Could maternal stress be a causal factor for nonsyndromic cleft lip and/or palate: A retrospective study.

Background: The etiology of the nonsyndromic cleft lip and palate is multifactorial and not clearly defined. Objective: To determine whether maternal stress could be a causal factor for the occurrence of nonsyndromic cleft lip and palate. Materials and Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational study in which data from 50 mothers of children born with nonsyndromic cleft lip and palate and 50 mothers of noncleft children were analyzed. The outcomes defined were to study the association between the increased stress scores and the occurrence of nonsyndromic cleft lip and/or palate. Statistical analysis was performed using the Chi-square test. Results: The association between the high maternal stress scores and the occurrence of nonsyndromic cleft lip and/or palate was not found to be significant (P = 0.3220). A significant association was noted between increased maternal age and increased stress levels in the cleft group (P = 0.0001). Conclusion: No significant association was found between the increased stress scores and the occurrence of nonsyndromic cleft lip and/or palate. However, mothers of cleft children whose age was 35 years and above at the time of conception were noted to have higher stress levels.

Master's Degrees Among Academic Plastic Surgeons and Plastic Surgery Residents: What Are the Trends?

BACKGROUND: As more plastic surgery clinicians pursue advanced degrees and strive to become stronger physician-scientists, an objective understanding of how such degrees influence careers becomes important. We hypothesized that having a master's degree is associated with higher scholarly activity, research funding, academic progression, and leadership appointments. METHODS: Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited integrated plastic surgery residency program Web sites were queried to create a data set of current academic plastic surgeons (APSs) and plastic surgery residents (PSRs). Scholarly metrics such as publications, citations, and H-indices were extracted from the Scopus database. National Institutes of Health and Plastic Surgery Foundation funding information was collected through their respective Web sites. RESULTS: Our cohort comprised 799 APSs and 922 PSRs, of whom 8% and 7.4%, respectively, had at least one master's degree. Academic plastic surgeons with master's of public health degrees had a significantly higher median number of publications and citations than APSs without a master's of public health. There was no association between any master's degree and academic rank or being a department chairman or program director. Academic plastic surgeons with master of science degrees were more likely to receive National Institutes of Health grants. Among PSRs, master's of science graduates had a higher median number of publications. Other master's degrees did not significantly influence scholarly productivity or funding. CONCLUSIONS: Certain master's degrees had an impact on scholarly productivity, with no significant effect on academic rank or leadership positions. The value of master's degrees in programs focusing on healthcare management, leadership skills, and business acumen likely extends beyond the scope of this study.

COVID-19-Associated Acute Disseminated Encephalomyelitis: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to provide an overview of acute disseminating encephalomyelitis, a potential and serious complication of COVID-19. METHODS: Three primary databases were used, PubMed, LitCovid, and WHO. The final review articles reported acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM) in COVID-19-positive patients and were full-text, peer-reviewed articles. Articles which did not have patient data such as in vitro studies and articles with unclear inference were excluded. RESULTS: Out of 21 cases of ADEM, the diagnosis of severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 was confirmed in 18 and suspected in 3. Among the neurological symptoms, altered consciousness was most common (7/21), followed by anosmia (3), paraplegia (3/21), brain stem involvement (3/21), sphincter involvement (2/21), and quadriplegia (1/21). Raised inflammatory markers were most commonly seen in 9/17. Central nervous system imaging was abnormal in 19 cases and unavailable in 2 cases. Fifteen patients were treated with corticosteroids, 11 patients received intravenous immunoglobulin, while 3 patients received convalescent plasma. Two patients needed surgical intervention. Complications included seizures (1), acute kidney injury and septicemic shock (1), raised intracranial pressure (1), and supraventricular tachycardia secondary to hydroxychloroquine (1). One patient recovered completely and one had good recovery with mild deficits. Thirteen patients had incomplete recovery with residual neurological deficit while three patients died as the consequence of the disease. CONCLUSION: The physicians and neurosurgeons should be diligent while treating the COVID-19 patients with neurological manifestations and include ADEM as a differential diagnosis and stress on early diagnosis and treatment to reduce mortality and achieve satisfactory clinical outcome.

Mortality Benefit of Convalescent Plasma in COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Importance/Background: With a scarcity of high-grade evidence for COVID-19 treatment, researchers and health care providers across the world have resorted to classical and historical interventions. Immunotherapy with convalescent plasma (CPT) is one such therapeutic option. Methods: A systematized search was conducted for articles published between December 2019 and 18th January 2021 focusing on convalescent plasma efficacy and safety in COVID-19. The primary outcomes were defined as mortality benefit in patients treated with convalescent plasma compared to standard therapy/placebo. The secondary outcome was pooled mortality rate and the adverse event rate in convalescent plasma-treated patients. Results: A total of 27,706 patients were included in the qualitative analysis, and a total of 3,262 (2,127 in convalescent plasma-treated patients and 1,135 in the non-convalescent plasma/control group) patients died. The quantitative synthesis in 23 studies showed that the odds of mortality in patients who received plasma therapy were significantly lower than those in patients who did not receive plasma therapy [odds ratio (OR) 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53-0.80, p < 0.0001, I 2 = 15%). The mortality benefit remains the same even for 14 trials/prospective studies (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.43-0.81, p = 0.001, I 2 = 22%) as well as for nine case series/retrospective observational studies (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.65-0.94, p = 0.01, I 2 = 0%). However, in a subgroup analysis for 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), there was no statistically significant reduction in mortality between the CPT group compared to the non-CPT group (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.53-1.08, p = 0.13, I 2 = 7%). Furthermore, the sensitivity analysis of 10 RCTs, excluding the study with the highest statistical weight, displayed a lower mortality rate compared to that of non-CPT COVID-19 patients (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.42-0.97, p = 0.04, I 2 = 0%). The observed pooled mortality rate was 12.9% (95% CI 9.7-16.9%), and the pooled adverse event rate was 6.1% (95% CI 3.2-11.6), with significant heterogeneity. Conclusions and Relevance: Our systemic review and meta-analysis suggests that CPT could be an effective therapeutic option with promising evidence on the safety and reduced mortality in concomitant treatment for COVID-19 along with antiviral/antimicrobial drugs, steroids, and other supportive care. Future exploratory studies could benefit from more standardized reporting, especially in terms of the timing of interventions and clinically relevant outcomes, like days until discharge from the hospital and improvement of clinical symptoms.

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Setting-specific Transmission Rates: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the drivers of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission is crucial for control policies, but evidence of transmission rates in different settings remains limited. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review to estimate secondary attack rates (SARs) and observed reproduction numbers (Robs) in different settings exploring differences by age, symptom status, and duration of exposure. To account for additional study heterogeneity, we employed a beta-binomial model to pool SARs across studies and a negative-binomial model to estimate Robs. RESULTS: Households showed the highest transmission rates, with a pooled SAR of 21.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]:17.4-24.8). SARs were significantly higher where the duration of household exposure exceeded 5 days compared with exposure of ≤5 days. SARs related to contacts at social events with family and friends were higher than those for low-risk casual contacts (5.9% vs 1.2%). Estimates of SARs and Robs for asymptomatic index cases were approximately one-seventh, and for presymptomatic two-thirds of those for symptomatic index cases. We found some evidence for reduced transmission potential both from and to individuals younger than 20 years of age in the household context, which is more limited when examining all settings. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that exposure in settings with familiar contacts increases SARS-CoV-2 transmission potential. Additionally, the differences observed in transmissibility by index case symptom status and duration of exposure have important implications for control strategies, such as contact tracing, testing, and rapid isolation of cases. There were limited data to explore transmission patterns in workplaces, schools, and care homes, highlighting the need for further research in such settings.

"The historical timeline of cranioplasty".

Cranioplasty, defined as the reconstruction of cranial defects, not only offers protective effects with an aesthetically pleasing outcome, but also reverses the altered physiology post craniotomy and craniectomy. The journey of cranioplasty from its roots to the neoteric armamentarium depicts how enormously the innovation of surgical techniques have changed the face of plastic surgery.

Mortality and Severity in COVID-19 Patients on ACEIs and ARBs-A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Meta-Regression Analysis.

Purpose: The primary objective of this systematic review is to assess association of mortality in COVID-19 patients on Angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and Angiotensin-II receptor blockers (ARBs). A secondary objective is to assess associations with higher severity of the disease in COVID-19 patients. Materials and Methods: We searched multiple COVID-19 databases (WHO, CDC, LIT-COVID) for longitudinal studies globally reporting mortality and severity published before January 18th, 2021. Meta-analyses were performed using 53 studies for mortality outcome and 43 for the severity outcome. Mantel-Haenszel odds ratios were generated to describe overall effect size using random effect models. To account for between study results variations, multivariate meta-regression was performed with preselected covariates using maximum likelihood method for both the mortality and severity models. Result: Our findings showed that the use of ACEIs/ARBs did not significantly influence either mortality (OR = 1.16 95% CI 0.94-1.44, p = 0.15, I 2 = 93.2%) or severity (OR = 1.18, 95% CI 0.94-1.48, p = 0.15, I 2 = 91.1%) in comparison to not being on ACEIs/ARBs in COVID-19 positive patients. Multivariate meta-regression for the mortality model demonstrated that 36% of between study variations could be explained by differences in age, gender, and proportion of heart diseases in the study samples. Multivariate meta-regression for the severity model demonstrated that 8% of between study variations could be explained by differences in age, proportion of diabetes, heart disease and study country in the study samples. Conclusion: We found no association of mortality or severity in COVID-19 patients taking ACEIs/ARBs.

Mortality Benefit of Remdesivir in COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Importance/Background: During current public health emergency of COVID-19 pandemic, repurposing of existing antiviral drugs may be an efficient strategy since there is no proven effective treatment. Published literature shows Remdesivir has broad-spectrum antiviral activity against numerous RNA viruses and has been recently recognized as a promising therapy against SARS-CoV-2. Methods: A systematic search was conducted for full length manuscripts published between inception and July 19th, 2020 focussing on efficacy and safety of Remdesivir in COVID-19. The primary outcomes were defined as mortality rate and median days to recovery based on the available pooled data. The secondary outcome was adverse events rate and drug discontinuation rate. Statistical Analysis: All outcomes were performed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software package (Bio stat, Englewood, NJ, USA). Results: A total of 1,895 patients from 9 studies were included in this qualitative synthesis. In patients treated with Remdesivir, the mean recovery time was 15.84 days (95% CI 11.68-20, SE 2.12; I 2 = 97.24) and the pooled mortality rate was 11.3% (95% CI 7.9-16%; I 2 = 74.85). However, treatment with Remdesivir was associated with adverse effects (55.3%, 95% CI 31.5-76.9%; I 2 = 97.66) eventually warranting the discontinuation of the drug (17.8%, 95% CI 8.6-33.1%; I 2 = 95.64). The meta-analysis of three clinical trials indicated that administration of Remdesivir significantly reduces the mortality compared to the placebo (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.58-0.84, p ≤ 0.001; I 2 = 16.6). Conclusions and Relevance: The result of contemporary meta-analysis suggests mortality benefit with Remdesivir in COVID-19 and median recovery time was over 2 weeks. The pooled mortality with Remdesivir was found to be very low, and this analysis can shed light on this potential treatment for COVID-19 patients.