Effect of mRNA Vaccine Boosters against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron Infection in Qatar.

BACKGROUND: Waning of vaccine protection against coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) and the emergence of the omicron (or B.1.1.529) variant of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have led to expedited efforts to scale up booster vaccination. Protection conferred by booster doses of the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) and mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccines in Qatar, as compared with protection conferred by the two-dose primary series, is unclear. METHODS: We conducted two matched retrospective cohort studies to assess the effectiveness of booster vaccination, as compared with that of a two-dose primary series alone, against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection and Covid-19-related hospitalization and death during a large wave of omicron infections from December 19, 2021, through January 26, 2022. The association of booster status with infection was estimated with the use of Cox proportional-hazards regression models. RESULTS: In a population of 2,239,193 persons who had received at least two doses of BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccine, those who had also received a booster were matched with persons who had not received a booster. Among the BNT162b2-vaccinated persons, the cumulative incidence of symptomatic omicron infection was 2.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.3 to 2.5) in the booster cohort and 4.5% (95% CI, 4.3 to 4.6) in the nonbooster cohort after 35 days of follow-up. Booster effectiveness against symptomatic omicron infection, as compared with that of the primary series, was 49.4% (95% CI, 47.1 to 51.6). Booster effectiveness against Covid-19-related hospitalization and death due to omicron infection, as compared with the primary series, was 76.5% (95% CI, 55.9 to 87.5). BNT162b2 booster effectiveness against symptomatic infection with the delta (or B.1.617.2) variant, as compared with the primary series, was 86.1% (95% CI, 67.3 to 94.1). Among the mRNA-1273-vaccinated persons, the cumulative incidence of symptomatic omicron infection was 1.0% (95% CI, 0.9 to 1.2) in the booster cohort and 1.9% (95% CI, 1.8 to 2.1) in the nonbooster cohort after 35 days; booster effectiveness against symptomatic omicron infection, as compared with the primary series, was 47.3% (95% CI, 40.7 to 53.3). Few severe Covid-19 cases were noted in the mRNA-1273-vaccinated cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: The messenger RNA (mRNA) boosters were highly effective against symptomatic delta infection, but they were less effective against symptomatic omicron infection. However, with both variants, mRNA boosters led to strong protection against Covid-19-related hospitalization and death. (Funded by Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar and others.).

Effects of Previous Infection and Vaccination on Symptomatic Omicron Infections.

BACKGROUND: The protection conferred by natural immunity, vaccination, and both against symptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection with the BA.1 or BA.2 sublineages of the omicron (B.1.1.529) variant is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a national, matched, test-negative, case-control study in Qatar from December 23, 2021, through February 21, 2022, to evaluate the effectiveness of vaccination with BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) or mRNA-1273 (Moderna), natural immunity due to previous infection with variants other than omicron, and hybrid immunity (previous infection and vaccination) against symptomatic omicron infection and against severe, critical, or fatal coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). RESULTS: The effectiveness of previous infection alone against symptomatic BA.2 infection was 46.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 39.5 to 51.9). The effectiveness of vaccination with two doses of BNT162b2 and no previous infection was negligible (-1.1%; 95% CI, -7.1 to 4.6), but nearly all persons had received their second dose more than 6 months earlier. The effectiveness of three doses of BNT162b2 and no previous infection was 52.2% (95% CI, 48.1 to 55.9). The effectiveness of previous infection and two doses of BNT162b2 was 55.1% (95% CI, 50.9 to 58.9), and the effectiveness of previous infection and three doses of BNT162b2 was 77.3% (95% CI, 72.4 to 81.4). Previous infection alone, BNT162b2 vaccination alone, and hybrid immunity all showed strong effectiveness (>70%) against severe, critical, or fatal Covid-19 due to BA.2 infection. Similar results were observed in analyses of effectiveness against BA.1 infection and of vaccination with mRNA-1273. CONCLUSIONS: No discernable differences in protection against symptomatic BA.1 and BA.2 infection were seen with previous infection, vaccination, and hybrid immunity. Vaccination enhanced protection among persons who had had a previous infection. Hybrid immunity resulting from previous infection and recent booster vaccination conferred the strongest protection. (Funded by Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar and others.).

Covid-19 Vaccine Protection among Children and Adolescents in Qatar.

BACKGROUND: The BNT162b2 vaccine against coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) has been authorized for use in children 5 to 11 years of age and adolescents 12 to 17 years of age but in different antigen doses. METHODS: We assessed the real-world effectiveness of the BNT162b2 vaccine against infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) among children and adolescents in Qatar. To compare the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the national cohort of vaccinated participants with the incidence in the national cohort of unvaccinated participants, we conducted three matched, retrospective, target-trial, cohort studies - one assessing data obtained from children 5 to 11 years of age after the B.1.1.529 (omicron) variant became prevalent and two assessing data from adolescents 12 to 17 years of age before the emergence of the omicron variant (pre-omicron study) and after the omicron variant became prevalent. Associations were estimated with the use of Cox proportional-hazards regression models. RESULTS: Among children, the overall effectiveness of the 10-µg primary vaccine series against infection with the omicron variant was 25.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 10.0 to 38.6). Effectiveness was highest (49.6%; 95% CI, 28.5 to 64.5) right after receipt of the second dose but waned rapidly thereafter and was negligible after 3 months. Effectiveness was 46.3% (95% CI, 21.5 to 63.3) among children 5 to 7 years of age and 16.6% (95% CI, -4.2 to 33.2) among those 8 to 11 years of age. Among adolescents, the overall effectiveness of the 30-µg primary vaccine series against infection with the omicron variant was 30.6% (95% CI, 26.9 to 34.1), but many adolescents had been vaccinated months earlier. Effectiveness waned over time since receipt of the second dose. Effectiveness was 35.6% (95% CI, 31.2 to 39.6) among adolescents 12 to 14 years of age and 20.9% (95% CI, 13.8 to 27.4) among those 15 to 17 years of age. In the pre-omicron study, the overall effectiveness of the 30-µg primary vaccine series against SARS-CoV-2 infection among adolescents was 87.6% (95% CI, 84.0 to 90.4) and waned relatively slowly after receipt of the second dose. CONCLUSIONS: Vaccination in children was associated with modest, rapidly waning protection against omicron infection. Vaccination in adolescents was associated with stronger, more durable protection, perhaps because of the larger antigen dose. (Funded by Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar and others.).

Waning of BNT162b2 Vaccine Protection against SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Qatar.

BACKGROUND: Waning of vaccine protection against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection or coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is a concern. The persistence of BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccine effectiveness against infection and disease in Qatar, where the B.1.351 (or beta) and B.1.617.2 (or delta) variants have dominated incidence and polymerase-chain-reaction testing is done on a mass scale, is unclear. METHODS: We used a matched test-negative, case-control study design to estimate vaccine effectiveness against any SARS-CoV-2 infection and against any severe, critical, or fatal case of Covid-19, from January 1 to September 5, 2021. RESULTS: Estimated BNT162b2 effectiveness against any SARS-CoV-2 infection was negligible in the first 2 weeks after the first dose. It increased to 36.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 33.2 to 40.2) in the third week after the first dose and reached its peak at 77.5% (95% CI, 76.4 to 78.6) in the first month after the second dose. Effectiveness declined gradually thereafter, with the decline accelerating after the fourth month to reach approximately 20% in months 5 through 7 after the second dose. Effectiveness against symptomatic infection was higher than effectiveness against asymptomatic infection but waned similarly. Variant-specific effectiveness waned in the same pattern. Effectiveness against any severe, critical, or fatal case of Covid-19 increased rapidly to 66.1% (95% CI, 56.8 to 73.5) by the third week after the first dose and reached 96% or higher in the first 2 months after the second dose; effectiveness persisted at approximately this level for 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: BNT162b2-induced protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection appeared to wane rapidly following its peak after the second dose, but protection against hospitalization and death persisted at a robust level for 6 months after the second dose. (Funded by Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar and others.).

Estimating protection afforded by prior infection in preventing reinfection: Applying the test-negative study design.

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need to use infection testing databases to rapidly estimate effectiveness of prior infection in preventing reinfection ($P{E}_S$) by novel SARS-CoV-2 variants. Mathematical modeling was used to demonstrate a theoretical foundation for applicability of the test-negative, case-control study design to derive $P{E}_S$. Apart from the very early phase of an epidemic, the difference between the test-negative estimate for $P{E}_S$ and true value of $P{E}_S$ was minimal and became negligible as the epidemic progressed. The test-negative design provided robust estimation of $P{E}_S$ and its waning. Assuming that only 25% of prior infections are documented, misclassification of prior infection status underestimated $P{E}_S$, but the underestimate was considerable only when >50% of the population was ever infected. Misclassification of latent infection, misclassification of current active infection, and scale-up of vaccination all resulted in negligible bias in estimated $P{E}_S$. The test-negative design was applied to national-level testing data in Qatar to estimate $P{E}_S$ for SARS-CoV-2. $P{E}_S$ against SARS-CoV-2 Alpha and Beta variants was estimated at 97.0% (95% CI: 93.6-98.6) and 85.5% (95% CI: 82.4-88.1), respectively. These estimates were validated using a cohort study design. The test-negative design offers a feasible, robust method to estimate protection from prior infection in preventing reinfection.

TEMPORARY REMOVAL: The Effect of Preoperative Intravenous Tranexamic Acid Versus Rectal Misoprostol in Reducing Blood Loss During and After Elective Cesarean Delivery in Primigravida: A Double-Blinded, Randomized, Comparative-Placebo Trial.

The publisher regrets that this article has been temporarily removed. A replacement will appear as soon as possible in which the reason for the removal of the article will be specified, or the article will be reinstated. The full Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal can be found at: https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies/article-withdrawal.

Coronavirus Disease 2019 Disease Severity in Children Infected With the Omicron Variant.

SHORT SUMMARY: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection from the Omicron variant in children/adolescents is less severe than infection from the Delta variant. Those 6 to <18 years also have less severe disease than those <6 years old. BACKGROUND: There are limited data assessing coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) disease severity in children/adolescents infected with the Omicron variant. METHODS: We identified children and adolescents <18 years of age with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection with Delta and propensity score-matched controls with Omicron variant infection from the National COVID-19 Database in Qatar. Primary outcome was disease severity, determined by hospital admission, admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), or mechanical ventilation within 14 days of diagnosis, or death within 28 days. RESULTS: Among 1735 cases with Delta variant infection between 1 June and 6 November 2021, and 32 635 cases with Omicron variant infection between 1 January and 15 January 2022, who did not have prior infection and were not vaccinated, we identified 985 propensity score-matched pairs. Among those who were Delta infected, 84.2% had mild, 15.7% had moderate, and 0.1% had severe/critical disease. Among those who were Omicron infected, 97.8% had mild, 2.2% had moderate, and none had severe/critical disease (P < .001). Omicron variant infection (vs Delta) was associated with significantly lower odds of moderate or severe/critical disease (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], .07-.18). Those aged 6-11 and 12 to <18 years had lower odds of developing moderate or severe/critical disease compared with those younger than age 6 years (aOR, 0.47; 95% CI, .33-.66 for 6-11 year olds; aOR, 0.45; 95% CI, .21-.94 for 12 to <18 year olds). CONCLUSIONS: Omicron variant infection in children/adolescents is associated with less severe disease than Delta variant infection as measured by hospitalization rates and need for ICU care or mechanical ventilation. Those 6 to <18 years of age also have less severe disease than those <6 years old.

Severity, Criticality, and Fatality of the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Beta Variant.

Beta (B.1.351)-variant coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) disease was investigated in Qatar. Compared with the Alpha (B.1.1.7) variant, odds (95% confidence interval) of progressing to severe disease, critical disease, and COVID-19-related death were 1.24-fold (1.11-1.39), 1.49-fold (1.13-1.97), and 1.57-fold (1.03-2.43) higher, respectively, for the Beta variant.

Caps Captioning: A Modern Image Captioning Approach Based on Improved Capsule Network.

In image captioning models, the main challenge in describing an image is identifying all the objects by precisely considering the relationships between the objects and producing various captions. Over the past few years, many methods have been proposed, from an attribute-to-attribute comparison approach to handling issues related to semantics and their relationships. Despite the improvements, the existing techniques suffer from inadequate positional and geometrical attributes concepts. The reason is that most of the abovementioned approaches depend on Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) for object detection. CNN is notorious for failing to detect equivariance and rotational invariance in objects. Moreover, the pooling layers in CNNs cause valuable information to be lost. Inspired by the recent successful approaches, this paper introduces a novel framework for extracting meaningful descriptions based on a parallelized capsule network that describes the content of images through a high level of understanding of the semantic contents of an image. The main contribution of this paper is proposing a new method that not only overrides the limitations of CNNs but also generates descriptions with a wide variety of words by using Wikipedia. In our framework, capsules focus on the generation of meaningful descriptions with more detailed spatial and geometrical attributes for a given set of images by considering the position of the entities as well as their relationships. Qualitative experiments on the benchmark dataset MS-COCO show that our framework outperforms state-of-the-art image captioning models when describing the semantic content of the images.

Assessment of the Risk of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Reinfection in an Intense Reexposure Setting.

BACKGROUND: Risk of reinfection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is unknown. We assessed the risk and incidence rate of documented SARS-CoV-2 reinfection in a cohort of laboratory-confirmed cases in Qatar. METHODS: All SARS-CoV-2 laboratory-confirmed cases with at least 1 polymerase chain reaction-positive swab that was ≥45 days after a first positive swab were individually investigated for evidence of reinfection. Viral genome sequencing of the paired first positive and reinfection viral specimens was conducted to confirm reinfection. RESULTS: Out of 133 266 laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 cases, 243 persons (0.18%) had at least 1 subsequent positive swab ≥45 days after the first positive swab. Of these, 54 cases (22.2%) had strong or good evidence for reinfection. Median time between the first swab and reinfection swab was 64.5 days (range, 45-129). Twenty-three of the 54 cases (42.6%) were diagnosed at a health facility, suggesting presence of symptoms, while 31 (57.4%) were identified incidentally through random testing campaigns/surveys or contact tracing. Only 1 person was hospitalized at the time of reinfection but was discharged the next day. No deaths were recorded. Viral genome sequencing confirmed 4 reinfections of 12 cases with available genetic evidence. Reinfection risk was estimated at 0.02% (95% confidence interval [CI], .01%-.02%), and reinfection incidence rate was 0.36 (95% CI, .28-.47) per 10 000 person-weeks. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 reinfection can occur but is a rare phenomenon suggestive of protective immunity against reinfection that lasts for at least a few months post primary infection.

Herd Immunity against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infection in 10 Communities, Qatar.

We investigated what proportion of the population acquired severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and whether the herd immunity threshold has been reached in 10 communities in Qatar. The study included 4,970 participants during June 21-September 9, 2020. Antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 were detected by using an electrochemiluminescence immunoassay. Seropositivity ranged from 54.9% (95% CI 50.2%-59.4%) to 83.8% (95% CI 79.1%-87.7%) across communities and showed a pooled mean of 66.1% (95% CI 61.5%-70.6%). A range of other epidemiologic measures indicated that active infection is rare, with limited if any sustainable infection transmission for clusters to occur. Only 5 infections were ever severe and 1 was critical in these young communities; infection severity rate of 0.2% (95% CI 0.1%-0.4%). Specific communities in Qatar have or nearly reached herd immunity for SARS-CoV-2 infection: 65%-70% of the population has been infected.

Introduction and expansion of the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.7 variant and reinfections in Qatar: A nationally representative cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The epidemiology of the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.7 (or Alpha) variant is insufficiently understood. This study's objective was to describe the introduction and expansion of this variant in Qatar and to estimate the efficacy of natural infection against reinfection with this variant. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Reinfections with the B.1.1.7 variant and variants of unknown status were investigated in a national cohort of 158,608 individuals with prior PCR-confirmed infections and a national cohort of 42,848 antibody-positive individuals. Infections with B.1.1.7 and variants of unknown status were also investigated in a national comparator cohort of 132,701 antibody-negative individuals. B.1.1.7 was first identified in Qatar on 25 December 2020. Sudden, large B.1.1.7 epidemic expansion was observed starting on 18 January 2021, triggering the onset of epidemic's second wave, 7 months after the first wave. B.1.1.7 was about 60% more infectious than the original (wild-type) circulating variants. Among persons with a prior PCR-confirmed infection, the efficacy of natural infection against reinfection was estimated to be 97.5% (95% CI: 95.7% to 98.6%) for B.1.1.7 and 92.2% (95% CI: 90.6% to 93.5%) for variants of unknown status. Among antibody-positive persons, the efficacy of natural infection against reinfection was estimated to be 97.0% (95% CI: 92.5% to 98.7%) for B.1.1.7 and 94.2% (95% CI: 91.8% to 96.0%) for variants of unknown status. A main limitation of this study is assessment of reinfections based on documented PCR-confirmed reinfections, but other reinfections could have occurred and gone undocumented. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed that introduction of B.1.1.7 into a naïve population can create a major epidemic wave, but natural immunity in those previously infected was strongly associated with limited incidence of reinfection by B.1.1.7 or other variants.

Association of Prior SARS-CoV-2 Infection With Risk of Breakthrough Infection Following mRNA Vaccination in Qatar.

Importance: The effect of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection on vaccine protection remains poorly understood. Objective: To assess protection from SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infection after mRNA vaccination among persons with vs without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Design, Setting, and Participants: Matched-cohort studies in Qatar for the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) and mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccines. A total of 1 531 736 individuals vaccinated with either vaccine between December 21, 2020, and September 19, 2021, were followed up beginning 14 days after receiving the second dose until September 19, 2021. Exposures: Prior SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccination. Main Outcomes and Measures: Incident SARS-CoV-2 infection, defined as a polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-positive nasopharyngeal swab regardless of reason for PCR testing or presence of symptoms. Cumulative incidence was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier estimator method. Results: The BNT162b2-vaccinated cohort comprised 99 226 individuals with and 290 432 matched individuals without prior PCR-confirmed infection (median age, 37 years; 68% male). The mRNA-1273-vaccinated cohort comprised 58 096 individuals with and 169 514 matched individuals without prior PCR-confirmed infection (median age, 36 years; 73% male). Among BNT162b2-vaccinated persons, 159 reinfections occurred in those with and 2509 in those without prior infection 14 days or more after dose 2. Among mRNA-1273-vaccinated persons, 43 reinfections occurred in those with and 368 infections in those without prior infection. Cumulative infection incidence among BNT162b2-vaccinated individuals was an estimated 0.15% (95% CI, 0.12%-0.18%) in those with and 0.83% (95% CI, 0.79%-0.87%) in those without prior infection at 120 days of follow-up (adjusted hazard ratio for breakthrough infection with prior infection, 0.18 [95% CI, 0.15-0.21]; P < .001). Cumulative infection incidence among mRNA-1273-vaccinated individuals was an estimated 0.11% (95% CI, 0.08%-0.15%) in those with and 0.35% (95% CI, 0.32%-0.40%) in those without prior infection at 120 days of follow-up (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.35 [95% CI, 0.25-0.48]; P < .001). Vaccinated individuals with prior infection 6 months or more before dose 1 had statistically significantly lower risk for breakthrough infection than those vaccinated less than 6 months before dose 1 (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.42-0.92]; P = .02 for BNT162b2 and 0.40 [95% CI, 0.18-0.91]; P = .03 for mRNA-1273 vaccination). Conclusions and Relevance: Prior SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with a statistically significantly lower risk for breakthrough infection among individuals receiving the BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccines in Qatar between December 21, 2020, and September 19, 2021. The observational study design precludes direct comparisons of infection risk between the 2 vaccines.

Antenatal perineal massage benefits in reducing perineal trauma and postpartum morbidities: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Most vaginal births are associated with trauma to the perineum. The morbidity associated with perineal trauma can be significant, especially when it leads to third- and fourth-degree perineal tears. We hypothesized that antenatal perineal massage could decrease the incidence of perineal trauma, particularly severe perineal tears and other postpartum complications. METHODS: We searched four different databases from inception until August 2019 for the available trials. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which assessed the effect of antenatal perineal massage (intervention group) versus control group (no antenatal perineal massage) in perineal trauma patients. Data were extracted from eligible studies and meta-analyzed using RevMan software. Primary outcomes were the risk of episiotomies and perineal tears. Secondary outcomes were perineal pain, second stage of labor duration, wound healing, anal incontinence, and Apgar scores at 1 and 5 min. RESULTS: Eleven RCTs with 3467 patients were analyzed. Women who received antenatal perineal massage had significantly lower incidence of episiotomies (RR = 0.79, 95% CI [0.72, 0.87], p < 0.001) and perineal tears (RR = 0.79, 95% CI [0.67, 0.94], p = 0.007), particularly the risk of third- and fourth-degree perineal tears (p = 0.03). Better wound healing and less perineal pain were evident in the antenatal perineal massage group. Antenatal perineal massage reduced the second stage of labor duration (p = 0.005) and anal incontinence (p = 0.003) with significant improvement in Apgar scores at 1 and 5 min (p = 0.01 and p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Antenatal perineal massage is associated with a lower risk of severe perineal trauma and postpartum complications.

Identifying and selecting new procedures for health technology assessment: a decade of nice experience in the United Kingdom.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to analyze the experience of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in identifying new procedures entering the United Kingdom (UK) healthcare system, for assessment and publication of recommendations on their use. This system is designed to provide guidance in an area where regulation is lacking worldwide. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of all procedures notified to the Interventional Procedures Programme (NICE) between 2002 and 2012. Notifications were analyzed year by year for their source (who notified them), clinical specialties involved, and whether guidance was subsequently published. RESULTS: A total of 1,094 procedures were notified by clinicians (51 percent), and by others, including hospitals (6 percent), horizon scanners (5 percent), patients (4 percent), private health insurers (4 percent), and medical device manufacturers (3 percent). Guidance was published on 44 percent of procedures notified to the program. There was a decrease in the numbers of procedures notified during 2003-2012 (p = .049). There were notifications across all specialties, with the largest numbers in general surgery (125), urology (104), orthopedics (99), interventional radiology (93), cardiology (82), and obstetrics and gynecology (82). CONCLUSIONS: The "open" NICE Web portal allows anyone to notify new procedures, aiming to maximize the opportunity of identifying all those procedures entering clinical practice. This has resulted in identification of large numbers of procedures from across the whole range of medical specialties. The fact that similar proportions of procedures notified from diverse sources have been selected for assessment and publication of practice recommendations suggests that this inclusive approach is worthwhile.

Direct vertebral rotation versus simple rod derotation techniques in correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

BACKGROUND: One method for treating adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS), which is characterized by abnormal spinal alignment in the coronal, sagittal, and rotational planes, is surgical correction. The two surgical techniques most typically used to correct spine alignment are simple rod derotation (SRD) and direct vertebral derotation (DVR). AIM: The study's goal was to assess the effectiveness of two treatment methods for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: simple rod derotation and direct vertebral rotation. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A randomized controlled research involving 36 adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis was done. Patients were randomly split into one of two groups: 18 patients in group A had DVR treatment, while 18 patients in group B received SRD with a 2-year follow-up. RESULTS: Apical Vertebral Rotation measured from CT scans in DVR group was 24.4° ± 8.38° preoperatively and it decreased significantly postoperatively to 14.4° ± 4.61° with (42.22%) correction rate, while in SRD group, it was 25.03° ± 7.99° preoperatively and it also decreased significantly postoperatively to a mean value of 21.41° ± 7.01° with (14.65%) correction rate. There were statistically significant differences between both groups post-operative (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The apical vertebral rotation was greatly enhanced in both procedures, with direct vertebral rotation being better. Both Simple rod derotation and direct vertebral rotation reduce the rib hump, although the improvement is much greater with direct vertebral rotation.