Diferenças no aumento da glicemia entre equinos recebendo xilazina e detomidina para procedimentos clínicos cirúrgicos e não-cirúrgicos

The aim of this prospective randomized clinical study was to compare blood glucose and cortisol levels between horses receiving xylazine and detomidine for surgical and non-surgical procedures. Horses from non-surgical groups received 0.5 mg/kg of xylazine (GX group, n=5) or 0.01 mg/kg of detomidine (GD group, n=5) for gastroscopic examination. Horses from the surgical groups received similar doses of xylazine (AX group, n=7) or detomidine (AD group, n=7), followed by anesthetic induction with 2 mg/kg of ketamine and 0.05 mg/kg of diazepam for an arthroscopic procedure under isoflurane anesthesia. Blood samples were obtained prior to the alpha-2 agonist administration (baseline) and after 10, 30, 60 and 90 minutes. All groups had a significant increase in blood glucose from 30 to 90 minutes after alpha-2 agonist administration, compared to baseline. After receiving the alpha-2 agonist, the AD group had blood glucose levels (118-150 mg/dL) significantly higher than GD (99-119 mg/dL) and AX (97-116 mg/dL) groups. Cortisol had no significant changes within a group. However, the AX group had cortisol levels (3.6-3.7 mg/dL) significantly lower than GX group (5.4-5.7 mg/dL) from 30 to 90 minutes after xylazine administration. We concluded that blood glucose levels were when detomidine was administered for surgical procedure, compared to xylazine also for surgical procedure, and non-surgical procedure. Serum cortisol was minimally affected by administration of xylazine and detomidine regardless procedures were surgical or non-surgical.O objetivo deste estudo clínico, radomizado e prospectivo, foi comparar as concentrações sanguíneas de glicose e cortisol entre equinos recebendo xilazina e detomidina para procedimentos cirúrgicos e não-cirúrgicos. Os equinos dos grupos não-cirúrgicos receberam 0,5 mg/kg de xilazina (grupo GX, n=5) ou 0,01 mg/kg de detomidina (grupo GD, n=5) para realização de exame gastroscópico. Os equinos dos grupos cirúrgicos receberam doses semelhantes de xilazina (grupo AX, n=7) ou detomidina (grupo AD, n=7), seguindo-se a indução anestésica com 2 mg/kg de cetamina e 0,05 mg/kg de diazepam para realização de procedimento artroscópico durante anestesia com isofluorano. As amostras de sangue foram coletadas antes da administração do alfa-2 agonista (basal) e após 10, 30, 60 e 90 minutos. Todos os grupos tiveram um aumento significativo da glicemia, a partir de 30 até 90 minutos da administração do alfa-2 agonista, em relação ao basal. Após receber o alfa-2 agonista, o grupo AD apresentou glicemia (118-150 mg/dL) significativamente maior que os grupos GD (99-119 mg/dL) e AX (97-116 mg/dL). Não houve diferenças significativas da concentração de cortisol dentro de cada grupo. Entretanto, o grupo AX apresentou níveis de cortisol (3,6-3,7 mg/dL) significativamente mais baixos que o grupo GX (5,4-5,7 mg/dL), a partir de 30 até 90 minutos da administração de xilazina. Concluímos que a glicemia apresentou valor mais elevadoapós a administração de detomidina para realização de procedimento cirúrgico, comparado à xilazina administrada também para procedimento cirúrgico, e para procedimento não-cirúrgico. A concentração sérica de cortisol foi minimamente influenciada pela administração de xilazina e detomidina independentemente dos procedimentos serem cirúrgicos ou não-cirúrgico

Impactos negativos da administração de hidroxicloroquina e anticoagulante em pacientes com infecção por SARS-COV-2: um ensaio clínico randomizado

Objetivo: Avaliar antimalárico com ou sem tratamento anticoagulante, em pacientes com infecção recente por SARS-COV-2. Métodos: Estudo clínico realizado no Hospital das Clínicas Samuel Libânio da Universidade do Vale do Sapucaí, Pouso Alegre-MG. Aprovado pelo Comitê de Ética (4.034.077) e registrado nos Ensaios Clínicos (NCT04788355). Pacientes suspeitos de COVID-19 foram incluídos na sala de emergência. Os grupos foram: C (controle) com 6 pacientes, A (anticoagulante apixabana) com 9 pacientes, H (hidroxicloroquina) com 5 pacientes e HA (hidroxicloroquina e anticoagulante apixabana) com 8 pacientes. Resultados: não houve diferenças significativas entre os grupos. O grupo HA, no qual houve intervenção com dois medicamentos, apresentou maior número de dias com sintomas (p = 0,037) e piores resultados, quando comparado ao controle: os sintomas mais relevantes foram: tosse (p = 0,001), e anosmia/ageusia (p = 0,011) cefaléia (p = 0,001). Conclusão: O presente estudo teve início quando havia dúvidas sobre o uso de medicamentos como hidroxicloroquina (HCQ) e apixabana (APX). O “n” reduzido foi definido por meio de questões burocráticas e polêmicas independentes das ações dos autores. Nenhum benefício clínico foi associado com HCQ e APX. Houve um aumento no número de dias sintomáticos quando HCQ e APX foram administrados. Apesar das limitações, não houve indicação terapêutica dos medicamentos avaliados.Purpose: To evaluate antimalarial with or without anticoagulant treatment, in patients with recent SARS-COV-2 infection. Methods: Clinical study carried out at Samuel Libânio Clinic Hospital, University of Vale do Sapucaí, Pouso Alegre-MG. Approved by the Ethics Committee (4.034.077) and registered in the Clinical Trials (NCT04788355). Suspected patients for COVID-19 were included in the emergency room. The groups were: C (control) with 6 patients, A (anticoagulant apixaban) with 9 patients, H (hydroxychloroquine) with 5 patients and HA (hydroxychloroquine and anticoagulant apixaban) with 8 patients. Results: there were no significant differences between groups. The HA group, in which there was an intervention with two drugs, presented a greater number of days with symptoms (p = 0.037) and worse results, when compared to the control: most relevant symptoms, were: cough (p = 0.001), and anosmia / ageusia (p = 0.011) headache (p = 0.001). Conclusion: The present study began when there were doubts about the use of drugs such as Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and apixaban (APX). The reduced “n” was defined through bureaucratic and polemic issues independent of the authors’ actions. No clinical benefit was associated with HCQ and APX. There was an increase in the number of symptomatic days when HCQ and APX were administered. Despite the limitations, there was no therapeutic indication of the evaluated drugs

Erratum to: The study of cardiovascular risk in adolescents – ERICA: rationale, design and sample characteristics of a national survey examining cardiovascular risk factor profile in Brazilian adolescents

1585

Pervasive gaps in Amazonian ecological research

Biodiversity loss is one of the main challenges of our time,1,2 and attempts to address it require a clear un derstanding of how ecological communities respond to environmental change across time and space.3,4 While the increasing availability of global databases on ecological communities has advanced our knowledge of biodiversity sensitivity to environmental changes,5–7 vast areas of the tropics remain understudied.8–11 In the American tropics, Amazonia stands out as the world’s most diverse rainforest and the primary source of Neotropical biodiversity,12 but it remains among the least known forests in America and is often underrepre sented in biodiversity databases.13–15 To worsen this situation, human-induced modifications16,17 may elim inate pieces of the Amazon’s biodiversity puzzle before we can use them to understand how ecological com munities are responding. To increase generalization and applicability of biodiversity knowledge,18,19 it is thus crucial to reduce biases in ecological research, particularly in regions projected to face the most pronounced environmental changes. We integrate ecological community metadata of 7,694 sampling sites for multiple or ganism groups in a machine learning model framework to map the research probability across the Brazilian Amazonia, while identifying the region’s vulnerability to environmental change. 15%–18% of the most ne glected areas in ecological research are expected to experience severe climate or land use changes by 2050. This means that unless we take immediate action, we will not be able to establish their current status, much less monitor how it is changing and what is being lostinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Pervasive gaps in Amazonian ecological research

Biodiversity loss is one of the main challenges of our time,1,2 and attempts to address it require a clear understanding of how ecological communities respond to environmental change across time and space.3,4 While the increasing availability of global databases on ecological communities has advanced our knowledge of biodiversity sensitivity to environmental changes,5,6,7 vast areas of the tropics remain understudied.8,9,10,11 In the American tropics, Amazonia stands out as the world's most diverse rainforest and the primary source of Neotropical biodiversity,12 but it remains among the least known forests in America and is often underrepresented in biodiversity databases.13,14,15 To worsen this situation, human-induced modifications16,17 may eliminate pieces of the Amazon's biodiversity puzzle before we can use them to understand how ecological communities are responding. To increase generalization and applicability of biodiversity knowledge,18,19 it is thus crucial to reduce biases in ecological research, particularly in regions projected to face the most pronounced environmental changes. We integrate ecological community metadata of 7,694 sampling sites for multiple organism groups in a machine learning model framework to map the research probability across the Brazilian Amazonia, while identifying the region's vulnerability to environmental change. 15%–18% of the most neglected areas in ecological research are expected to experience severe climate or land use changes by 2050. This means that unless we take immediate action, we will not be able to establish their current status, much less monitor how it is changing and what is being lost