Comparação dos métodos de Papanicolaou e Gram para diagnóstico laboratorial de vaginose bacteriana em material coletado da região cervical e fundo de saco vaginal/ Comparison of Papanicolaou and Gram methods for laboratory diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis in material collected from the cervical region and vaginal fornix

Introdução: Vaginose bacteriana é definida como uma síndrome clínica polimicrobiana envolvendo a substituição de Lactobacillus spp. por microrganismos de vários gêneros, incluindo bactérias anaeróbias como Prevotella sp., Mobiluncus sp., Atopobium vaginae; Gardnerella vaginalis, Mycoplasma hominis, Ureaplasma urealyticum entre outras bactérias. O diagnóstico laboratorial de escolha para pesquisa de VB é a bacterioscopia pelo Gram, método simplificado por Nugent. No entanto, a VB e outras alterações relacionadas às infecções do trato genital feminino podem ser determinadas método de Papanicolaou, pela evidência de base nebulosa de pequenos cocobacilos, presença de clue cells e ausência notável de lactobacilos. Método: estudo transversal, com 102 mulheres, das quais foram examinados esfregaços da região ecto e endocervical do colo do útero pelo método de Papanicolaou, e de fundo de saco vaginal pelo método de Gram interpretados pelo escore de Nugent. Resultados: parâmetros indicadores de vaginose pelo PapaClue e Bethesda pelo Papanicolaou, comparado com o método de Gram segundo os critérios de Nugent mostrou que a maior parte dos resultados dos dois testes (Gram e Pap) é discordante na população estudada, concordância ruim (Kappa = 0,349) e concordância boa (Kappa = 0,489), respectivamente (p < 0,001). Quando os parâmetros do Papanicolaou são comparados entre si, a combinação PapaClue/Bethesda apresentou concordância boa (Kappa < 0,539),  também com significância estatística (p < 0,001). Conclusão: Esta pesquisa demonstrou baixa detecção de VB pelo Pap (5 %) em relação ao Gram (19%), em maioria (75%) de mulheres na fase reprodutiva

Catálogo Taxonômico da Fauna do Brasil: setting the baseline knowledge on the animal diversity in Brazil

The limited temporal completeness and taxonomic accuracy of species lists, made available in a traditional manner in scientific publications, has always represented a problem. These lists are invariably limited to a few taxonomic groups and do not represent up-to-date knowledge of all species and classifications. In this context, the Brazilian megadiverse fauna is no exception, and the Catálogo Taxonômico da Fauna do Brasil (CTFB) (http://fauna.jbrj.gov.br/), made public in 2015, represents a database on biodiversity anchored on a list of valid and expertly recognized scientific names of animals in Brazil. The CTFB is updated in near real time by a team of more than 800 specialists. By January 1, 2024, the CTFB compiled 133,691 nominal species, with 125,138 that were considered valid. Most of the valid species were arthropods (82.3%, with more than 102,000 species) and chordates (7.69%, with over 11,000 species). These taxa were followed by a cluster composed of Mollusca (3,567 species), Platyhelminthes (2,292 species), Annelida (1,833 species), and Nematoda (1,447 species). All remaining groups had less than 1,000 species reported in Brazil, with Cnidaria (831 species), Porifera (628 species), Rotifera (606 species), and Bryozoa (520 species) representing those with more than 500 species. Analysis of the CTFB database can facilitate and direct efforts towards the discovery of new species in Brazil, but it is also fundamental in providing the best available list of valid nominal species to users, including those in science, health, conservation efforts, and any initiative involving animals. The importance of the CTFB is evidenced by the elevated number of citations in the scientific literature in diverse areas of biology, law, anthropology, education, forensic science, and veterinary science, among others

League table of network meta-analysis: Relative risk (RR) for overall therapy outcome.

League table of network meta-analysis: Relative risk (RR) for overall therapy outcome.</p

Risk of bias for time to defervescence outcome.

BackgroundHuman brucellosis is a neglected, re-emerging, and endemic zoonosis in many countries. The debilitating and disabling potential of the disease is a warning about its morbidity, generating socioeconomic impact. This review aims to update the current evidence on the efficacy and safety of therapeutic options for human brucellosis using the network meta-analysis (NMA).MethodologyA systematic search was conducted in four different databases by independent reviewers to assess overall therapy failure, adverse events, and time to defervescence associated with different therapies. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating any therapeutic drug intervention were selected, excluding non-original studies or studies related to localized forms of the disease or with less than 10 participants. Data were analyzed by frequentist statistics through NMA by random effects model. The risk of bias and certainty of evidence was assessed, this review was registered at PROSPERO.ResultsThirty-one (31) RCTs involving 4167 patients were included. Three networks of evidence were identified to evaluate the outcomes of interest. Triple therapy with doxycycline + streptomycin + hydroxychloroquine for 42 days (RR: 0.08; CI 95% 0.01–0.76) had a lower failure risk than the doxycycline + streptomycin regimen. Doxycycline + rifampicin had a higher risk of failure than doxycycline + streptomycin (RR: 1.96; CI 95% 1.27–3.01). No significant difference was observed between the regimens when analyzing the incidence of adverse events and time to defervescence. In general, most studies had a high risk of bias, and the results had a very low certainty of evidence.ConclusionsThis review confirmed the superiority of drugs already indicated for treating human brucellosis, such as the combination of doxycycline and aminoglycosides. The association of hydroxychloroquine to the dual regimen was identified as a potential strategy to prevent overall therapy failure, which is subject to confirmation in future studies.</div

League table of network meta-analysis: Relative risk (RR) for adverse events outcome.

League table of network meta-analysis: Relative risk (RR) for adverse events outcome.</p

Forest plot of network meta-analysis of the time to defervescence outcome (all schemes against doxycycline + streptomycin regimen).

Forest plot of network meta-analysis of the time to defervescence outcome (all schemes against doxycycline + streptomycin regimen).</p

Characteristic of the population enrolled in the treatment of brucellosis studies and therapy schedules (n = 31).

Characteristic of the population enrolled in the treatment of brucellosis studies and therapy schedules (n = 31).</p

Studies excluded after full text reading.

BackgroundHuman brucellosis is a neglected, re-emerging, and endemic zoonosis in many countries. The debilitating and disabling potential of the disease is a warning about its morbidity, generating socioeconomic impact. This review aims to update the current evidence on the efficacy and safety of therapeutic options for human brucellosis using the network meta-analysis (NMA).MethodologyA systematic search was conducted in four different databases by independent reviewers to assess overall therapy failure, adverse events, and time to defervescence associated with different therapies. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating any therapeutic drug intervention were selected, excluding non-original studies or studies related to localized forms of the disease or with less than 10 participants. Data were analyzed by frequentist statistics through NMA by random effects model. The risk of bias and certainty of evidence was assessed, this review was registered at PROSPERO.ResultsThirty-one (31) RCTs involving 4167 patients were included. Three networks of evidence were identified to evaluate the outcomes of interest. Triple therapy with doxycycline + streptomycin + hydroxychloroquine for 42 days (RR: 0.08; CI 95% 0.01–0.76) had a lower failure risk than the doxycycline + streptomycin regimen. Doxycycline + rifampicin had a higher risk of failure than doxycycline + streptomycin (RR: 1.96; CI 95% 1.27–3.01). No significant difference was observed between the regimens when analyzing the incidence of adverse events and time to defervescence. In general, most studies had a high risk of bias, and the results had a very low certainty of evidence.ConclusionsThis review confirmed the superiority of drugs already indicated for treating human brucellosis, such as the combination of doxycycline and aminoglycosides. The association of hydroxychloroquine to the dual regimen was identified as a potential strategy to prevent overall therapy failure, which is subject to confirmation in future studies.</div