Comparison between standard Vs. Escalated dose venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in critically ill patients with COVID-19: A two centers, observational study.

INTRODUCTION: The risk of mortality in patients with COVID-19 was found to be significantly higher in patients who experienced thromboembolic events. Thus, several guidelines recommend using prophylactic anticoagulants in all COVID-19 hospitalized patients. However, there is uncertainty about the appropriate dosing regimen and safety of anticoagulation in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Thus, this study aims to compare the effectiveness and safety of standard versus escalated dose pharmacological venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in critically ill patients with COVID-19. METHODS: A two-center retrospective cohort study including critically ill patients aged ≥ 18-years with confirmed COVID-19 admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) at two tertiary hospitals in Saudi Arabia from March 1st, 2020, until January 31st, 2021. Patients who received either Enoxaparin 40 mg daily or Unfractionated heparin 5000 Units three times daily were grouped under the "standard dose VTE prophylaxis and patients who received higher than the standard dose but not as treatment dose were grouped under "escalated VTE prophylaxis dose". The primary outcome was the occurance of thrombotic events, and the secondary outcomes were bleeding, mortality, and other ICU-related complications. RESULTS: A total of 758 patients were screened; 565 patients were included in the study. We matched 352 patients using propensity score matching (1:1). In patients who received escalated dose pharmacological VTE prophylaxis, any case of thrombosis and VTE were similar between the two groups (OR 1.22;95 %CI 0.52-2.86; P = 0.64 and OR 0.75; 95% CI 0.16-3.38; P = 0.70 respectively). However, the odds of minor bleeding was higher in patients who received escalated VTE prophylaxis dose (OR 3.39; 95% CI 1.08-10.61; P = 0.04). There was no difference in the 30-day mortality nor in-hospital mortality between the two groups (HR 1.17;95 %CI0.79-1.73; P = 0.43 and HR 1.08;95 %CI 0.76-1.53; P = 0.83, respectively). CONCLUSION: Escalated-dose pharmacological VTE prophylaxis in critically ill patients with COVID-19 was not associated with thrombosis, or mortality benefits but led to an increased risk of minor bleeding. This study supports previous evidence regarding the optimal dosing VTE pharmacological prophylaxis regimen for critically ill patients with COVID-19.

Skeletal and dentoalveolar changes after total maxillary arch distalization using the casted palatal plate vs. buccal miniscrews: A randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate treatment changes after total maxillary arch distalization using the casted palatal plate compared with buccal miniscrews. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a randomized, parallel, two-arm, single center trial. Participants were young adults with class II dental relationships and normal or horizontal growth patterns. The patients were treated with total distalization of the maxillary arch and were randomly allocated, according to the anchorage devices, between the plate group and the minivis group. The primary outcomes were sagittal, vertical and angular changes of molars and incisors, while the secondary outcomes were skeletal and soft tissue changes. Outcomes were evaluated on lateral cephalograms and blinding of outcome assessment was implemented. A multivariate analysis of Variance (MANOVA) tests were used and Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons with P<0.001. RESULTS: Forty patients (33 females and 7 males; mean age 20±3.1 years) where enrolled. A significant distalization of U6 was observed in both groups (4.33mm in the plate group and 1.88mm in the miniscrews group). It was combined with significant intrusion and non-significant distal tipping of the U6 in the plate group (1.85mm and 3.10°, respectively), while intrusion and distal tipping were non-significant in the miniscrew group (0.8mm and 2°, respectively). Both groups showed significant retraction and palatal inclination without vertical changes of U1. Only the plate group produced significant reduction of ANB and Wits. Upper and lower lips were retracted and the nasolabial angle increased significantly in both groups. There was no significant main effect of the appliance type on the comparison of treatment effects between the two groups (P=0.623). However, univariate comparisons showed that the plaque group showed greater distalization of the U6 (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Both the casted palatal plate and buccal miniscrews can be viable devices for total distalization of the maxillary arch in the treatment of class II patients. The casted plate may be considered when more extensive distalization is required.

Efficiency of maxillary total arch distalization using temporary anchorage devices (TADs) for treatment of Class II-malocclusions: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the treatment effects and post-treatment stability of the maxillary total arch distalization using TADs during the non-extraction treatment of class II malocclusions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Study involved an electronic search followed by hand searching for randomized and non-randomized clinical studies about maxillary total arch distalization using TADs. After data extraction and risk of bias assessment, meta-analysis was performed for dental, skeletal and soft tissue changes using the Generic-inverse variance approach by use of the mean difference and random-effect model. RESULTS: In total, 1788 articles were identified, 88 full texts were screened and 22 studies were found eligible; 17 of them were included in the quantitative analysis. The means of distalization/distal tipping of the maxillary first molar were 4mm/3.17° in adults, 3.95mm/1.61° in adolescents after treatment with the Modified C-Palatal plate (MCPP), while they were 2.44mm/2.91° with the inter-radicular mini-screws. Both MCPP's treatment in adults and inter-radicular mini-screws resulted in significant intrusion of U6 (1.64 and 0.75mm, respectively), while insignificant extrusion of U6 was resulted in adolescents treated by MCPP. MCPP appliances resulted in palatal inclination/extrusion of maxillary incisors U1 (6.77°/2mm in adults, 7.46°/3.14mm in adolescents). In contrast, inter-radicular mini-screws resulted in less palatal less amount of palatal inclination/insignificant intrusion of U1 (2.42°/0.14mm). MCPP treatment also resulted in significant changes in the skeletal measurements (SNA, ANB, occlusal and mandibular planes). Insignificant differences were found between subgroups in the retraction amount of maxillary incisors, as well as the upper and lower lips. In the follow-up of adolescents treated with MCPP, a significant amount of mesial movement, mesial tipping, and extrusion (2.94mm, 2.84°, and 3.94mm, respectively) was found. However, skeletal and occlusal corrections of the Class II relationship were maintained. CONCLUSIONS: Maxillary total arch distalization using TADs can be an effective and stable treatment procedure. However, RCTs or prospective cohort studies are highly recommended to establish a clinical evidence regarding their efficiency.