RESUMEN
Postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) is the most common complication of plastic surgery procedures. Diverse risk assessment models (RAMs) exist to stratify patients by VTE risk, but due to a lack of high-quality evidence and heterogeneity in RAM data, there is no recommendation regarding RAM that can be used for plastic surgery patients. This study compares the reliability and outcomes of Caprini and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification RAMs used in plastic surgery to help surgeons stratify the risk of VTE. Methods: MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched between February 2010 and December 2021. All published English articles that report the incidence of VTE stratified by a RAM among patients who underwent plastic surgery were included. The results of the presented meta-analysis were pooled using a random-effects model. Results: The database search revealed 809 articles, out of which eight studies (n = 1,348,606) were eligible. Out of the eight studies, six utilized the Caprini score, and three utilized ASA score. Super-high-risk patients were significantly more likely to present with VTE than their high-risk [odds ratio (OR), 2.92; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.26-6.78], medium-risk (OR, 5.29; 95% CI, 2.38-11.79), or low-risk counterparts (OR, 10.00; 95% CI, 2.32-43.10) at Caprini score. High-risk patients in ASA score showed significant increase in VTE incidents (OR, 2.72; 95% CI, 1.10-6.72). Conclusions: Both Caprini and ASA RAMs showed compelling evidence of efficacy in our study. However, the Caprini RAM is more predictive of postoperative VTE incidents in high-risk plastic surgery patients than the ASA grading system.
RESUMEN
Background: Assessing the humoral immune response to SARS-CoV-2 is crucial for inferring protective immunity from reinfection and for assessing vaccine efficacy. Data regarding the durability and sustainability of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies are conflicting. In this study, we aimed to determine the seroconversion rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection in a cohort of reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR)-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections and the antibody dynamics, durability, and the correlation of antibody titers with disease severity using the commercially available SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike (S1/S2) protein. Methods: A total of 342 subjects with PCR-confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled. A total of 395 samples were collected at different time points (0-204) after the onset of symptoms or from the day of positive PCR in asymptomatic patients. Demographics, clinical presentation and the date of PCR were collected. All samples were tested using the automated commercial chemiluminescent system (DiaSorin SARS-CoV-2 S1/S2 IgG) on the LIAISONXL® platform (LIAISON). Results: The seroconversion rate for samples collected 14 days after the onset of infection was much higher than that for samples collected before 14 days (79.4% vs. 39.4%). The rate of seroconversion in symptomatic participants (62.1%) was similar to that of asymptomatic participants (56.1%) (p = 0.496). The IgG titer distribution was also similar across both groups (p = 0.142), with a median IgG level of 27.86 AU/ml (3.8-85.5) and 15 AU/ml (3.8-58.85) in symptomatic and asymptomatic participants, respectively. However, IgG titers were significantly higher in ICU patients, with a median of 104 AU/ml (3.8-179) compared to 34 AU/ml (3.8-70) in the non-ICU participants (p < 0.0001). Furthermore, the median time to seroconversion occurred significantly faster in ICU patients than in non-ICU participants (19 versus 47 days) (P < 0.0001). IgG titers were also higher in subjects ≥50 years compared to those <50 years (p < 0.009), male compared to female (p < 0.054) and non-Saudi compared to Saudi (p < 0.003). Approximately 74% of all samples tested beyond 120 days were positive. Conclusion: Antibodies can persist in circulation for longer than 4 months after COVID-19 infection. The majority of patients with COVID-19 mounted humoral immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection that strongly correlated with disease severity, older age and male gender. However, the population of individuals who tested negative should be further evaluated.
