Updated guidance regarding the risk of allergic reactions to COVID-19 vaccines and recommended evaluation and management: A GRADE assessment and international consensus approach.

This guidance updates 2021 GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) recommendations regarding immediate allergic reactions following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines and addresses revaccinating individuals with first-dose allergic reactions and allergy testing to determine revaccination outcomes. Recent meta-analyses assessed the incidence of severe allergic reactions to initial COVID-19 vaccination, risk of mRNA-COVID-19 revaccination after an initial reaction, and diagnostic accuracy of COVID-19 vaccine and vaccine excipient testing in predicting reactions. GRADE methods informed rating the certainty of evidence and strength of recommendations. A modified Delphi panel consisting of experts in allergy, anaphylaxis, vaccinology, infectious diseases, emergency medicine, and primary care from Australia, Canada, Europe, Japan, South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the United States formed the recommendations. We recommend vaccination for persons without COVID-19 vaccine excipient allergy and revaccination after a prior immediate allergic reaction. We suggest against >15-minute postvaccination observation. We recommend against mRNA vaccine or excipient skin testing to predict outcomes. We suggest revaccination of persons with an immediate allergic reaction to the mRNA vaccine or excipients be performed by a person with vaccine allergy expertise in a properly equipped setting. We suggest against premedication, split-dosing, or special precautions because of a comorbid allergic history.

The Effect of Patency Files on Apical Canal Anatomy Using SEM Imaging.

Introduction: There are many reasons to maintain apical patency during routine endodontic treatment. Thousands of canals are treated utilizing a patency file every year all around the world. The effect patency has on the apical anatomy of the root has been controversial for generations. Objective: This ex vivo descriptive study was created to show the effect patency files actually have on the apical root canal anatomy using visually detailed SEM images supported by dental radiographs. Materials and Methods: Three extracted maxillary anterior teeth that represent the multitude of canals in vivo were instrumented utilizing patency files. Two of the three maxillary anterior teeth were instrumented with hand files, the other maxillary anterior tooth with a .06 taper rotary file. The teeth were then scanned with an electron microscope to view the effect that the instruments had on the apical canal anatomy. A fourth tooth, a maxillary second molar, was shaped with an .06 taper rotary file and cone fitted. This tooth was radiographed with a gutta percha cone fitted to reveal the position of the narrowest constriction after patency was achieved. Results: The patency files, both hand files and rotary, were shown not to adversely affect the apical canal anatomy. Additionally, the SEM's revealed a precise demarcation of cementum to dentin which was at the root surface after patency was achieved. Conclusion: The patent use of greater tapered rotary files provides a clear demarcation of the CDJ which allows a precise acquisition of the narrowest constriction of the canal with the use of an electronic apex locator for establishing the ideal working length and precision placement of a gutta percha cone.