7 research outputs found

    Determinants of survival in lung transplantation patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: a retrospective cohort study

    No full text
    Survival after lung transplantation (LTx) for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is worse compared to other indications for LTx. We investigated the effect of several pretransplant variables including the use of pretransplant corticosteroids (CS) on post-transplant graft and chronic lung allograft dysfunction (CLAD)-free survival and functional testing (maximum inspiratory and expiratory pressure, six-minute walk test, quadriceps and hand pinch force) in a small cohort of IPF patients. We retrospectively compared two groups of IPF patients (n = 36 on CS vs. n = 18 not on CS) who underwent LTx between 2000 and 2016. Analysis of 54 IPF-LTx patients showed no significant effect on graft survival or functional tests except for maximum inspiratory pressure (P = 0.033) between these two groups (all LTx patients, CS vs. no CS). Regression analysis showed significant impact of procedure with a hazard ratio of 0.423 (CI 95% 0.194, 0.924) favoring sequential single LTx (SSLTx) compared to single lung transplantation (SLTx). When analyzing only the 40 SSLTx patients, corticosteroid-free patients showed significantly better graft survival compared to patients on CS (P = 0.045) and CLAD-free survival (P = 0.019). The possible detrimental effect of corticosteroid therapy before LTx was demonstrated in this cohort of SSLTx patients, which questions the use of corticosteroids in a pretransplantation setting.status: publishe

    Allergic reactions to COVID-19 vaccines: statement of the Belgian Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology (BelSACI)

    Full text link
    Vaccination against COVID-19 constitutes a huge hope and a major challenge. For the first time in modern history, a global vaccination campaign has started worldwide in a short period of time and with products that were recently developed. Consequently, legitimate concerns regarding the safety and tolerability of COVID-19 vaccines arise.In line with international allergy societies, the Belgian Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology (BelSACI) provides this statement to guide health care providers (general practitioners, specialists including allergists) and stakeholders.In this statement, we first review current evidence on allergic reactions to vaccines and the potential risk factors that have been identified.Second, we provide a risk stratification method that may be used as a worksheet during the vaccination campaign.Finally, we discuss the management of suspected or confirmed allergic reactions following vaccination

    Détection et identification des infections à SARS-CoV-2 par des chiens à partir de sueur d'aisselle

    Get PDF
    peer reviewedDetection dogs were trained to detect SARS-CoV-2 infection based on armpit sweat odor. Sweat samples were collected using cotton pads under the armpits of negative and positive human patients, confirmed by qPCR, for periods of 15–30 min. Multiple hospitals and organizations throughout Belgium participated in this study. The sweat samples were stored at −20°C prior to being used for training purposes. Six dogs were trained under controlled atmosphere conditions for 2–3 months. After training, a 7-day validation period was conducted to assess the dogs’ performances. The detection dogs exhibited an overall sensitivity of 81%, specificity of 98%, and an accuracy of 95%. After validation, training continued for 3 months, during which the dogs’ performances remained the same. Gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS) analysis revealed a unique sweat scent associated with SARS-CoV-2 positive sweat samples. This scent consisted of a wide variety of volatiles, including breakdown compounds of antiviral fatty acids, skin proteins and neurotransmitters/hormones. An acceptability survey conducted in Belgium demonstrated an overall high acceptability and enthusiasm toward the use of detection dogs for SARS-CoV-2 detection. Compared to qPCR and previous canine studies, the detection dogs have good performances in detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection in humans, using frozen sweat samples from the armpits. As a result, they can be used as an accurate pre-screening tool in various field settings alongside the PCR test.3. Good health and well-bein

    Data_Sheet_1_Sniffing out safety: canine detection and identification of SARS-CoV-2 infection from armpit sweat.pdf

    No full text
    Detection dogs were trained to detect SARS-CoV-2 infection based on armpit sweat odor. Sweat samples were collected using cotton pads under the armpits of negative and positive human patients, confirmed by qPCR, for periods of 15–30 min. Multiple hospitals and organizations throughout Belgium participated in this study. The sweat samples were stored at −20°C prior to being used for training purposes. Six dogs were trained under controlled atmosphere conditions for 2–3 months. After training, a 7-day validation period was conducted to assess the dogs’ performances. The detection dogs exhibited an overall sensitivity of 81%, specificity of 98%, and an accuracy of 95%. After validation, training continued for 3 months, during which the dogs’ performances remained the same. Gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS) analysis revealed a unique sweat scent associated with SARS-CoV-2 positive sweat samples. This scent consisted of a wide variety of volatiles, including breakdown compounds of antiviral fatty acids, skin proteins and neurotransmitters/hormones. An acceptability survey conducted in Belgium demonstrated an overall high acceptability and enthusiasm toward the use of detection dogs for SARS-CoV-2 detection. Compared to qPCR and previous canine studies, the detection dogs have good performances in detecting SARS-CoV-2 infection in humans, using frozen sweat samples from the armpits. As a result, they can be used as an accurate pre-screening tool in various field settings alongside the PCR test.</p
    corecore