Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros











Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Sex Transm Dis ; 51(10): 641-647, 2024 Oct 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38661311

RESUMO

ABSTRACT: We conducted a systematic literature review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of alternative treatments for neurosyphilis. We searched MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Embase, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science from database inception to September 2023, for studies in neurosyphilis that compared penicillin monotherapy with other treatments. We focused on the impact of these therapies on treatment response, but also assessed data regarding reinfection and adverse drug events. Random-effect models were used to obtain pooled mean differences. Of 3415 screened studies, 6 met the inclusion criteria for the systematic literature review. Three studies provided quantitative data that allowed for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Our analysis revealed that the efficacy of intravenous (IV) ceftriaxone 2 g daily for 10 days (51 patients) did not appear statistically different compared with IV penicillin G 18 to 24 million units daily for 10 days (185 patients) for neurosyphilis (pooled odds ratio, 2.85; 95% confidence interval, 0.41-19.56; I 2 = 49%). No statistical difference between ceftriaxone and penicillin was identified in people living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) (pooled odds ratio, 4.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.50-40.49; I 2 = 34%). We concluded that alternative therapy with IV ceftriaxone appears similar to penicillin, potentially expanding treatment options for neurosyphilis. Other treatment options including doxycycline warrant further study.


Assuntos
Antibacterianos , Neurossífilis , Humanos , Masculino , Antibacterianos/administração & dosagem , Antibacterianos/efeitos adversos , Ceftriaxona/administração & dosagem , Ceftriaxona/efeitos adversos , Infecções por HIV/tratamento farmacológico , Infecções por HIV/complicações , Neurossífilis/complicações , Neurossífilis/tratamento farmacológico , Penicilina G/administração & dosagem , Penicilina G/efeitos adversos , Penicilinas/administração & dosagem , Penicilinas/efeitos adversos , Resultado do Tratamento
2.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38655026

RESUMO

Objective: We performed a systematic literature review and meta-analysis on the effectiveness of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination against post-COVID conditions (long COVID) in the pediatric population. Design: Systematic literature review/meta-analysis. Methods: We searched PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, and Web of Science from December 1, 2019, to August 14, 2023, for studies evaluating the COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness against post-COVID conditions among vaccinated individuals < 21 years old who received at least 1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine. A post-COVID condition was defined as any symptom that was present 4 or more weeks after COVID-19 infection. We calculated the pooled diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) (95% CI) for post-COVID conditions between vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. Results: Eight studies with 23,995 individuals evaluated the effect of vaccination on post-COVID conditions, of which 5 observational studies were included in the meta-analysis. The prevalence of children who did not receive COVID-19 vaccines ranged from 65% to 97%. The pooled prevalence of post-COVID conditions was 21.3% among those unvaccinated and 20.3% among those vaccinated at least once. The pooled DOR for post-COVID conditions among individuals vaccinated with at least 1 dose and those vaccinated with 2 doses were 1.07 (95% CI, 0.77-1.49) and 0.82 (95% CI, 0.63-1.08), respectively. Conclusions: A significant proportion of children and adolescents were unvaccinated, and the prevalence of post-COVID conditions was higher than reported in adults. While vaccination did not appear protective, conclusions were limited by the lack of randomized trials and selection bias inherent in observational studies.

3.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol ; 44(12): 1972-1978, 2023 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37272468

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To determine risk factors for the development of long coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in healthcare personnel (HCP). METHODS: We conducted a case-control study among HCP who had confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 working in a Brazilian healthcare system between March 1, 2020, and July 15, 2022. Cases were defined as those having long COVID according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention definition. Controls were defined as HCP who had documented COVID-19 but did not develop long COVID. Multiple logistic regression was used to assess the association between exposure variables and long COVID during 180 days of follow-up. RESULTS: Of 7,051 HCP diagnosed with COVID-19, 1,933 (27.4%) who developed long COVID were compared to 5,118 (72.6%) who did not. The majority of those with long COVID (51.8%) had 3 or more symptoms. Factors associated with the development of long COVID were female sex (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.05-1.39), age (OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 1.00-1.02), and 2 or more SARS-CoV-2 infections (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.07-1.50). Those infected with the SARS-CoV-2 δ (delta) variant (OR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.17-0.50) or the SARS-CoV-2 o (omicron) variant (OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.30-0.78), and those receiving 4 COVID-19 vaccine doses prior to infection (OR, 0.05; 95% CI, 0.01-0.19) were significantly less likely to develop long COVID. CONCLUSIONS: Long COVID can be prevalent among HCP. Acquiring >1 SARS-CoV-2 infection was a major risk factor for long COVID, while maintenance of immunity via vaccination was highly protective.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Humanos , Feminino , Masculino , COVID-19/epidemiologia , SARS-CoV-2 , Síndrome de COVID-19 Pós-Aguda , Brasil/epidemiologia , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Fatores de Risco
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA