43 research outputs found

    Immunological fingerprint in coronavirus disease-19 convalescents with and without post-COVID syndrome

    Get PDF
    BackgroundSymptoms lasting longer than 12  weeks after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection are called post-coronavirus disease (COVID) syndrome (PCS). The identification of new biomarkers that predict the occurrence or course of PCS in terms of a post-viral syndrome is vital. T-cell dysfunction, cytokine imbalance, and impaired autoimmunity have been reported in PCS. Nevertheless, there is still a lack of conclusive information on the underlying mechanisms due to, among other things, a lack of controlled study designs.MethodsHere, we conducted a prospective, controlled study to characterize the humoral and cellular immune response in unvaccinated patients with and without PCS following SARS-CoV-2 infection over 7 months and unexposed donors.ResultsPatients with PCS showed as early as 6 weeks and 7 months after symptom onset significantly increased frequencies of SARS-CoV-2-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T-cells secreting IFNγ, TNF, and expressing CD40L, as well as plasmacytoid dendritic cells (pDC) with an activated phenotype. Remarkably, the immunosuppressive counterparts type 1 regulatory T-cells (TR1: CD49b/LAG-3+) and IL-4 were more abundant in PCS+.ConclusionThis work describes immunological alterations between inflammation and immunosuppression in COVID-19 convalescents with and without PCS, which may provide potential directions for future epidemiological investigations and targeted treatments

    Mortality from gastrointestinal congenital anomalies at 264 hospitals in 74 low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries: a multicentre, international, prospective cohort study

    Get PDF
    Summary Background Congenital anomalies are the fifth leading cause of mortality in children younger than 5 years globally. Many gastrointestinal congenital anomalies are fatal without timely access to neonatal surgical care, but few studies have been done on these conditions in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). We compared outcomes of the seven most common gastrointestinal congenital anomalies in low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries globally, and identified factors associated with mortality. Methods We did a multicentre, international prospective cohort study of patients younger than 16 years, presenting to hospital for the first time with oesophageal atresia, congenital diaphragmatic hernia, intestinal atresia, gastroschisis, exomphalos, anorectal malformation, and Hirschsprung’s disease. Recruitment was of consecutive patients for a minimum of 1 month between October, 2018, and April, 2019. We collected data on patient demographics, clinical status, interventions, and outcomes using the REDCap platform. Patients were followed up for 30 days after primary intervention, or 30 days after admission if they did not receive an intervention. The primary outcome was all-cause, in-hospital mortality for all conditions combined and each condition individually, stratified by country income status. We did a complete case analysis. Findings We included 3849 patients with 3975 study conditions (560 with oesophageal atresia, 448 with congenital diaphragmatic hernia, 681 with intestinal atresia, 453 with gastroschisis, 325 with exomphalos, 991 with anorectal malformation, and 517 with Hirschsprung’s disease) from 264 hospitals (89 in high-income countries, 166 in middleincome countries, and nine in low-income countries) in 74 countries. Of the 3849 patients, 2231 (58·0%) were male. Median gestational age at birth was 38 weeks (IQR 36–39) and median bodyweight at presentation was 2·8 kg (2·3–3·3). Mortality among all patients was 37 (39·8%) of 93 in low-income countries, 583 (20·4%) of 2860 in middle-income countries, and 50 (5·6%) of 896 in high-income countries (p<0·0001 between all country income groups). Gastroschisis had the greatest difference in mortality between country income strata (nine [90·0%] of ten in lowincome countries, 97 [31·9%] of 304 in middle-income countries, and two [1·4%] of 139 in high-income countries; p≤0·0001 between all country income groups). Factors significantly associated with higher mortality for all patients combined included country income status (low-income vs high-income countries, risk ratio 2·78 [95% CI 1·88–4·11], p<0·0001; middle-income vs high-income countries, 2·11 [1·59–2·79], p<0·0001), sepsis at presentation (1·20 [1·04–1·40], p=0·016), higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score at primary intervention (ASA 4–5 vs ASA 1–2, 1·82 [1·40–2·35], p<0·0001; ASA 3 vs ASA 1–2, 1·58, [1·30–1·92], p<0·0001]), surgical safety checklist not used (1·39 [1·02–1·90], p=0·035), and ventilation or parenteral nutrition unavailable when needed (ventilation 1·96, [1·41–2·71], p=0·0001; parenteral nutrition 1·35, [1·05–1·74], p=0·018). Administration of parenteral nutrition (0·61, [0·47–0·79], p=0·0002) and use of a peripherally inserted central catheter (0·65 [0·50–0·86], p=0·0024) or percutaneous central line (0·69 [0·48–1·00], p=0·049) were associated with lower mortality. Interpretation Unacceptable differences in mortality exist for gastrointestinal congenital anomalies between lowincome, middle-income, and high-income countries. Improving access to quality neonatal surgical care in LMICs will be vital to achieve Sustainable Development Goal 3.2 of ending preventable deaths in neonates and children younger than 5 years by 2030

    The mentor match: A new approach to implementing formal mentorship in general surgery residency.

    No full text
    Mentorship is a vital component within general surgery residency that fosters success extending into future practices. Recognizing the need for formalized mentorship within our general surgery residency, a survey based match process was developed. The Mentor Match was developed by creating resident and faculty surveys using the six ACGME core competencies of patient care, medical knowledge, communication skills, practice based learning, system based practice and professionalism. Surveys focused on resident areas of weakness correlating to areas in which faculty expressed subjective strength. Survey results were used to match faculty mentors with resident mentees. One year after implementation, residents were surveyed to evaluate the perceived success of the match process and mentorship program. Resident participation was 100% with a survey response of 78%. Ninety-two percent of residents were satisfied with the program, 83% saw improvement in their areas of weakness and 75% felt the match process was effective in pairing mentors with mentees. In conclusion, the Mentor Match was an effective tool in developing a formalized mentorship program with positive results after one year of implementation
    corecore