Abordagem da artroplastia total do joelho no Brasil: estudo transversal

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has evolved particularly since the 1970s, with improvements in implants and surgical instruments, and has thus become an effective intervention for treating knee arthrosis. Many studies have presented rates of satisfactory clinical and radiological results greater than 90%, from follow-ups of over ten years. Nevertheless, despite scientific evidence showing the efficacy of TKA, the approaches taken present controversies in certain respects. The objective of this study was to evaluate how the Brazilian orthopedists deal with TKA, with investigation of the main aspects of this procedure. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross-sectional survey conducted during the 39th Brazilian Congress of Orthopedics and Traumatology, in São Paulo, Brazil, in November 2007. METHODS: We applied a questionnaire to orthopedists registered at the congress. The questionnaire was randomly distributed and participation was voluntary; 858 completed questionnaires were included in the analysis. RESULTS: Most of the Brazilian orthopedists were members of SBOT and worked in the southeastern region. They used imported cemented implants through an anterior access route centered on the patella, with replacement of the joint surface of the patella and preservation of the posterior cruciate ligament. They did not have experience with simultaneous bilateral TKA. Postoperatively, they used antibiotics and suction drains for 48 hours. There was no consensus regarding prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism or the frequency of the main complications. CONCLUSION: The majority of Brazilian orthopedists work in the southeastern region of the country and agree about the main aspects of the approaches towards TKA.CONTEXTO E OBJETIVO: A artroplastia total do joelho (ATJ) evoluiu sobremaneira desde os anos 70, com melhora dos implantes e do instrumental cirúrgico, tornando-se uma intervenção efetiva para o tratamento da artrose do joelho. Muitos estudos apresentam resultados clínicos e radiológicos satisfatórios superiores a 90% no acompanhamento acima de 10 anos. Apesar das evidências científicas sobre sua eficácia da ATJ, a sua abordagem apresenta controvérsias em alguns aspectos. O objetivo do estudo foi avaliar como o ortopedista brasileiro aborda a ATJ e os principais aspectos técnicos na realização deste procedimento. TIPO DE ESTUDO E LOCAL: Estudo transversal, realizado durante o 39º Congresso Brasileiro de Ortopedia e Traumatologia em São Paulo, Brasil, em novembro de 2007. MÉTODOS: Aplicamos um questionário aos ortopedistas inscritos no congresso. A distribuição foi aleatória com adesão voluntária. Foram incluídos 858 questionários para análise. RESULTADOS: A maioria dos Ortopedistas Brasileiros são membros da SBOT e atua na região sudeste. Usam o implante importado, cimentado, por via de acesso anterior centrada na patela, com substituição da superfície articular da patela e preservação do ligamento cruzado posterior e não tem experiência com a artroplastia total bilateral simultânea. No pós-operatório utilizam antibióticos e dreno de sucção por 48 horas. Não houve consenso quanto à profilaxia para tromboembolismo venoso e frequência das principais complicações. CONCLUSÃO: A maioria dos ortopedistas brasileiros trabalha na região sudeste e concorda quanto aos principais aspectos da abordagem da ATJ.Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) Department of Orthopedics and TraumatologyUniversidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology Orthopedist and Head of the Knee GroupUNIFESP, Department of Orthopedics and TraumatologyUNIFESP, Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology Orthopedist and Head of the Knee GroupSciEL

2 nd Brazilian Consensus on Chagas Disease, 2015

Abstract Chagas disease is a neglected chronic condition with a high burden of morbidity and mortality. It has considerable psychological, social, and economic impacts. The disease represents a significant public health issue in Brazil, with different regional patterns. This document presents the evidence that resulted in the Brazilian Consensus on Chagas Disease. The objective was to review and standardize strategies for diagnosis, treatment, prevention, and control of Chagas disease in the country, based on the available scientific evidence. The consensus is based on the articulation and strategic contribution of renowned Brazilian experts with knowledge and experience on various aspects of the disease. It is the result of a close collaboration between the Brazilian Society of Tropical Medicine and the Ministry of Health. It is hoped that this document will strengthen the development of integrated actions against Chagas disease in the country, focusing on epidemiology, management, comprehensive care (including families and communities), communication, information, education, and research

Single-dose administration and the influence of the timing of the booster dose on immunogenicity and efficacy of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine: a pooled analysis of four randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: The ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine has been approved for emergency use by the UK regulatory authority, Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, with a regimen of two standard doses given with an interval of 4-12 weeks. The planned roll-out in the UK will involve vaccinating people in high-risk categories with their first dose immediately, and delivering the second dose 12 weeks later. Here, we provide both a further prespecified pooled analysis of trials of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and exploratory analyses of the impact on immunogenicity and efficacy of extending the interval between priming and booster doses. In addition, we show the immunogenicity and protection afforded by the first dose, before a booster dose has been offered. METHODS: We present data from three single-blind randomised controlled trials-one phase 1/2 study in the UK (COV001), one phase 2/3 study in the UK (COV002), and a phase 3 study in Brazil (COV003)-and one double-blind phase 1/2 study in South Africa (COV005). As previously described, individuals 18 years and older were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive two standard doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (5 × 1010 viral particles) or a control vaccine or saline placebo. In the UK trial, a subset of participants received a lower dose (2·2 × 1010 viral particles) of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 for the first dose. The primary outcome was virologically confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 disease, defined as a nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT)-positive swab combined with at least one qualifying symptom (fever ≥37·8°C, cough, shortness of breath, or anosmia or ageusia) more than 14 days after the second dose. Secondary efficacy analyses included cases occuring at least 22 days after the first dose. Antibody responses measured by immunoassay and by pseudovirus neutralisation were exploratory outcomes. All cases of COVID-19 with a NAAT-positive swab were adjudicated for inclusion in the analysis by a masked independent endpoint review committee. The primary analysis included all participants who were SARS-CoV-2 N protein seronegative at baseline, had had at least 14 days of follow-up after the second dose, and had no evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection from NAAT swabs. Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose. The four trials are registered at ISRCTN89951424 (COV003) and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606 (COV001), NCT04400838 (COV002), and NCT04444674 (COV005). FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Dec 6, 2020, 24 422 participants were recruited and vaccinated across the four studies, of whom 17 178 were included in the primary analysis (8597 receiving ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and 8581 receiving control vaccine). The data cutoff for these analyses was Dec 7, 2020. 332 NAAT-positive infections met the primary endpoint of symptomatic infection more than 14 days after the second dose. Overall vaccine efficacy more than 14 days after the second dose was 66·7% (95% CI 57·4-74·0), with 84 (1·0%) cases in the 8597 participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 248 (2·9%) in the 8581 participants in the control group. There were no hospital admissions for COVID-19 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group after the initial 21-day exclusion period, and 15 in the control group. 108 (0·9%) of 12 282 participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 127 (1·1%) of 11 962 participants in the control group had serious adverse events. There were seven deaths considered unrelated to vaccination (two in the ChAdOx1 nCov-19 group and five in the control group), including one COVID-19-related death in one participant in the control group. Exploratory analyses showed that vaccine efficacy after a single standard dose of vaccine from day 22 to day 90 after vaccination was 76·0% (59·3-85·9). Our modelling analysis indicated that protection did not wane during this initial 3-month period. Similarly, antibody levels were maintained during this period with minimal waning by day 90 (geometric mean ratio [GMR] 0·66 [95% CI 0·59-0·74]). In the participants who received two standard doses, after the second dose, efficacy was higher in those with a longer prime-boost interval (vaccine efficacy 81·3% [95% CI 60·3-91·2] at ≥12 weeks) than in those with a short interval (vaccine efficacy 55·1% [33·0-69·9] at <6 weeks). These observations are supported by immunogenicity data that showed binding antibody responses more than two-fold higher after an interval of 12 or more weeks compared with an interval of less than 6 weeks in those who were aged 18-55 years (GMR 2·32 [2·01-2·68]). INTERPRETATION: The results of this primary analysis of two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 were consistent with those seen in the interim analysis of the trials and confirm that the vaccine is efficacious, with results varying by dose interval in exploratory analyses. A 3-month dose interval might have advantages over a programme with a short dose interval for roll-out of a pandemic vaccine to protect the largest number of individuals in the population as early as possible when supplies are scarce, while also improving protection after receiving a second dose. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes of Health Research (NIHR), The Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, the Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca