Comparison between surgical sutures and Prineo® in terms of esthetic result and scar formation

INTRODUCTION: Wound healing is a well-organized, directed process of tissue repair. The process can be expedited using topical glues and adhesives, which offer a non-invasive, easily removable alternative to suturing. Furthermore, such products have good tensile strength and involve lower application time. In particular, the Prineo® adhesive is applied to a polyester mesh that covers the wound. METHOD: We carried out a retrospective, cross-sectional study, with subsequent statistical analysis , involving 101 surgical procedures in which wound closure was performed using either nylon sutures or Prineo®. All the procedures were performed between 2012 and 2014. RESULTS: Six patients had contact dermatitis after Prineo® was used, with statistical significance (p = 0.042). Furthermore, Prineo® decreased the rate of scar enlargement (p < 0.05) . There was no statistical difference between the Prineo® and suture groups in terms of scar quality (p = 0.068); in both groups, the scar result was mostly excellent (87 %) to good (27%). CONCLUSION: Patients whose wounds were closed using Prineo® a system involving octyl-2-cyanoacrylate and an associated polyester mesh displayed lower rates of scar enlargement, which depended on whether the thickness of the dermis was satisfactory. However, the same patients had higher rates of contact dermatitis than those whose wounds were closed using surgical sutures. Both groups showed excellent to good scar quality, with no significant difference in terms of esthetic scar results

Mastoplasty with inclusion of prosthesis during abdominoplasty in post-bariatric patients

INTRODUCTION: Augmentation mammaplasty during abdominoplasty reduces surgical time and has a better aesthetic effect as it only leaves a single scar. The authors of this study assessed the results obtained in post-bariatric patients undergoing this procedure in the plastic surgery service at Daher Hospital. METHODS: This was a retrospective longitudinal observational study. Of the 161 post-bariatric patients evaluated, 27 had indications for breast augmentation during abdominoplasty. The surgical technique consisted of classical abdominoplasty and creation of tunnels on the upper and middle abdomen for insertion of implants. RESULTS: The age of the patients ranged from 35 to 50 years, with a mean of 42.4 years. The volume of the prosthesis ranged from 285 to 300 ml. The average body mass index was 22.2 kg/m2.The average surgical time period was 2 hours and 35 minutes. None of the following complications were observed: deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, skin necrosis, hematoma, capsular contracture and/or event. Two patients (7.4%) presented with seroma in the mammary region and one patient developed infection. CONCLUSION: The aesthetic results were satisfactory, as there was only a single scar for these two procedures in post-bariatric patients. Selecting the ideal patient was crucial for good operative success

Assessment of immediate symmetrization in breast reconstruction

INTRODUCTION: The surgical treatment of breast cancer frequently results in mutilation. Breast reconstruction in mastectomized women aims to create a new esthetically acceptable breast symmetrical to the contralateral breast. The objective of this study was to assess the feasibility of symmetrization of the contralateral breast simultaneously with breast reconstruction, discuss possible complications, and perform a brief review of the literature. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted in the Department of Plastic Surgery of Hospital Daher from October 2013 to February 2015. Breast reconstruction outcomes immediately after mastectomy for breast cancer were assessed, and all patients undergoing symmetrization of the contralateral breast in the same surgical stage using the same surgical technique were selected for inclusion and statistical analysis. RESULTS: The study comprised 42 patients within the established criteria, totaling 21 reconstructions with simultaneous symmetrization (Group 1) and 21 symmetrization procedures in two stages (Group 2). The mean age was 53.86 years in Group 1 and 52.62 years in the control group. The groups were comparable in all variables. Data regarding postoperative complications were analyzed. Some of the studied patients did not complete all stages of reconstruction. The group that underwent immediate symmetrization attained more symmetry. The patients aged 45 years and with lower body mass index attained more symmetry in Group 1. CONCLUSION: The implementation of symmetrization procedures at the same stage of unilateral breast reconstruction is associated with low complication rates and revision surgeries. In selected cases, immediate symmetrization may be preferable to the procedure in another surgical stage

Sera from Visceral Leishmaniasis Patients Display Oxidative Activity and Affect the TNF-αProduction by MacrophagesIn Vitro

Submitted by Ana Maria Fiscina Sampaio ([email protected]) on 2018-04-05T17:58:16Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Soares NM Sera from Visceral Leishmaniasis Patients....pdf: 712177 bytes, checksum: d58fde5167450c1a9b12e7e1afe5c0d2 (MD5)Approved for entry into archive by Ana Maria Fiscina Sampaio ([email protected]) on 2018-04-05T18:11:20Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 Soares NM Sera from Visceral Leishmaniasis Patients....pdf: 712177 bytes, checksum: d58fde5167450c1a9b12e7e1afe5c0d2 (MD5)Made available in DSpace on 2018-04-05T18:11:20Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Soares NM Sera from Visceral Leishmaniasis Patients....pdf: 712177 bytes, checksum: d58fde5167450c1a9b12e7e1afe5c0d2 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017Universidade Federal da Bahia. Faculdade de Farmácia. Departamento de Análises Clínicas e Toxicológicas. Salvador, BA, BrasilUniversidade Federal da Bahia. Faculdade de Farmácia. Departamento de Análises Clínicas e Toxicológicas. Salvador, BA, BrasilUniversidade Federal da Bahia. Faculdade de Farmácia. Departamento de Análises Clínicas e Toxicológicas. Salvador, BA, BrasilFundação Oswaldo Cruz. Centro de Pesquisas Gonçalo Moniz. Salvador, BA, BrasilUniversidade Federal da Bahia. Faculdade de Farmácia. Departamento de Análises Clínicas e Toxicológicas. Salvador, BA, BrasilFundação Oswaldo Cruz. Centro de Pesquisas Gonçalo Moniz. Salvador, BA, BrasilUniversidade Federal da Bahia. Faculdade de Farmácia. Departamento de Análises Clínicas e Toxicológicas. Salvador, BA, BrasilMammalian protection against leishmanial infection depends on the development of an effective immune response. Zoonotic visceral leishmaniasis (ZVL) patients are usually unable to mount an effective immune response against the parasite and indeed appear to be severely immunosuppressed. This suppression has strong nonspecific and specific components mediated by serum factors and leishmanicidal activity of infected macrophages, respectively. The lipid profile has been shown to be altered in ZVL patients' sera. This work aimed at (i) determining the HDL, Apo A1, LDL, and VLDL concentrations in ZVL patients' sera; (ii) investigating the oxidative effect of ZVL patients' sera on theβ-carotene matrix; (iii) measuring IL-10, IL-6, IL-12p40, and tumour necrosis factor-α(TNF-α) concentrations in the macrophage cultures, to which 10% of ZVL patients' serum had been added. Levels of HDL, LDL fraction, and apolipoprotein A1 in ZVL patients' sera were lower than those of healthy individuals' sera, except for the mean level of VLDL. The matrix ofβ-carotene and linoleic acid system was oxidized in the presence of ZLV patients' sera. The presence of ZVL patients' sera did not modify the cytokine production of IL-6, IL-12p40, and IL-10 by human macrophagesin vitrobut TNF-αproduction was altered, probably due to lack of macrophage stimulation by lipoprotein

Exploring the bacteriome and resistome of humans and food-producing animals in Brazil

National Council for Science and Technological Development (CNPq) and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (process numbers 402659/2018-0, 443805/2018-0, and OPP1193112); Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES); CNPq (process number 312066/2019-8), CNPq (307145/2021-2); FAPERJ (E-26/201.046/2022)National Laboratory of Scientific Computing. Bioinformatics Laboratory. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Universidade Federal de São Paulo. Escola Paulista de Medicina. Department of Internal Medicine. Division of Infectious Diseases. Laboratório Alerta. São Paulo, SP, Brazil.Universidade Federal de São Paulo. Escola Paulista de Medicina. Department of Internal Medicine. Division of Infectious Diseases. Laboratório Alerta. São Paulo, SP, Brazil.Regional University of Blumenau. Blumenau, SC, Brazil.National Laboratory of Scientific Computing. Bioinformatics Laboratory. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.National Laboratory of Scientific Computing. Bioinformatics Laboratory. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde. Instituto Evandro Chagas. Ananindeua, PA, Brasil.Universidade Federal de São Paulo. Escola Paulista de Medicina. Department of Internal Medicine. Division of Infectious Diseases. Laboratório Alerta. São Paulo, SP, Brazil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde. Instituto Evandro Chagas. Ananindeua, PA, Brasil.Federal University of Ceará. Postgraduate Program in Medical Microbiology. Group of Applied Medical Microbiology. Fortaleza, CE, Brazil.Regional University of Blumenau. Blumenau, SC, Brazil.Universidade Federal de São Paulo. Escola Paulista de Medicina. Department of Internal Medicine. Division of Infectious Diseases. Laboratório Alerta. São Paulo, SP, Brazil / Universidade Federal de São Paulo. Instituto de Ciências Ambientais, Químicas e Farmacêuticas. Departamento de Ciências Biológicas. Setor de Biologia Molecular, Microbiologia e Imunologia. Laboratório de Imunologia e Bacteriologia. Diadema, SP, Brazil.Federal University of Ceará. Postgraduate Program in Medical Microbiology. Group of Applied Medical Microbiology. Fortaleza, CE, Brazil.Universidade Federal da Grande Dourados. Laboratório de Pesquisa em Ciências da Saúde. Dourados, MS, Brazil.National Laboratory of Scientific Computing. Bioinformatics Laboratory. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.University São Francisco. Laboratory of Molecular Biology of Microorganisms. Bragança Paulista, SP, Brazil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde. Instituto Evandro Chagas. Ananindeua, PA, Brasil.Universidade Federal da Grande Dourados. Laboratório de Pesquisa em Ciências da Saúde. Dourados, MS, Brazil.Universidade Federal de São Paulo. Escola Paulista de Medicina. Department of Internal Medicine. Division of Infectious Diseases. Laboratório Alerta. São Paulo, SP, Brazil / Universidade Federal de São Paulo. Instituto de Ciências Ambientais, Químicas e Farmacêuticas. Departamento de Ciências Biológicas. Setor de Biologia Molecular, Microbiologia e Imunologia. Laboratório de Imunologia e Bacteriologia. Diadema, SP, Brazil.Universidade Federal de São Paulo. Escola Paulista de Medicina. Department of Internal Medicine. Division of Infectious Diseases. Laboratório Alerta. São Paulo, SP, Brazil.Universidade Federal da Grande Dourados. Laboratório de Pesquisa em Ciências da Saúde. Dourados, MS, Brazil.University São Francisco. Laboratory of Molecular Biology of Microorganisms. Bragança Paulista, SP, Brazil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde. Instituto Evandro Chagas. Ananindeua, PA, Brasil.Universidade Federal de São Paulo. Escola Paulista de Medicina. Department of Internal Medicine. Division of Infectious Diseases. Laboratório Especial de Microbiologia Clínica. São Paulo, SP, Brazil.Universidade Federal de São Paulo. Escola Paulista de Medicina. Department of Internal Medicine. Division of Infectious Diseases. Laboratório Especial de Microbiologia Clínica. São Paulo, SP, Brazil.Universidade Federal de São Paulo. Escola Paulista de Medicina. Department of Internal Medicine. Division of Infectious Diseases. Laboratório Alerta. São Paulo, SP, Brazil / Universidade Federal de São Paulo. Instituto de Ciências Ambientais, Químicas e Farmacêuticas. Departamento de Ciências Biológicas. Setor de Biologia Molecular, Microbiologia e Imunologia. Laboratório de Imunologia e Bacteriologia. Diadema, SP, Brazil.National Laboratory of Scientific Computing. Bioinformatics Laboratory. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Universidade Federal de São Paulo. Escola Paulista de Medicina. Department of Internal Medicine. Division of Infectious Diseases. Laboratório Alerta. São Paulo, SP, Brazil / Universidade Federal de São Paulo. Escola Paulista de Medicina. Department of Internal Medicine. Division of Infectious Diseases. Laboratório Especial de Microbiologia Clínica. São Paulo, SP, Brazil.The epidemiology of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is complex, with multiple interfaces (human-animal-environment). In this context, One Health surveillance is essential for understanding the distribution of microorganisms and antimicrobial resistance genes (ARGs). This report describes a multicentric study undertaken to evaluate the bacterial communities and resistomes of food-producing animals (cattle, poultry, and swine) and healthy humans sampled simultaneously from five Brazilian regions. Metagenomic analysis showed that a total of 21,029 unique species were identified in 107 rectal swabs collected from distinct hosts, the highest numbers of which belonged to the domain Bacteria, mainly Ruminiclostridium spp. and Bacteroides spp., and the order Enterobacterales. We detected 405 ARGs for 12 distinct antimicrobial classes. Genes encoding antibiotic-modifying enzymes were the most frequent, followed by genes related to target alteration and efflux systems. Interestingly, carbapenemase-encoding genes such as blaAIM-1, blaCAM-1, blaGIM-2, and blaHMB-1 were identified in distinct hosts. Our results revealed that, in general, the bacterial communities from humans were present in isolated clusters, except for the Northeastern region, where an overlap of the bacterial species from humans and food-producing animals was observed. Additionally, a large resistome was observed among all analyzed hosts, with emphasis on the presence of carbapenemase-encoding genes not previously reported in Latin America. IMPORTANCE Humans and food production animals have been reported to be important reservoirs of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) genes (ARGs). The frequency of these multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacteria tends to be higher in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), due mainly to a lack of public health policies. Although studies on AMR in humans or animals have been carried out in Brazil, this is the first multicenter study that simultaneously collected rectal swabs from humans and food-producing animals for metagenomics. Our results indicate high microbial diversity among all analyzed hosts, and several ARGs for different antimicrobial classes were also found. As far as we know, we have detected for the first time ARGs encoding carbapenemases, such as blaAIM-1, blaCAM-1, blaGIM-2, and blaHMB-1, in Latin America. Thus, our results support the importance of metagenomics as a tool to track the colonization of food-producing animals and humans by antimicrobial-resistant bacteria. In addition, a network surveillance system called GUARANI, created for this study, is ready to be expanded and to collect additional data

Risk of adverse outcomes in offspring with RT-PCR confirmed prenatal Zika virus exposure: an individual participant data meta-analysis of 13 cohorts in the Zika Brazilian Cohorts

The Zika Brazilian Cohorts Consortium was supported by the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico – CNPq) (grant number 404861/2018-0). The individual studies participating in the ZBC-Consortium were funded by: Wellcome Trust and the United Kingdom’s Department for International Development (grant numbers: 205377/Z/16/Z; 201870/Z/16/Z). European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under ZikaPLAN (grant number 734584). Wellcome Trust - Research Enrichment in Epidemic Situation (grant number 107779/Z/15/Z; with ER1505 & ER1601). Medical Research Council on behalf of the Newton Fund and Wellcome Trust (grant number MC_PC_15088). National Institutes of Health/National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (grant number RO1/ AI140718). Fondation Christophe et Rodolphe Mérieux. National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico – CNPq) (grant numbers 443875/2018-9; 440573/2016-5; 441098/2016-9; 305090/2016-0; 307282/2017-1; 304476/2018-8; 465549/2014-4; 440763/2016-9; 309722/2017-9; 306708/2014-0; 440577/2016-0). Coordination for the improvement of Higher Education Personnel (Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - Capes) (grant numbers 88881.130813/2016-01; 88887.116627/2016-01; 88887.136366/2017-00). Ministry of Health of Brazil - Emergency Response in Public Health - Zika virus and Microcephaly (Ministério da Saúde de Brasil - Resposta à Emergência em Saúde Pública – Zika vírus e Microcefalia) (grant number 837058/2016). Department of Science and Technology (Departamento de Ciência e Tecnologia - DECIT) (grant numbers 25000.072811/2016-19; 440839/2016-5). Foundation of Research Support of the State of São Paulo (Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo – FAPESP) (grant numbers 2016/08578-0; 2017/21688-1; 2013/21719-3; 2016/ 15021-1; 2015/12295-0; 2016/05115-9). Foundation of Research Support of the State of Rio de Janeiro (Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro – FAPERJ) (grant numbers E-26/201.351/2016; E-18/ 2015TXB; E-26/202.862/2018; E 26/010.002477/2016). Foundation of Support for Research and Scientific and Technological Development of Maranhão (Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa e ao Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico do Maranhão – FAPEMA) (grant number 008/2016). Brazilian Ministry of Health (Ministério da Saúde – MS) (grant number 929698560001160-02). Evandro Chagas Institute/Brazilian Ministry of Health (Instituto Evandro Chagas/Ministério da Saúde). Foundation of Research Support of the State of Goiás (Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Goiás – FAPEG) (number grant 2017/10267000531). Foundation of Research Support of the State of Rio Grande do Sul (Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul – FAPERGS) (grant number 17/2551-0000521-0). Foundation to Support Teaching, Research and Assistance at Hospital das Clínicas, Faculty of Medicine of Ribeirão Preto (Fundação de Apoio ao Ensino, Pesquisa e Assistência do Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina de Ribeirão Preto) and São Paulo State Department of Health (Secretaria de Saúde do Estado de São Paulo). Support Foundation of Pernambuco Science and Technology (Fundação de Amparo à Ciência e Tecnologia de Pernambuco – FACEPE) (grant numbers APQ-0172-4.01/16; APQ-0192-4.01/17; APQ0793-4.01/17).Federal University of Pernambuco. Postgraduate Program in Tropical Medicine. Recife, PE, Brazil / University of Pernambuco. Post-Graduation in Health Sciences. Recife, PE, Brazil.University of Pernambuco. Post-Graduation in Health Sciences. Recife, PE, Brazil.London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine. Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology. London, UK.Federal University of Pernambuco. Postgraduate Program in Collective Health. Recife, PE, Brazil.University of Pernambuco. Post-Graduation in Health Sciences. Recife, PE, Brazil.University of Amazonas State. Postgraduate Program in Tropical Medicine. Manaus, AM, Brazil / Doctor Heitor Vieira Dourado Tropical Medicine Foundation. Postgraduate Program in Tropical Medicine. Manaus, AM, Brazil.Ribeirão Preto Medical School. Department of Pediatrics. Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil.Ribeirão Preto Medical School. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics. Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil.Ribeirão Preto Medical School. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics. Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil.Ribeirão Preto Medical School. Department of Pediatrics. Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil.University of Amazonas State. Postgraduate Program in Tropical Medicine. Manaus, AM, Brazil / Doctor Heitor Vieira Dourado Tropical Medicine Foundation. Postgraduate Program in Tropical Medicine. Manaus, AM, Brazil.University of Amazonas State. Postgraduate Program in Tropical Medicine. Manaus, AM, Brazil / Doctor Heitor Vieira Dourado Tropical Medicine Foundation. Postgraduate Program in Tropical Medicine. Manaus, AM, Brazil.Instituto Fernandes Figueira. Clinical Research Unit. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Oswaldo Cruz Foundation. Instituto Fernandes Figueira. Clinical Research Unit. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Oswaldo Cruz Foundation. Instituto Fernandes Figueira. Obstretics. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.University of California. David Geffen School of Medicine. Department of Pediatrics. Los Angeles, CA, Estados Unidos.Oswaldo Cruz Foundation. Research Center Aggeu Magalhães. Recife, PE, Brazil.London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine. Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology. London, UK.Oswaldo Cruz Foundation. Research Center Aggeu Magalhães. Recife, PE, Brazil.Altino Ventura Foundation. Department of Ophthalmology. Recife, PE, Brazil / Pernambuco Eyes Hospital. Recife, PE, Brazil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde e Ambiente. Instituto Evandro Chagas. Ananindeua, PA, Brasil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde e Ambiente. Instituto Evandro Chagas. Ananindeua, PA, Brasil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde e Ambiente. Instituto Evandro Chagas. Ananindeua, PA, Brasil.Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde e Ambiente. Instituto Evandro Chagas. Ananindeua, PA, Brasil.Medicine School of São José do Rio Preto. Department of Infectious Disease. São José do Rio Preto, SP, Brazil.Medicine School of São José do Rio Preto. Department of Infectious Disease. São José do Rio Preto, SP, Brazil.Medicine School of São José do Rio Preto. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics. São José do Rio Preto, SP, Brazil.Medicine School of Jundiaí. Infectious Pediatric Laboratory. Jundiaí, SP, Brazil.Federal University of São Paulo. Department of Fetal Medicine. São Paulo, SP, Brazil.Father Anchieta University Center. Nursing School. Jundiaí, SP, Brazil.Federal University of São Paulo. Paulista School of Medicine. Departament of Obstetrics. São Paulo, SP, Brazil.Federal University of Goiás. Institute of Tropical Pathology and Public Health. Goiânia, GO, Brazil.Health Secretariat of Goiás State. Maternal and Child Hospital. Goiânia, GO, Brazil.Federal University of São Paulo. Paulista School of Medicine. Departament of Obstetrics. São Paulo, SP, Brazil.Health Secretariat of Goiás State. Maternal and Child Hospital. Goiânia, GO, Brazil.Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul. Hospital das Clinicas de Porto Alegre. Departamento de Genética. Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.City Hall of Tangará da Serra, Municipal Health Department, Tangará da Serra, MT, Brazil.Federal University of Campina Grande. Medical Academic Unit. Campina Grande, PB, Brazil.Federal University of Campina Grande. Medical Academic Unit. Campina Grande, PB, Brazil.Federal University of Rio de Janeiro. Department of Pediatrics. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.D’Or Institute for Research & Education. Department of Pediatrics. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Departmentiversity of Rio de Janeiro Maternity School. Department of Obstectrics. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Departmentiversity of Rio de Janeiro Maternity School. Department of Obstectrics. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Reference Maternity Prof. José Maria de Magalhães Netto. Bahia Health Department, Salvador, BA, Brazil.Oswaldo Cruz Foundation. Gonçalo Moniz Institute. Salvador, BA, Brazil.Oswaldo Cruz Foundation. Gonçalo Moniz Institute. Salvador, BA, Brazil.Federal University of Rio de Janeiro. Department of Infecitous Diseases. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Federal University of Rio de Janeiro. Department of Infecitous Diseases. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Oswaldo Cruz Foundation. Gonçalo Moniz Institute. Salvador, BA, Brazil.Oswaldo Cruz Foundation. Leonidas and Maria Deane Institute. Manaus, AM, Brazil.University of Amazonas State. Postgraduate Program in Tropical Medicine. Manaus, AM, Brazil / Doctor Heitor Vieira Dourado Tropical Medicine Foundation. Postgraduate Program in Tropical Medicine. Manaus, AM, Brazil / Oswaldo Cruz Foundation. Leonidas and Maria Deane Institute. Manaus, AM, Brazil.Oswaldo Cruz Foundation. Instituto Nacional de Infectologia Evandro Chagas. Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.Background: Knowledge regarding the risks associated with Zika virus (ZIKV) infections in pregnancy has relied on individual studies with relatively small sample sizes and variable risk estimates of adverse outcomes, or on surveillance or routinely collected data. Using data from the Zika Brazilian Cohorts Consortium, this study aims, to estimate the risk of adverse outcomes among offspring of women with RT-PCR-confirmed ZIKV infection during pregnancy and to explore heterogeneity between studies. Methods: We performed an individual participant data meta-analysis of the offspring of 1548 pregnant women from 13 studies, using one and two-stage meta-analyses to estimate the absolute risks. Findings: Of the 1548 ZIKV-exposed pregnancies, the risk of miscarriage was 0.9%, while the risk of stillbirth was 0.3%. Among the pregnancies with liveborn children, the risk of prematurity was 10,5%, the risk of low birth weight was 7.7, and the risk of small for gestational age (SGA) was 16.2%. For other abnormalities, the absolute risks were: 2.6% for microcephaly at birth or first evaluation, 4.0% for microcephaly at any time during follow-up, 7.9% for neuroimaging abnormalities, 18.7% for functional neurological abnormalities, 4.0% for ophthalmic abnormalities, 6.4% for auditory abnormalities, 0.6% for arthrogryposis, and 1.5% for dysphagia. This risk was similar in all sites studied and in different socioeconomic conditions, indicating that there are not likely to be other factors modifying this association. Interpretation: This study based on prospectively collected data generates the most robust evidence to date on the risks of congenital ZIKV infections over the early life course. Overall, approximately one-third of liveborn children with prenatal ZIKV exposure presented with at least one abnormality compatible with congenital infection, while the risk to present with at least two abnormalities in combination was less than 1.0%

Anatomical terminology of the internal nose and paranasal sinuses: cross-cultural adaptation to Portuguese

Introduction: Functional endonasal endoscopic surgery is a frequent surgical procedure among otorhinolaryngologists. In 2014, the European Society of Rhinology published the “European Position Paper on the Anatomical Terminology of the Internal Nose and Paranasal Sinuses”, aiming to unify the terms in the English language. We do not yet have a unified terminology in the Portuguese language. Objective: Transcultural adaptation of the anatomical terms of the nose and paranasal cavities of the “European Anatomical Terminology of the Internal Nose and Paranasal Sinuses” to Portuguese. Methods: A group of rhinologists from diverse parts of Brazil, all experienced in endoscopic endonasal surgery, was invited to participate in the creation of this position paper on the anatomical terms of the nose and paranasal sinuses in the Portuguese language according to the methodology adapted from that previously described by Rudmik and Smith. Results: The results of this document were generated based on the agreement of the majority of the participants according to the most popular suggestions among the rhinologists. A cross-cultural adaptation of the sinonasal anatomical terminology was consolidated. We suggest the terms “inferior turbinate”, “nasal septum”, “(bone/cartilaginous) part of the nasal septum”, “(middle/inferior) nasal meatus”, “frontal sinus drainage pathway”, “frontal recess” and “uncinate process” be standardized. Conclusion: We have consolidated a Portuguese version of the European Anatomical Terminology of the Internal Nose and Paranasal Sinuses, which will help in the publication of technical announcements, scientific publications and the teaching of the internal anatomical terms of the nose and paranasal sinuses in Brazil. Resumo: Introdução: A cirurgia endoscópica funcional endonasal é um procedimento cirúrgico frequente entre os otorrinolaringologistas. Em 2014, a Sociedade Europeia de Rinologia publicou o “Documento Europeu para Posicionamento sobre a Terminologia Anatômica Interna do Nariz e das Cavidades Paranasais” com o objetivo de unificar os termos na língua inglesa. Ainda não dispomos de uma terminologia unificada na língua portuguesa. Objetivo: Adaptação transcultural dos termos anatômicos do nariz e das cavidades paranasais para o português da “European Anatomical Terminology of the Internal Nose and Paranasal Sinuses”. Método: Um grupo de rinologistas de todo o Brasil, com experiência em cirurgia endoscópica endonasal, foi convidado a participar da elaboração desse posicionamento sobre os termos anatômicos do nariz e das cavidades paranasais para o português conforme metodologia adaptada da previamente descrita por Rudmik e Smith. Resultados: Os resultados desse documento foram gerados a partir da concordância da maioria dos participantes conforme as sugestões mais populares entre os rinologistas. Uma adaptação transcultural da terminologia anatômica nasossinusal foi consolidada. Sugerimos que se busque uniformizar termos como “concha inferior”, “septo nasal”, “porção (óssea/cartilagionasa) do septo nasal”, “meato (médio/ inferior) nasal”, “via da drenagem do seio frontal”,“recesso frontal” e “processo uncinado”. Conclusão: Consolidamos uma versão adaptada em português da “European Anatomical Terminology of the Internal Nose and Paranasal Sinuses” que auxiliará a publicação de comunicados técnicos, publicações científicas e o ensino dos termos anatômicos internos do nariz e das cavidades paranasais no Brasil. Keywords: Cross-cultural adaptation, Anatomy, Nose, Paranasal sinus, Consensus, Palavras-chave: Adaptação transcultural, Anatomia, Nariz, Cavidades paranasais, Consens

Risk of adverse outcomes in offspring with RT-PCR confirmed prenatal Zika virus exposure: an individual participant data meta-analysis of 13 cohorts in the Zika Brazilian Cohorts ConsortiumResearch in context

Summary: Background: Knowledge regarding the risks associated with Zika virus (ZIKV) infections in pregnancy has relied on individual studies with relatively small sample sizes and variable risk estimates of adverse outcomes, or on surveillance or routinely collected data. Using data from the Zika Brazilian Cohorts Consortium, this study aims, to estimate the risk of adverse outcomes among offspring of women with RT-PCR-confirmed ZIKV infection during pregnancy and to explore heterogeneity between studies. Methods: We performed an individual participant data meta-analysis of the offspring of 1548 pregnant women from 13 studies, using one and two-stage meta-analyses to estimate the absolute risks. Findings: Of the 1548 ZIKV-exposed pregnancies, the risk of miscarriage was 0.9%, while the risk of stillbirth was 0.3%. Among the pregnancies with liveborn children, the risk of prematurity was 10,5%, the risk of low birth weight was 7.7, and the risk of small for gestational age (SGA) was 16.2%. For other abnormalities, the absolute risks were: 2.6% for microcephaly at birth or first evaluation, 4.0% for microcephaly at any time during follow-up, 7.9% for neuroimaging abnormalities, 18.7% for functional neurological abnormalities, 4.0% for ophthalmic abnormalities, 6.4% for auditory abnormalities, 0.6% for arthrogryposis, and 1.5% for dysphagia. This risk was similar in all sites studied and in different socioeconomic conditions, indicating that there are not likely to be other factors modifying this association. Interpretation: This study based on prospectively collected data generates the most robust evidence to date on the risks of congenital ZIKV infections over the early life course. Overall, approximately one-third of liveborn children with prenatal ZIKV exposure presented with at least one abnormality compatible with congenital infection, while the risk to present with at least two abnormalities in combination was less than 1.0%. Funding: National Council for Scientific and Technological Development - Brazil (Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico – CNPq); Wellcome Trust and the United Kingdom's Department for International Development; European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program; Medical Research Council on behalf of the Newton Fund and Wellcome Trust; National Institutes of Health/National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Foundation Christophe et Rodolphe Mérieux; Coordination for the improvement of Higher Education Personnel (Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - Capes); Ministry of Health of Brazil; Brazilian Department of Science and Technology; Foundation of Research Support of the State of São Paulo (Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo – FAPESP); Foundation of Research Support of the State of Rio de Janeiro (Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro – FAPERJ); Foundation of Support for Research and Scientific and Technological Development of Maranhão; Evandro Chagas Institute/Brazilian Ministry of Health (Instituto Evandro Chagas/Ministério da Saúde); Foundation of Research Support of the State of Goiás (Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Goiás – FAPEG); Foundation of Research Support of the State of Rio Grande do Sul (Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul – FAPERGS); Foundation to Support Teaching, Research and Assistance at Hospital das Clínicas, Faculty of Medicine of Ribeirão Preto (Fundação de Apoio ao Ensino, Pesquisa e Assistência do Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina de Ribeirão Preto); São Paulo State Department of Health (Secretaria de Saúde do Estado de São Paulo); Support Foundation of Pernambuco Science and Technology (Fundação de Amparo à Ciência e Tecnologia de Pernambuco – FACEPE)