Infectious Disease Medicine

传染病医学
  • 文章类型: Case Reports
    免疫重建炎症综合征(IRIS)是一种潜在的威胁生命的现象,与人类免疫缺陷病毒(HIV)感染导致的获得性免疫缺陷综合征患者开始抗逆转录病毒治疗有关。它被认为是对现有病原体或甚至其抗原的夸大的炎症反应。我们在最近开始接受治疗的年轻HIV感染患者中介绍了由于非结核分枝杆菌感染引起的IRIS病例。这个案例强调了做出这样的诊断的挑战以及与肺部和感染性疾病的多学科团队讨论对这些患者的最佳管理的重要性。
    Immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome (IRIS) is a potentially life-threatening phenomenon associated with the initiation of antiretroviral therapy in patients with acquired immunodeficiency syndrome due to a human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. It is thought to be an exaggerated inflammatory response to an existing pathogen or even its antigen. We present a case of IRIS due to a non-tuberculous mycobacteria infection in a young patient with HIV infection who was recently started on therapy. This case highlights the challenges of making such a diagnosis and the importance of multidisciplinary team discussions with pulmonary and infectious diseases for optimal management of these patients.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    评估后covid-19疾病对成年人的影响。
    对照研究中健康结果的系统评价和荟萃分析。
    从数据库开始到2022年10月20日搜索了两个来源:Cochranecovid-19研究登记册(包括Cochrane中央对照试验登记册,Medline,Embase,clinicalTrials.gov,世界卫生组织国际临床试验注册平台,medRxiv)和WHO的covid-19研究数据库。
    队列研究招募了100多名参与者,对照组和至少12周的随访。根据临床证明有SARS-CoV-2感染的成年人,成像,或包括实验室标准。
    两个独立的审阅者提取了数据。主要结果包括生活质量,在日常活动中的功能,利用资源,恢复率(症状群),以及新医学诊断的发生率。使用随机效应模型汇集数据。使用JoannaBriggs研究所用于队列研究的关键评估工具评估偏倚的风险。
    我们纳入了63项对照队列研究,超过9600万参与者。根据五项研究,我们发现,在6至24个月的随访中,与对照组相比,确诊SARS-CoV-2感染的个体的整体生活质量降低,尽管异质性非常高(EQ-5D量表的平均差-5.28(95%置信区间-7.88~2.68;I2=93.81%).来自十项研究的证据,无法在荟萃分析中汇总,表明与SARS-CoV-2感染相关的功能损害率增加。在重症监护病房随访6至24个月时,与对照组相比,护理的使用增加(风险比2.00(95%置信区间0.69至5.80),五项研究,I2=91.96%)和门诊护理(1.12(1.01至1.24),七项研究,I2=99.51%)。关于持续性症状,有记录的SARS-CoV-2感染的个体在随访时出现两种或两种以上持续性症状的风险增加,尤其是那些与神经集群相关的(即,风险比1.51(95%置信区间1.17至1.93),I2=98.91%)。证据还表明,各种代谢的发病率增加,心血管,神经学,呼吸,血液学和其他事件诊断。
    证据表明SARS-CoV-2感染后出现功能障碍,除了资源的使用和广泛不同的医疗诊断的发生率较高。这些结果应谨慎解释,考虑到研究之间的高度异质性以及与结果测量和参与者流失相关的研究局限性。
    开放科学框架,osf.io/drm39.
    UNASSIGNED: To assess the impact of post-covid-19 conditions among adults.
    UNASSIGNED: Systematic review and meta-analysis of health outcomes in controlled studies.
    UNASSIGNED: Two sources were searched from database inception to 20 October 2022: Cochrane covid-19 study register (comprising Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, Embase, clinicalTrials.gov, World Health Organization\'s International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, medRxiv) and WHO\'s covid-19 research database.
    UNASSIGNED: Cohort studies recruiting more than 100 participants with a control group and a follow-up of at least 12 weeks were included. Adults who were documented to have SARS-CoV-2 infection based on clinical, imaging, or laboratory criteria were included.
    UNASSIGNED: Two independent reviewers extracted data. The main outcomes included quality of life, functionality in daily activities, use of resources, recovery rates (cluster of symptoms), and the incidence of new medical diagnoses. Data were pooled using a random effects model. The risk of bias was assessed with the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool for cohort studies.
    UNASSIGNED: We included 63 controlled cohort studies, encompassing more than 96 million participants. Based on five studies, we found a reduction in overall quality of life between individuals with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection versus controls at six to 24 months follow-up, although heterogeneity was very high (mean difference in EQ-5D scale -5.28 (95% confidence interval -7.88 to 2.68; I2=93.81%). Evidence from ten studies, which could not be pooled in a meta-analysis, indicated that an increased rate of functional impairment associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Use of care increased compared with controls at six to 24 months follow-up at intensive care units (risk ratio 2.00 (95% confidence interval 0.69 to 5.80), five studies, I2=91.96%) and in outpatient care (1.12 (1.01 to 1.24), seven studies, I2=99.51%). Regarding persistent symptoms, individuals with documented SARS-CoV-2 infection had an increased risk of having two or more persistent symptoms at follow-up, especially those related to neurological clusters (ie, risk ratio 1.51 (95% confidence interval 1.17 to 1.93), I2=98.91%). Evidence also showed an increased incidence of a wide variety of metabolic, cardiovascular, neurological, respiratory, haematological and other incident diagnoses.
    UNASSIGNED: Evidence suggests functional impairment after SARS-CoV-2 infection, in addition to a higher use of resources and a higher incidence of widely varying medical diagnoses. These results should be interpreted with caution, considering the high heterogeneity across studies and study limitations related to outcome measurement and attrition of participants.
    UNASSIGNED: Open Science Framework, osf.io/drm39.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Systematic Review
    背景:在COVID-19大流行期间,儿童的口罩任务在不同地区有所不同。尚未对该干预进行风险-收益分析。在这项研究中,我们进行了系统评价,以评估儿童佩戴口罩的有效性.
    方法:我们在2023年2月之前进行了数据库搜索。这些研究通过标题和摘要进行筛选,并纳入研究进一步筛选为全文参考。偏倚风险分析由两名独立审阅者进行,并由第三名审阅者裁定。
    结果:我们筛选了597项研究,其中22项纳入最终分析。没有针对儿童的随机对照试验评估戴口罩减少SARS-CoV-2感染或传播的益处。六项观察性研究报告了儿童掩蔽与较低感染率或抗体血清阳性之间的关联,具有严重(n=5)或严重(n=1)的偏倚风险;所有六项都可能被掩盖和未掩盖组之间的重要差异所混淆,并且在重新分析时显示出两项结果无意义。其他16项观察性研究发现戴口罩与感染或传播之间没有关联。
    结论:儿童口罩强制预防SARS-CoV-2传播或感染的真实世界有效性尚未得到高质量证据的证明。目前的科学数据不支持为保护儿童免受COVID-19的侵害。
    Mask mandates for children during the COVID-19 pandemic varied in different locations. A risk-benefit analysis of this intervention has not yet been performed. In this study, we performed a systematic review to assess research on the effectiveness of mask wearing in children.
    We performed database searches up to February 2023. The studies were screened by title and abstract, and included studies were further screened as full-text references. A risk-of-bias analysis was performed by two independent reviewers and adjudicated by a third reviewer.
    We screened 597 studies and included 22 in the final analysis. There were no randomised controlled trials in children assessing the benefits of mask wearing to reduce SARS-CoV-2 infection or transmission. The six observational studies reporting an association between child masking and lower infection rate or antibody seropositivity had critical (n=5) or serious (n=1) risk of bias; all six were potentially confounded by important differences between masked and unmasked groups and two were shown to have non-significant results when reanalysed. Sixteen other observational studies found no association between mask wearing and infection or transmission.
    Real-world effectiveness of child mask mandates against SARS-CoV-2 transmission or infection has not been demonstrated with high-quality evidence. The current body of scientific data does not support masking children for protection against COVID-19.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 暂无摘要。
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 暂无摘要。
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Systematic Review
    目的:系统评估报告的儿童急性SARS-CoV-2感染后健康结果的稳健性。
    方法:在PubMed和WebofScience上进行了搜索,以确定截至2022年1月22日发表的研究,这些研究报告了儿童(<18岁)急性SARS-CoV-2感染后健康结局,自发现感染后随访≥2个月或自急性疾病恢复后≥1个月。我们评估了混淆偏差和因果关系的考虑,以及偏见的风险。
    结果:21项研究包括81896名儿童报告了多达97种症状,随访时间为2.0-11.5个月。15项研究没有对照组。在SARS-CoV-2感染儿童中,COVID后综合征儿童的报告比例在0%至66.5%之间(n=16986),在无SARS-CoV-2感染儿童中,该比例在2.0%至53.3%之间(n=64910)。只有两项研究对SARS-CoV-2感染与“后COVID综合征”的主要结局之间的关联做出了明确的因果解释,并提供了有关预防措施的建议。由于总体上存在严重的偏倚风险,所有21项研究的稳健性都受到严重限制。
    结论:报告的儿童急性SARS-CoV-2感染后健康结果的稳健性受到严重限制,至少在所有发表的文章中,我们可以识别。没有一项研究提供了关于SARS-CoV-2感染是否对急性后健康结局有影响的合理确定性证据。更不用说到什么程度了。儿童及其家庭迫切需要更可靠和方法上有力的证据来解决他们的关切和改善护理。
    To systematically assess the robustness of reported postacute SARS-CoV-2 infection health outcomes in children.
    A search on PubMed and Web of Science was conducted to identify studies published up to 22 January 2022 that reported on postacute SARS-CoV-2 infection health outcomes in children (<18 years) with follow-up of ≥2 months since detection of infection or ≥1 month since recovery from acute illness. We assessed the consideration of confounding bias and causality, as well as the risk of bias.
    21 studies including 81 896 children reported up to 97 symptoms with follow-up periods of 2.0-11.5 months. Fifteen studies had no control group. The reported proportion of children with post-COVID syndrome was between 0% and 66.5% in children with SARS-CoV-2 infection (n=16 986) and between 2.0% and 53.3% in children without SARS-CoV-2 infection (n=64 910). Only two studies made a clear causal interpretation of an association between SARS-CoV-2 infection and the main outcome of \'post-COVID syndrome\' and provided recommendations regarding prevention measures. The robustness of all 21 studies was seriously limited due to an overall critical risk of bias.
    The robustness of reported postacute SARS-CoV-2 infection health outcomes in children is seriously limited, at least in all the published articles we could identify. None of the studies provided evidence with reasonable certainty on whether SARS-CoV-2 infection has an impact on postacute health outcomes, let alone to what extent. Children and their families urgently need much more reliable and methodologically robust evidence to address their concerns and improve care.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:全球六分之一的婴儿死亡是由侵袭性细菌感染引起的,其中相当大但未定量的比例是由革兰氏阴性细菌引起的。
    方法:我们对2010年5月31日至2020年6月1日发表的研究进行了系统评价,Embase和全球卫生数据库。我们对革兰氏阴性菌血症和个别革兰氏阴性菌种的发病率进行了荟萃分析,作为所有婴儿菌血症的比例,按发病(早与晚)和国家收入(低/中与高)分层。
    结果:纳入了来自54个国家的152项研究,高收入国家(HIC)60个,低收入/中等收入国家(LMIC)92个。革兰氏阴性代表较高的比例(53%,与HIC相比,LMIC中所有婴儿菌血症的95%CI49%至57%(28%,95%CI25%至32%)。婴儿革兰氏阴性菌血症的发生率为每1000例活产2.01(95%CI1.15至3.51);与HIC(0.73,95%CI0.39至7.5)相比,LMIC的发病率高五倍(4.35,95%CI2.94至6.43)。在HIC,大肠杆菌是主要的革兰氏阴性病原体,占早期菌血症的19.2%(95%CI15.6%~23.4%)和所有迟发性菌血症的7.3%(95%CI5.3%~10.1%);克雷伯菌属是迟发性菌血症的下一个最常见原因(5.3%)。在LMIC中,克雷伯菌属导致16.4%(95%CI11.5%至22.7%)的早期和15.0%(95%CI10.1%至21.8%)的晚发性菌血症,其次是大肠杆菌(早发性7.50%,95%CI4.98%至11.1%;迟发性6.53%,95%CI4.50%至9.39%)和假单胞菌属(早发型3.93%,95%CI2.04%至7.44%;迟发性2.81%,95%CI1.99%至3.95%)。
    结论:E.大肠杆菌克雷伯菌属和假单胞菌属可导致全球20%-28%的早发性婴儿菌血症和14%的婴儿脑膜炎病例。实施预防措施可降低LMIC中革兰阴性菌血症的高发率。
    CRD42020191618。
    BACKGROUND: One in six infant deaths worldwide are caused by invasive bacterial infections, of which a substantial but unquantified proportion are caused by Gram-negative bacteria.
    METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of studies published from 31 May 2010 to 1 June 2020 indexed in MEDLINE, Embase and Global Health databases. We performed meta-analyses of the incidence of Gram-negative bacteraemia and of individual Gram-negative species as proportions of all infant bacteraemia, stratified by onset (early vs late) and country income (low/middle vs high).
    RESULTS: 152 studies from 54 countries were included, 60 in high-income countries (HIC) and 92 in low-income/middle-income countries (LMIC). Gram-negatives represented a higher proportion (53%, 95% CI 49% to 57%) of all infant bacteraemia in LMIC compared with HIC (28%, 95% CI 25% to 32%). Incidence of infant Gram-negative bacteraemia was 2.01 (95% CI 1.15 to 3.51) per 1000 live births; it was five times higher in LMIC (4.35, 95% CI 2.94 to 6.43) compared with HIC (0.73, 95% CI 0.39 to 7.5). In HIC, Escherichia coli was the leading Gram-negative pathogen, representing 19.2% (95% CI 15.6% to 23.4%) of early and 7.3% (95% CI 5.3% to 10.1%) of all late-onset bacteraemia; Klebsiella spp were the next most common cause (5.3%) of late-onset bacteraemia. In LMIC, Klebsiella spp caused 16.4% (95% CI 11.5% to 22.7%) of early and 15.0% (95% CI 10.1% to 21.8%) of late-onset bacteraemia, followed by E. coli (early-onset 7.50%, 95% CI 4.98% to 11.1%; late-onset 6.53%, 95% CI 4.50% to 9.39%) and Pseudomonas spp (early-onset 3.93%, 95% CI 2.04% to 7.44%; late-onset 2.81%, 95% CI 1.99% to 3.95%).
    CONCLUSIONS: E. coli, Klebsiella and Pseudomonas spp cause 20%-28% of early-onset infant bacteraemia and 14% cases of infant meningitis worldwide. Implementation of preventive measures could reduce the high incidence of Gram-negative bacteraemia in LMIC.
    UNASSIGNED: CRD42020191618.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    暂无摘要。
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    BACKGROUND: Healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) have a significant impact on neonatal morbidity, mortality and long-term prognosis, which have a high incidence in neonates. Many studies have shown that chlorhexidine cleansing is effective in reducing HAIs in adults, but the effect of chlorhexidine cleansing on HAIs in neonates remains controversial.
    OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of chlorhexidine cleansing on HAIs in neonates. The protocol of this review has been registered with the PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews.
    METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed on five medical literature databases, namely MEDLINE, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), published up until 3 March 2021. In the end, six studies were eligible for inclusion, including four randomised controlled trials and two quasi-experimental studies. Version 2 of the Cochrane tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials and the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist for quasi-experimental studies were used for quality assessment. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) and their associated 95% CIs were calculated using the fixed effects model (I2 <50%) or the random effects model (I2 ≥50%).
    CONCLUSIONS: The results of the meta-analysis revealed that chlorhexidine cleansing had no significant effect on neonatal sepsis (RR: 0.49, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.38, p=0.18, I2=0%), but significantly reduced neonatal skin bacterial colonisation (RR: 0.61, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.90, p=0.01, I2=50%). In addition, this systematic review showed that chlorhexidine cleansing could significantly reduce central line-associated bloodstream infection in neonates based on large-sample studies. However, more studies are needed to determine the optimal concentration and frequency of chlorhexidine cleansing. PROSPERO registration number CRD42021243858.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    OBJECTIVE: To determine if and to what degree asthma may predispose to worse COVID-19 outcomes in order to inform treatment and prevention decisions, including shielding and vaccine prioritisation.
    METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
    METHODS: Electronic databases were searched (October 2020) for clinical studies reporting at least one of the following stratified by asthma status: risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2; hospitalisation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission or mortality with COVID-19.
    METHODS: Adults and children who tested positive for or were suspected to have COVID-19.
    METHODS: Main outcome measures were the following stratified by asthma status: risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2; hospitalisation, ICU admission or mortality with COVID-19. We pooled odds ratios (ORs) and presented these with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Certainty was assessed using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations).
    RESULTS: 30 (n=112 420) studies were included (12 judged high quality, 15 medium, 3 low). Few provided indication of asthma severity. Point estimates indicated reduced risks in people with asthma for all outcomes, but in all cases the evidence was judged to be of very low certainty and 95% CIs all included no difference and the possibility of increased risk (death: OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.13, I2=58%; hospitalisation: OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.26; ICU admission: OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.24). Findings on hospitalisation are also limited by substantial unexplained statistical heterogeneity. Within people with asthma, allergic asthma was associated with less COVID-19 risk and concurrent chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was associated with increased risk. In some studies, corticosteroids were associated with increased risk, but this may reflect increased risk in people with more severe asthma.
    CONCLUSIONS: Though absence of evidence of a clear association between asthma and worse outcomes from COVID-19 should not be interpreted as evidence of absence, the data reviewed indicate that risks from COVID-19 in people with asthma, as a whole, may be less than originally anticipated.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

公众号