The woven endoBridge (WEB) for endovascular therapy of intracranial aneurysms : update of a systematic review with meta-analysis.

Endovascular treatment of wide-neck intracranial aneurysms (IAs) is challenging, especially in bifurcation location. The intra-saccular flow-disruptor Woven EndoBridge (WEB) offers a new concept of endovascular therapy for wide-neck IAs. We performed an update of a systematic review aimed to report the feasibility, effectiveness and safety of WEB device therapy. A systematic review was conducted using several electronic databases (including PUBMED and EMBASE), searching for studies published between October 2015 and December 2017 (those published between January 2010 and September 2015 were included in our initial systematic review). Outcomes were: success of implantation, peri-procedural complications, mortality, and adequate occlusion (complete occlusion or neck remnant). In total (initial review + update), 12 uncontrolled case-series studies were included, reporting outcomes for 940 patients (68.6% female; mean age, 57 years) harboring 962 IAs. Most IAs were wide-neck bifurcation aneurysms (75%-100%), mainly at middle cerebral artery (37%) and anterior communicating artery (24.6%). Feasibility was 97% (95% confidence interval [CI], 95%-99%), and 9% (95%CI, 5%-14%) of cases required additional treatment. There were 14% (95%CI, 9%-19%) peri-procedural complications. After a median clinical follow-up of 7 months, mortality was 5% (95%CI, 1%-10%) and was higher in series with larger proportions of ruptured IAs. At last angiographic follow-up (median, 7 months; range, 3-27.9 months), adequate occlusion rate was 81% (95%CI, 73%-88%). Although WEB showed high rates of adequate aneurysm occlusion at mid-term, procedure-related complications and mortality rates were not negligible. Future studies should compare the WEB device with other treatment options. [Abstract copyright: Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

A systematic review assessing the under-representation of elderly adults in COVID-19 trials

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has caused a pandemic threatening millions of people worldwide. Yet studies specifically assessing the geriatric population are scarce. We aimed to examine the participation of elderly patients in therapeutic or prophylactic trials on COVID-19

Vaccine safety – is the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine any different?

Vaccines have changed modern medicine, and are a mainstay in reducing morbidity and mortality from infections. Our research group recently published a study in which we found that vaccines approved by the US Food and Drugs Administration were safe with few clinically important post-approval adverse effects. The current COVID-19 pandemic presents regulators with the unprecedented challenge of balancing a public demand for the rapid development and approval of a safe and effective SARS-CoV-2 vaccine without compromising the strict pre-marketing requirements used for previous vaccines. Here, we review the approval process and safety profiles of FDA approved vaccines and discuss some of the challenges currently facing the FDA regarding the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine approval

Immunogenicity and Safety of Modified Vaccinia Ankara (MVA) Vaccine—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Prevention of mpox has become an important public health interest. We aimed to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of the Modified Vaccinia Ankara (MVA) vaccine. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) comparing MVA versus no intervention, placebo, or another vaccine. Outcomes included safety and immunogenicity outcomes. We also performed a systematic review of RCTs evaluating various MVA regimens. Fifteen publications were included in the quantitative meta-analysis. All but one (ACAM2000) compared MVA with placebo. We found that cardiovascular adverse events following two MVA doses were significantly more common compared to placebo (relative risk [RR] 4.07, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10–15.10), though serious adverse events (SAEs) were not significantly different. Following a single MVA dose, no difference was demonstrated in any adverse event outcomes. Seroconversion rates were significantly higher compared with placebo after a single or two doses. None of the RCTs evaluated clinical effectiveness in preventing mpox. This meta-analysis provides reassuring results concerning the immunogenicity and safety of MVA. Further studies are needed to confirm the immunogenicity of a single dose and its clinical effectiveness. A single vaccine dose may be considered according to vaccine availability, with preference for two doses

Patient demographics.

This study’s aim is to describe the imaging findings in pregnant patients undergoing emergent MRI for suspected acute appendicitis, and the various alternative diagnoses seen on those MRI scans. This is a single center retrospective analysis in which we assessed the imaging, clinical and pathological data for all consecutive pregnant patients who underwent emergent MRI for suspected acute appendicitis between April 2013 and June 2021. Out of 167 patients, 35 patients (20.9%) were diagnosed with acute appendicitis on MRI. Thirty patients (18%) were diagnosed with an alternative diagnosis on MRI: 17/30 (56.7%) patients had a gynecological source of abdominal pain (e.g. ectopic pregnancy, red degeneration of a leiomyoma); 8 patients (26.7%) had urological findings such as pyelonephritis; and 6 patients (20%) had gastrointestinal diagnoses (e.g. abdominal wall hernia or inflammatory bowel disease). Our conclusions are that MRI is a good diagnostic tool in the pregnant patient, not only in diagnosing acute appendicitis, but also in providing information on alternative diagnoses to acute abdominal pain. Our findings show the various differential diagnoses on emergent MRI in pregnant patients with suspected acute appendicitis, which may assist clinicians and radiologists is patient assessment and imaging utilization.</div

A 26-week pregnant, 34-year-old patient who presented with right lower quadrant pain.

Axial T2 weighted image (A) shows a swollen right kidney with marked hypointense lesions in the parenchyma (arrow) and a small amount of peri-nephric free fluid (arrowhead). Coronal fat saturated T2 weighted image (B) shows hypointense lesions in the right kidney’s parenchyma (arrow) and a small amount of peri-nephric free fluid (arrowhead). Findings are consistent with acute pyelonephritis.</p

Flow chart depicting MRI diagnosis.

This study’s aim is to describe the imaging findings in pregnant patients undergoing emergent MRI for suspected acute appendicitis, and the various alternative diagnoses seen on those MRI scans. This is a single center retrospective analysis in which we assessed the imaging, clinical and pathological data for all consecutive pregnant patients who underwent emergent MRI for suspected acute appendicitis between April 2013 and June 2021. Out of 167 patients, 35 patients (20.9%) were diagnosed with acute appendicitis on MRI. Thirty patients (18%) were diagnosed with an alternative diagnosis on MRI: 17/30 (56.7%) patients had a gynecological source of abdominal pain (e.g. ectopic pregnancy, red degeneration of a leiomyoma); 8 patients (26.7%) had urological findings such as pyelonephritis; and 6 patients (20%) had gastrointestinal diagnoses (e.g. abdominal wall hernia or inflammatory bowel disease). Our conclusions are that MRI is a good diagnostic tool in the pregnant patient, not only in diagnosing acute appendicitis, but also in providing information on alternative diagnoses to acute abdominal pain. Our findings show the various differential diagnoses on emergent MRI in pregnant patients with suspected acute appendicitis, which may assist clinicians and radiologists is patient assessment and imaging utilization.</div

Ultrasound findings prior to MRI.

This study’s aim is to describe the imaging findings in pregnant patients undergoing emergent MRI for suspected acute appendicitis, and the various alternative diagnoses seen on those MRI scans. This is a single center retrospective analysis in which we assessed the imaging, clinical and pathological data for all consecutive pregnant patients who underwent emergent MRI for suspected acute appendicitis between April 2013 and June 2021. Out of 167 patients, 35 patients (20.9%) were diagnosed with acute appendicitis on MRI. Thirty patients (18%) were diagnosed with an alternative diagnosis on MRI: 17/30 (56.7%) patients had a gynecological source of abdominal pain (e.g. ectopic pregnancy, red degeneration of a leiomyoma); 8 patients (26.7%) had urological findings such as pyelonephritis; and 6 patients (20%) had gastrointestinal diagnoses (e.g. abdominal wall hernia or inflammatory bowel disease). Our conclusions are that MRI is a good diagnostic tool in the pregnant patient, not only in diagnosing acute appendicitis, but also in providing information on alternative diagnoses to acute abdominal pain. Our findings show the various differential diagnoses on emergent MRI in pregnant patients with suspected acute appendicitis, which may assist clinicians and radiologists is patient assessment and imaging utilization.</div