, the follow-up reactive hyperemia index showed no significant change compared with the postprocedural reactive hyperemia index (1.58 ± 0.23 vs. 1.57 ± 0.22). The results of subgroup analysis between a group of clinically high-risk patients and a group of patients with complex lesions were similar to the aforementioned results. Conclusions The reactive hyperemia index was significantly improved by endovascular therapy in our study population. However, no difference was observed between drug-coated ballooning and bare-metal stenting, which highlights the effects of vessel patency on endothelial function.
Background Periprocedural myocardial injury is a predictor of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention. Methods The authors examined the effects of preprocedural lipid levels (low-density lipoprotein, high-density lipoprotein, and triglycerides) in 977 patients with coronary artery disease who underwent elective percutaneous coronary intervention. Results Elevated cardiac troponin I level (≥5× the upper limit of normal) was used to indicate periprocedural myocardial injury. Serum lipid samples were collected 12 hours preprocedurally. Cardiac troponin I was collected 1, 6, and 12 hours postprocedurally. Correlations between preprocedural lipid levels and postprocedural cardiac troponin I were studied. Low-density lipoprotein levels were less than 70 mg/dL in 70% of patients and greater than 100 mg/dL in only 7.4% of patients; 13% had triglyceride levels greater than or equal to 150 mg/dL, and 96% had high-density lipoprotein levels less than 40 mg/dL. Patients with elevated cardiac troponin I had significantly lower left ventricular ejection fraction than did those with cardiac troponin I levels less than 5× the upper limit of normal (P = .01). Double-and triple-vessel disease were more common in patients with elevated cardiac troponin I (P < .002). Multivariable logistic and linear regression analyses revealed no statistically significant associations between lipid levels and postprocedural cardiac troponin I elevation, possibly because such large proportions of included patients had low levels of low-density lipoprotein (70%) and a history of statin intake (86%). Conclusion The authors found no association between lipid profile and periprocedural myocardial injury.
Background Long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) have been reported to be involved in the pathogenesis of neurodegenerative diseases. It has also been hypothesized that plasma exosomal lncRNAs may be used as Alzheimer’s disease (AD) biomarkers. In this systematic review, we compiled all studies on the subject to evaluate the accuracy of lncRNAs in identifying AD cases through meta-analysis. Methods A PRISMA-compliant systematic search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases for English publications till September 2022. We included all observational studies published which investigated the sensitivity and specificity of various lncRNAs in plasma samples of AD diagnosis. Our search strategy included lncRNA and all the related spelling and abbreviation variations combined with the keyword Alzheimer’s disease. Methodological quality was assessed using the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines and the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-II) tool. The meta-analysis was carried out using the area under the Receiver Operator Characteristic (ROC) curves (AUC) and sensitivity and specificity values to assess the accuracy of the identified lncRNAs in AD diagnosis. To account for the predicted heterogeneity of the study, a random-effects model was used. All the statistical analyses and visualizations were conducted using Stata 17.0 software. Results A total of seven studies (AD patients = 553, healthy controls = 513) were included in the meta-analysis. Three lncRNAs were upregulated (RNA BACE-AS1, RNA NEAT1, RNA GAS5), and one lncRNA (MALAT1) was downregulated in plasma samples of AD patients. RNA 51A and RNA BC200 were reported to have variable expression patterns. A lncRNA (RNA 17A) was not significantly different between AD and control groups. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUC values of lncRNAs in identifying AD were (0.74; 95% CI [0.63, 0.82], I2 = 79.2%), (0.88; 95% CI [0.75, 0.94], I2 = 88.9%), and 0.86; 95% CI [0.82, 0.88], respectively. In addition, the pooled diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of the five individual lncRNAs in AD diagnosis was 20. Conclusion lncRNAs had high accuracy in identifying AD and must be seen as a promising diagnostic biomarker of the disease.
We describe a 34-year-old woman with isolated tuberculosis (TB) uveitis who had unsuccessful resolution of her ocular surface squamous neoplasia after multiple shave excisions with a positive purified protein derivative (PPD) test and interferon-gamma (IFN-γ) release assays (IGRAs) proven tuberculosis. She was managed with wide local excision of the lesion. Histopathology confirmed conjunctival intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade II. Topical interferon alpha-2b (4 times daily) and anti-tuberculous therapy was planned for her, and there was no sign of recurrence of the lesion at six months follow-up.
Background Many commonly used drugs were evaluated as repurposed treatment options since the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic. The benefit of lipid-lowering agents has been controversial in this regard. In this systematic review, we assessed the effect of these medications as adjunctive therapy in COVID-19 by the inclusion of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Methods We searched four international databases including PubMed, the Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase for RCTs in April 2023. The primary outcome was mortality, while other efficacy indices were considered secondary outcomes. In order to estimate the pooled effect size of the outcomes, considering the odds ratio (OR) or standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI), random-effect meta-analyses was conducted. Results Ten studies involving 2,167 COVID-19 patients using statins, omega-3 fatty acids, fenofibrate, PCSK9 inhibitors, and nicotinamide as intervention compared to control or placebo, were included. No significant difference was found in terms of mortality (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.59, p-value = 0.86, I2 = 20.4%) or length of hospital stay (SMD -0.10, 95% CI -0.78 to 0.59, p-value = 0.78, I2 = 92.4%) by adding a statin to the standard of care. The trend was similar for fenofibrate and nicotinamide. PCSK9 inhibition, however, led to decreased mortality and an overall better prognosis. Omega-3 supplementation showed contradicting results in two trials, suggesting the need for further evaluation. Conclusion Although some observational studies found improved outcomes in patients using lipid-lowering agents, our study found no benefit in adding statins, fenofibrate, or nicotinamide to COVID-19 treatment. On the other hand, PCSK9 inhibitors can be a good candidate for further assessment. Finally, there are major limitations in the use of omega-3 supplements in treating COVID-19 and more trials are warranted to evaluate this efficacy.
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
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.