Anticoagulation therapy in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

Thromboembolic events are common in hospitalized patients with COVID-19, suggesting that SARS-CoV-2 infection may be related to a prothrombotic state. Several clinical trials evaluating different anticoagulation strategies were developed. Thus, we proposed conducting a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials that evaluated the efficacy and safety of therapeutic anticoagulation with heparins in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. We searched PubMed, Cochrane, and Epistemonikos for studies published until December 22, 2022. Nine studies compared prophylactic/intermediate anticoagulation versus therapeutic anticoagulation with heparins were included. Four efficacy and one safety endpoints were analyzed: all-cause mortality, thromboembolic events, pulmonary embolism, need of intensive care unit or non-invasive ventilation, and major bleeding. Compared with prophylactic/intermediate anticoagulation, therapeutic anticoagulation with heparins was not associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality and need of intensive care unit or non-invasive ventilation in hospitalized patients with COVID-19, but showed a reduction in the number of thromboembolic events (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.41-0.71, I2 = 0 %) and pulmonary embolisms (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.24-0.57, I2 = 0 %), besides an increase in major bleeding (RR 1.67, 95% CI 1.05-2.64, I2 = 0 %). This meta-analysis did not show a reduction in all-cause mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 who received anticoagulation with heparin at a therapeutic dose compared to those who received a prophylactic/intermediate dose, as well as no significant differences were found in the need of intensive care unit admission or use of non-invasive ventilation. There was, however, a reduction in thromboembolic events, pulmonary embolism, and increased bleeding (Tab. 1, Fig. 5, Ref. 31). Keywords: COVID-19, anticoagulation, heparins, meta-analysis.

Real-life Effectiveness of Omalizumab in Patients with Severe Allergic Asthma: RELIEF Study.

Introduction: Patients with severe allergic asthma (SAA) are at risk of severe exacerbations. Omalizumab is recommended as an add-on treatment for patients with uncontrolled SAA, despite high-dose inhaled corticosteroids and long acting ß2-agonist combination therapy (standard therapy).RELIEF was a prospective, open label, multicenter study conducted to assess the real-life effectiveness of omalizumab co-administered with standard therapy in patients with SAA for 24 months. Methods: A total of 347 patients aged ≥ 6 years with SAA were enrolled, 285 of whom (8 pediatrics and 277 adolescents and adults) completed this 24-month study. Compared with the 12 months prior to baseline, the mean number of exacerbations was reduced in the overall population at any time interval during the study. Proportion of patients with no exacerbations increased to 77.7% at 24 months from 32.6% at 12 months prior to baseline. A reduction in healthcare resource utilization was also observed. The mean number of specialist visits reduced from baseline (5.8 visits) to 2.4 visits at Month 24. Results: The mean asthma control test score was >19 at every time-point during the study. The rate of Global Evaluation of Treatment Effectiveness (GETE) for asthma response significantly increased at Months 18 and 24 (P <0.05) compared to baseline. Pulmonary function remained relatively stable for the overall study population. There were no new or unexpected safety findings in the study. Conclusion: RELIEF study showed that add-on therapy with omalizumab is effective in reducing exacerbations, healthcare utilization, and improving GETE score in patients with SAA uncontrolled by standard therapy.

Dental caries status and salivary properties of asthmatic children and adolescents.

AIMS: This study aimed to investigate the dental caries status and salivary properties in 3- to 15-year-old children/adolescents. METHODS: The sample was split in two groups: asthma group (AG), composed of 65 patients who attended Public Health Service; asthma-free group (AFG), composed of 65 nonasthmatic children/adolescents recruited in two public schools. Stimulated salivary samples were collected for 3 min. Buffering capacity and pH were ascertained in each salivary sample. A single trained and calibrated examiner (kappa = 0.98) performed the dental caries examination according to WHO criteria. RESULTS: The AFG showed salivary flow rate (1.10 ± 0.63 mL/min) higher (P = 0.002) than AG (0.80 ± 0.50 mL/min). An inverse relationship was observed between asthma severity and salivary flow rate (Phi coefficient, rφ: 0.79, P = 0.0001). Children with moderate or severe asthma showed an increased risk for reduced salivary flow rate (OR: 17.15, P < 0.001). No association was observed between drug use frequency (P > 0.05) and drug type (P > 0.05) with salivary flow rate. Buffering capacity was similar in both groups. No significant differences were encountered in dental caries experience between AFG and AG groups. CONCLUSIONS: Although asthma can cause reduction in flow rate, the illness did not seem to influence dental caries experience in children with access to proper dental care.

A workshop on asthma management programs and centers in Brazil: reviewing and explaining concepts / Programas e centros de atenção a asmáticos no Brasil; uma oficina de trabalho: revisitando e explicitando conceitos

Objective: To report the results of a workshop regarding asthma management programs and centers (AMPCs) in Brazil, so that they can be used as a tool for the improvement and advancement of current and future AMPCs. Methods: The workshop consisted of five presentations and the corresponding group discussions. The working groups discussed the following themes: implementation of asthma management strategies; human resources needed for AMPCs; financial resources needed for AMPCs; and operational maintenance of AMPCs. Results: The workshop involved 39 participants, from all regions of the country, representing associations of asthma patients (n = 3), universities (n = 7), and AMPCs (n = 29). We found a direct relationship between a lack of planning and the failure of AMPCs. Based on the experiences reported during the workshop, the common assumptions about AMPCs in Brazil were the importance of raising awareness of managers; greater community participation; interdependence between primary care and specialized care; awareness of regionalization; and use of medications available in the public health system. Conclusions: Brazil already has a core of experience in the area of asthma management programs. The implementation of strategies for the management of chronic respiratory disease and their incorporation into health care system protocols would seem to be a natural progression. However, there is minimal experience in this area. Joint efforts by individuals with expertise in AMPCs could promote the implementation of asthma management strategies, thus speeding the creation of treatment networks, which might have a multiplier effect, precluding the need for isolated centers to start from zero. .

Objetivo: Relatar os resultados de uma oficina de trabalho sobre programas e centros de atenção a asmáticos (PCAAs) no Brasil para que possam servir como instrumento para melhoria e avanço dos PCAAs existentes e criação de novos. Métodos: A oficina de trabalho constituiu-se de cinco apresentações e discussões em grupos. Os grupos de trabalho discutiram os seguintes temas: implementação de uma linha de cuidado em asma; recursos humanos necessários para os PCAA; recursos necessários para financiar os PCAA; e manutenção do funcionamento dos PCAAs. Resultados: A oficina envolveu 39 participantes de todas as regiões do país, representando associações de asmáticos (n = 3), centros universitários (n = 7) e PCAAs (n = 29). Evidenciou-se uma relação direta entre a ausência de planejamento e o insucesso dos PCAAs. Com base nas experiências brasileiras elencadas durante a oficina, as premissas comuns foram a importância da sensibilização do gestor, maior participação da comunidade, interdependência entre a atenção primária e a especializada, observação da regionalização e utilização dos medicamentos disponíveis no sistema público de saúde. Conclusões: O Brasil já tem um núcleo de experiências na área programática da asma. A implementação de uma linha de cuidado em doenças respiratórias crônicas e sua inclusão nas redes de saúde parecem ser o caminho natural. Porém, a experiência nessa área ainda é pequena. Agregar pessoas com experiência nos PCAAs na elaboração da linha de cuidado em asma encurtaria tempo na criação de redes de atenção com possível efeito multiplicador, evitando que se partisse do zero em cada local isolado. .