Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 6 de 6
Filtrar
1.
Cancer Epidemiol ; 93: 102654, 2024 Aug 30.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39216338

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Russia has one of the highest lung cancer burdens globally, particularly in men. Mortality started to decline in the 1990s after the reduction in smoking prevalence. However, Russia's recent experience is largely unknown. This study aims to describe recent trends in the incidence and mortality of lung cancer in Russia along with the use of computed tomography (CT). METHODS: We obtained incidence data from national cancer reports covering 1993-2021 and mortality and population data from the Russian Fertility and Mortality Database covering 1965-2021. The number of CT scanners was obtained from the OECD. Changes in age-standardized rates (Segi-Doll, per 100,000) were assessed using segmented regression and temporal effects using age-period-cohort analysis. RESULTS: Lung cancer rates in men have been substantially higher than in women and have declined sharply since their peak in the 1990s. The latest breakpoints in incidence in women were in 2012 (95 % CI: 2000; 2014) from stagnation with an annual change of 0.7 % (-0.2; 1.5) to 3.4 % (1.6; 5.2) increase. In men, the decrease in incidence stopped in 2013 (2011; 2014) from -1.8 % (-2.1; -1.4) to 0.3 % (-0.7; 1.3). The growing number of CT scans accompanied the recent changes in incidence rates. Incidence declined sharply in 2020 in men and women. There were no substantial changes in declining mortality trends. Period effects were visible after 2012 when incidence rates increased and deviated from mortality. After accounting for the period effect, generations born after the 1950s had lower risks. CONCLUSION: Increasing lung cancer incidence rates in Russia in the late 2010s, especially in women, and the stable mortality trends could be a possible sign of diagnostic or treatment period effect. The increased use of CT should be monitored for possible benefits and harms.

2.
BMC Cardiovasc Disord ; 24(1): 213, 2024 Apr 17.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38632510

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation is the most prevalent sustained cardiac arrhythmia. Electrical cardioversion, a well-established part of the rhythm control strategy, is probably underused in community settings. Here, we describe its use, safety, and effectiveness in a cohort of patients with atrial fibrillation treated in rural settings. METHODS: It is a retrospective cohort study. Data on all procedures from January 1, 2016, till December 1, 2022, in Tarusa Hospital, serving mostly a rural population of 15,000 people, were extracted from electronic health records. Data on the procedure's success, age, gender, body mass index, comorbidities, previous procedures, echocardiographic parameters, type and duration of arrhythmia, anticoagulation, antiarrhythmic drugs, transesophageal echocardiography, and settings were available. RESULTS: Altogether, 1,272 procedures in 435 patients were performed during the study period. The overall effectiveness of the procedure was 92%. Effectiveness was similar across all prespecified subgroups. Electrical cardioversion was less effective in patients undergoing the procedure for the first time (86%, 95% CI: 82-90) compared to repeated procedures (95%, 95% CI: 93-96), OR 0.39 (95% CI: 0.26-0.59). Complications were encountered in 13 (1.02%) procedures but were not serious. CONCLUSIONS: Electrical cardioversion is an immediately effective procedure that can be safely performed in community hospitals, both in inpatient and outpatient settings. Further studies with longer follow-up are needed to investigate the rate of sinus rhythm maintenance in these patients.


Asunto(s)
Fibrilación Atrial , Humanos , Cardioversión Eléctrica , Estudios Retrospectivos , Hospitales Comunitarios , Resultado del Tratamiento
4.
Respir Res ; 23(1): 276, 2022 10 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36217139

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Monitoring vaccine effectiveness (VE) remains a priority for epidemiological research throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. VE against infection declines with the emergence of new SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern (VOC), but VE against the severe disease remains high. Therefore, we aimed to estimate the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines used in Russia against lung injury during Delta and Omicron VOC surges. METHODS: We designed a case-control study (test-negative design) to estimate VE against any (any volume of involved lung parenchyma) and severe (>50% of involved parenchyma) lung injury detected on computer tomography and associated with COVID-19 between October 1, 2021-April 28, 2022 (Delta VOC dominance period followed by Omicron dominance period). We included the data of patients with symptomatic confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection referred to the low-dose computer tomography triage centres. RESULTS: Among 23996 patients in the primary analysis, 13372 (55.7%) had any lung injury, and 338 (1.4%) had severe lung injury. The adjusted for age, sex and triage centre VE estimates against any lung injury were 56% (95% confidence interval 54-59) for two-dose Gam-COVID-Vac (Sputnik V), 71% (68-74) for three-dose Gam-COVID-Vac (booster), 2% (-27 to 24) for EpiVacCorona, and 46% (37-53) for CoviVac. VE estimates against severe lung injury were 76% (67-82) for two-dose Gam-COVID-Vac (Sputnik V), 87% (76-93) for three-dose Gam-COVID-Vac, 36% (-63 to 75) for EpiVacCorona, and 80% (45-92) for CoviVac. CONCLUSIONS: Gam-COVID-Vac remained effective against lung injury associated with COVID-19 during Delta and Omicron VOC surges, and one Gam-COVID-Vac booster could be seen as an appropriate option after a two-dose regimen. CoviVac was also effective against lung injury. EpiVacCorona use in population-based vaccination should be halted until effectiveness and efficacy evidence is provided. Trial registration The joint study of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness in St. Petersburg was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04981405, date of registration-August 4, 2021).


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Lesión Pulmonar , COVID-19/epidemiología , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Humanos , Pandemias , SARS-CoV-2 , Vacunas Sintéticas
5.
BMC Public Health ; 22(1): 1803, 2022 09 22.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36138385

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Studies of mRNA and vector-based vaccines used in different countries report acceptable levels of effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection caused by the Delta variants of SARS-CoV-2. No studies estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) of Gam-COVID-Vac and other vaccines used in Russia against symptomatic infection with Delta variant. In this population-based case-control study, we aimed to estimate the effectiveness of the Russian COVID-19 vaccines against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 during the recent outbreak caused by the Delta VOC in October 2021 in St. Petersburg, Russia. METHODS: Cases were symptomatic patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 (using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test) referred to low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) triage in two outpatient centres between October 6 and 14, 2021 during the Delta variant outbreak. We recruited the controls during the representative survey of the seroprevalence study conducted during the same period in St. Petersburg using random digit dialling. In the primary analysis, we used logistic regression models to estimate the adjusted (age, sex, and history of confirmed COVID-19) VE against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 resulted in a referral to triage centre for three vaccines used in Russia: Gam-COVID-Vac, EpiVacCorona, and CoviVac. RESULTS: We included 1,254 cases and 2,747 controls recruited between the 6th and 14th of October in the final analysis. VE was 56% (95% CI: 48 to 63) for Gam-COVID-Vac (Sputnik V), 49% (95% CI: 29 to 63) for 1-dose Gam-COVID-Vac (Sputnik V) or Sputnik Light, -58% (95% CI: -225 to 23) for EpiVacCorona and 40% (95% CI: 3 to 63) for CoviVac. Without adjustment for the history of confirmed COVID-19 VE for all vaccines was lower, except for one-dose Gam-COVID-Vac (Sputnik Light). The adjusted VE was slightly lower in women - 51% (95% CI: 39 to 60) than men - 65% (95% CI: 5 to 73). CONCLUSIONS: Our preliminary results show that in contrast to other Russian vaccines, Gam-COVID-Vac is effective against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection caused by Delta VOC. Effectiveness is likely higher than the estimated 56% due to bias arising from high prevalence of the past COVID-19 in St. Petersburg.


Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , ARN Mensajero , SARS-CoV-2/genética , Estudios Seroepidemiológicos , Vacunas Sintéticas
6.
BMC Med ; 20(1): 312, 2022 09 20.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36123681

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The results of a randomised trial showed the safety and efficacy of Gam-COVID-Vac against COVID-19. However, compared to other vaccines used across the globe, the real-world data on the effectiveness of Gam-COVID-Vac, especially against the disease caused by the Delta variant of concern, was limited. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of vaccination mainly conducted with Gam-COVID-Vac in St. Petersburg, Russia. METHODS: We designed a case-control study to assess the vaccine effectiveness (VE) against referral to hospital. Self-reported vaccination status was collected for individuals with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection who were referred for initial low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) triage in two outpatient centres in July 3-August 9, 2021, in St. Petersburg, Russia. We used logistic regression models to estimate the adjusted (for age, sex, and triage centre) VE for complete (14 days or more after the second dose) vaccination. We estimated the VE against referral for hospital admission, COVID-19-related lung injury assessed with LDCT, and decline in oxygen saturation. RESULTS: In the final analysis, 13,893 patients were included, 1291 (9.3%) patients met our criteria for complete vaccination status, and 495 (3.6%) were referred to hospital. In the primary analysis, the adjusted VE against referral to hospital was 81% (95% confidence interval: 68-88) for complete vaccination. The VE against referral to hospital was more pronounced in women (84%, 95% CI: 66-92) compared to men (76%, 95% CI: 51-88). Vaccine protective effect increased with increasing lung injury categories, from 54% (95% CI: 48-60) against any sign of lung injury to 76% (95% CI: 59-86) against more than 50% lung involvement. A sharp increase was observed in the probability of hospital admission with age for non-vaccinated patients in relation to an almost flat relationship for the completely vaccinated group. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccination was effective against referral to hospital in patients with symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in St. Petersburg, Russia. This protection is probably mediated through VE against lung injury associated with COVID-19.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Lesión Pulmonar , COVID-19/prevención & control , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Femenino , Hospitales , Humanos , Masculino , Derivación y Consulta , SARS-CoV-2 , Eficacia de las Vacunas
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA