RESUMEN
Emerging variants of COVID-19 have threatened the effectiveness of intramuscular (IM) vaccines since that are made to target only the spike protein. Development of Intranasal (IN) vaccination has been proven to provide both the mucosal and systemic immune responses for broader and long lasting protection. Many IN vaccine candidates (virus-vectored vaccines, recombinant subunit vaccines and live attenuated vaccines) are in different phases of clinical trials and in near future many companies would be releasing their vaccines into the drug market. Potential advantages of IN vaccination over IM vaccination makes them ideal to be administered in children and developing populations of the world. This paper focuses on the very recent developments in intranasal vaccination with a spotlight on their safety and efficacy concerns. IN vaccination can prove to be game-changer in handling COVID-19 and potential viral contagious diseases in future.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Vacunas contra la Influenza , Niño , Humanos , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , Anticuerpos Antivirales , COVID-19/prevención & control , Administración IntranasalRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: The treatment of subcondylar mandible fractures is a topic of debate and can be variable even though these fractures are commonly seen. The present study aimed at evaluation of various treatment modalities for unilateral condylar fracture in adults. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty patients with unilateral condylar fractures between the age of 18 and 60 years were evaluated. Treatment protocol included closed reduction for 15 patients and open reduction for 15 patients. RESULTS: Assessment was done functionally for maximum interincisal mouth opening, deviation on maximum interincisal mouth opening, occlusion and facial nerve function, and radiologically for ramus height shortening. In general, there were no statistically significant differences between closed and open methods. DISCUSSION: Both the treatment options for condylar fractures of the mandible yielded acceptable results. Closed treatment appears to be a safe and appropriate modality for most unilateral condylar fractures. Although the open group, in general, showed similar outcomes, this treatment should be reserved for limited indications. The present study has confirmed that both treatment options can yield acceptable results. On clinical examination, there was no significant difference in mouth opening measures, the incidence of occlusal disturbances or in the degree of pain perception.