Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 18 de 18
Filter
1.
Front Immunol ; 13: 985938, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2224770

ABSTRACT

This proof-of-concept study tested if prior BCG revaccination can qualitatively and quantitively enhance antibody and T-cell responses induced by Oxford/AstraZeneca ChAdOx1nCoV-19 or COVISHIELD™, an efficacious and the most widely distributed vaccine in India. We compared COVISHIELD™ induced longitudinal immune responses in 21 BCG re-vaccinees (BCG-RV) and 13 BCG-non-revaccinees (BCG-NRV), all of whom were BCG vaccinated at birth; latent tuberculosis negative and SARS-CoV-2 seronegative prior to COVISHIELD™ vaccination. Compared to BCG-NRV, BCG-RV displayed significantly higher and persistent spike-specific neutralizing (n) Ab titers and polyfunctional CD4+ and CD8+ T-cells for eight months post COVISHIELD™ booster, including distinct CD4+IFN-γ+ and CD4+IFN-γ- effector memory (EM) subsets co-expressing IL-2, TNF-α and activation induced markers (AIM) CD154/CD137 as well as CD8+IFN-γ+ EM,TEMRA (T cell EM expressing RA) subset combinations co-expressing TNF-α and AIM CD137/CD69. Additionally, elevated nAb and T-cell responses to the Delta mutant in BCG-RV highlighted greater immune response breadth. Mechanistically, these BCG adjuvant effects were associated with elevated markers of trained immunity, including higher IL-1ß and TNF-α expression in CD14+HLA-DR+monocytes and changes in chromatin accessibility highlighting BCG-induced epigenetic changes. This study provides first in-depth analysis of both antibody and memory T-cell responses induced by COVISHIELD™ in SARS-CoV-2 seronegative young adults in India with strong evidence of a BCG-induced booster effect and therefore a rational basis to validate BCG, a low-cost and globally available vaccine, as an adjuvant to enhance heterologous adaptive immune responses to current and emerging COVID-19 vaccines.


Subject(s)
BCG Vaccine , COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Humans , Young Adult , Adjuvants, Immunologic , Chromatin , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , Immunity , Interleukin-2 , SARS-CoV-2 , Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha , Vaccination
2.
Frontiers in immunology ; 13, 2022.
Article in English | EuropePMC | ID: covidwho-2073641

ABSTRACT

This proof-of-concept study tested if prior BCG revaccination can qualitatively and quantitively enhance antibody and T-cell responses induced by Oxford/AstraZeneca ChAdOx1nCoV-19 or COVISHIELD™, an efficacious and the most widely distributed vaccine in India. We compared COVISHIELD™ induced longitudinal immune responses in 21 BCG re-vaccinees (BCG-RV) and 13 BCG-non-revaccinees (BCG-NRV), all of whom were BCG vaccinated at birth;latent tuberculosis negative and SARS-CoV-2 seronegative prior to COVISHIELD™ vaccination. Compared to BCG-NRV, BCG-RV displayed significantly higher and persistent spike-specific neutralizing (n) Ab titers and polyfunctional CD4+ and CD8+ T-cells for eight months post COVISHIELD™ booster, including distinct CD4+IFN-γ+ and CD4+IFN-γ- effector memory (EM) subsets co-expressing IL-2, TNF-α and activation induced markers (AIM) CD154/CD137 as well as CD8+IFN-γ+ EM,TEMRA (T cell EM expressing RA) subset combinations co-expressing TNF-α and AIM CD137/CD69. Additionally, elevated nAb and T-cell responses to the Delta mutant in BCG-RV highlighted greater immune response breadth. Mechanistically, these BCG adjuvant effects were associated with elevated markers of trained immunity, including higher IL-1β and TNF-α expression in CD14+HLA-DR+monocytes and changes in chromatin accessibility highlighting BCG-induced epigenetic changes. This study provides first in-depth analysis of both antibody and memory T-cell responses induced by COVISHIELD™ in SARS-CoV-2 seronegative young adults in India with strong evidence of a BCG-induced booster effect and therefore a rational basis to validate BCG, a low-cost and globally available vaccine, as an adjuvant to enhance heterologous adaptive immune responses to current and emerging COVID-19 vaccines.

3.
J Am Med Dir Assoc ; 2022 Sep 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2036188

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA), a multicomponent, complex intervention, can be used to improve perioperative outcomes. This study aimed to describe the actions and interventions prompted by preoperative CGA and optimization in elective noncardiac, older, surgical patients. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Five hundred consecutive patients aged over 65 years attending a preoperative CGA and optimization clinic in a single academic center. METHODS: A retrospective review of electronic clinical records was undertaken. CGA prompted actions and interventions were categorized a priori and examined according to the perioperative pathway and frailty status. RESULTS: Patients received a median of nine interventions (IQR 6‒12, range 0‒28). Long-term condition medication changes were made in 375 (75.0%) patients, lifestyle advice provided in 269 (53.8%), therapy interventions delivered in 117 (23.4%), shared decision making documented in 495 (99.0%) with individualized admission plans documented in 410/426 (96.2%). Following CGA, 74/500 (14.8%) patients did not undergo surgery and were more likely to have benign pathology (69% vs 53%, P = .01), higher frailty scores (Edmonton Frail Scale 8 (IQR 5‒10) vs 4 (IQR 2-6), P < .001), lower functional status (Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living 33 (IQR 16‒47) vs 57 (IQR 45‒64), P < .001) or cognitive scores (Montreal Cognitive Assessment 19 (IQR 14‒24) vs 24 (IQR 20‒26), P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: This study provides a description of actions and interventions prompted by preoperative CGA at one center. Such a detailed exploration of the CGA process and the clinical skills necessary to deliver it, should be used to inform future multicenter studies and the development and implementation of perioperative services for older patients.

4.
J Surg Res ; 279: 409-419, 2022 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1926707

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Recent advancements in surgical technology, reduced working hours, and training opportunities exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic have led to an increase in simulation-based training. Furthermore, a rise in endovascular procedures has led to a requirement for high-fidelity simulators that offer comprehensive feedback. This review aims to identify vascular surgery simulation models and assess their validity and levels of effectiveness (LoE) for each model in order to successfully implement them into current training curricula. METHODS: PubMed and EMBASE were searched on January 1, 2021, for full-text English studies on vascular surgery simulators. Eligible articles were given validity ratings based on Messick's modern concept of validity alongside an LoE score according to McGaghie's translational outcomes. RESULTS: Overall 76 eligible articles validated 34 vascular surgery simulators and training courses for open and endovascular procedures. High validity ratings were achieved across studies for: content (35), response processes (12), the internal structure (5), relations to other variables (57), and consequences (2). Only seven studies achieved an LoE greater than 3/5. Overall, ANGIO Mentor was the most highly validated and effective simulator and was the only simulator to achieve an LoE of 5/5. CONCLUSIONS: Simulation-based training in vascular surgery is a continuously developing field with exciting future prospects, demonstrated by the vast number of models and training courses. To effectively integrate simulation models into current vascular surgery curricula and assessments, there is a need for studies to look at trainee skill retention over a longer period of time. A more detailed discussion on cost-effectiveness is also needed.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Simulation Training , Specialties, Surgical , Clinical Competence , Computer Simulation , Humans , Pandemics , Simulation Training/methods , Vascular Surgical Procedures
5.
Panminerva Med ; 64(1): 96-114, 2022 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1766270

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the data currently available regarding the repurposing of different drugs for COVID-19 treatment. Participants with suspected or diagnosed COVID-19 were included in this study. The interventions that have been considered were repurposed drugs and comparators that included standard of care treatment or placebo. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We searched Ovid-MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane library, clinical trial registration site in the UK(NIHR), Europe (clinicaltrialsregister.eu), US (ClinicalTrials.gov) and internationally (isrctn.com), and reviewed the reference lists of articles for eligible articles published up to April 22, 2020. All studies in English that evaluated the efficacy of the listed drugs were included. Cochrane RoB 2.0 and ROBINS-I tool were used to assess study quality. This systematic review adheres to the PRISMA guidelines. The protocol is available at PROSPERO (CRD42020180915). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: From 708 identified studies or clinical trials, 16 studies and 16 case reports met our eligibility criteria. Of these, 6 were randomized controlled trials (763 patients), 7 cohort studies (321 patients) and 3 case series (191 patients). Chloroquine (CQ) had a 100% discharge rate compared to 50% with lopinavir-ritonavir at day 14, however a trial has recommended against a high dosage due to cardiotoxic events. Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) has shown no significant improvement in negative seroconversion rate which is also seen in our meta-analysis (P=0.68). Adverse events with HCQ have a significant difference compared to the control group (P=0.001). Lopinavir-ritonavir has shown no improvement in time to clinical improvement which is seen in our meta-analyses (P=0.1). Remdesivir has shown no significant improvement in time to clinical improvement but this trial had insufficient power. CONCLUSIONS: Due to the paucity in evidence, it is difficult to establish the efficacy of these drugs in the treatment of COVID-19 as currently there is no significant clinical effectiveness of the repurposed drugs. Further large clinical trials are required to achieve more reliable findings. A risk-benefit analysis is required on an individual basis to weigh out the potential improvement in clinical outcome and viral load reduction compared to the risks of the adverse events.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Lopinavir/therapeutic use , Ritonavir/therapeutic use , Drug Repositioning , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/adverse effects , Lopinavir/adverse effects , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
6.
Res Sq ; 2022 Mar 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1766251

ABSTRACT

This study tested if prior BCG revaccination can further boost immune responses subsequently induced by an otherwise efficacious Oxford/AstraZeneca ChAdOx1nCoV-19 vaccine, referred to as COVISHIELDTM in India. We compared COVISHIELDTM induced longitudinal immune responses in 21 BCG re-vaccinees (BCG-RV) and 13 BCG-non-revaccinees (BCG-NRV), all of whom were BCG vaccinated at birth and latent tuberculosis negative, after COVISHIELDTM prime and boost with baseline samples that were collected pre-pandemic and pre-BCG revaccination. Compared to BCG-NRV, BCG-RV displayed significantly higher magnitude of spike-specific Ab and T cell responses, including a greater proportion of high responders; better quality polyfunctional CD4 and CD8 T cells that persisted and a more robust Ab and T cell response to the Delta mutant of SARS-CoV-2 highlighting greater breadth. Mechanistically, BCG adjuvant effects on COVISHIELDTM induced adaptive responses was associated with more robust innate responses to pathogen-associated-molecular-patterns through TNF-α and IL-1ß secretion. This study highlights the potential of using a cheap and globally available vaccine as an adjuvant to enhance heterologous adaptive immune responses induced by COVIDSHIELDTM and other emerging vaccines.

7.
BJUI Compass ; 3(4): 277-286, 2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1664396

ABSTRACT

Objective: To report on the outcomes of urological cancer patients undergoing radical surgery between March-September 2020 (compared with 2019) in the European Institute of Oncology (IEO) in Milan and the South East London Cancer Alliance (SELCA). Materials and Methods: Since March 2020, both institutions implemented a COVID-19 minimal 'green' pathway, whereby patients were required to isolate for 14 days prior to admission and report a negative COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test within 3 days of surgery. COVID-19 positive patients had surgery deferred until a negative swab. Surgical outcomes assessed were: American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) grade; surgery time; theatre time; intensive care unit (ICU) stay >24 h; pneumonia; length of stay (LOS); re-admission. Postoperative COVID-19 infection rates and associated mortality were also recorded. Results: At IEO, uro-oncological surgery increased by 4%, as compared with the same period in 2019 (n = 515 vs. 534). The main increase was observed for renal (16%, n = 98 vs. 114), bladder (24%, n = 45 vs. 56) and testicular (27%, n = 26 vs. 33). Patient demographics were all comparable between 2019 and 2020. Only one bladder cancer patient developed COVID-19, reporting mild/moderate disease. There was no COVID-19 associated mortality. In the SELCA cohort, uro-oncological surgery declined by 23% (n = 403 vs. 312) compared with the previous year. The biggest decrease was seen for prostate (-42%, n = 156 vs. 91), penile (-100%, n = 4 vs. 0) and testicular cancers (-46%, n = 35 vs. 24). Various patient demographic characteristics were notably different when comparing 2020 versus 2019. This likely reflects the clinical decision of deferring COVID-19 vulnerable patients. One patient developed COVID-19, with no COVID-19 related mortality. Conclusion: The COVID-19 minimal 'green' pathways that were put in place have shown to be safe for uro-oncological patients requiring radical surgery. There were limited complications, almost no peri-operative COVID-19 infection and no COVID-19-related mortality in either cohort.

8.
J Robot Surg ; 16(5): 1183-1192, 2022 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1653738

ABSTRACT

The adoption of minimally invasive laparoscopic techniques has revolutionised urological practice. This necessitates a pneumoperitoneum (PNP) and the impact the PNP pressure has on post-operative outcomes is uncertain. During the current COVID-19 era guidance has suggested the utilisation of lower PNP pressures to mitigate the risk of intra-operative viral transmission. Review the current literature regarding the impact of pneumoperitoneum pressure, within the field of urology, on post-operative outcomes. A search of the PubMed, Medline and EMBASE databases was undertaken to identify studies that met the inclusion criteria. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA) guidelines were adhered to. Ten studies, that included both randomised controlled trials and retrospective case series reviews, were identified that met the inclusion criteria. The effect of PNP pressure on outcomes following prostatectomy, live donor nephrectomy, partial nephrectomy and a variety of benign upper tract procedures were discussed. Low pressure PNP appears safe when compared to high pressure PNP, potentially reducing post-operative pain and rates of ileus. When compared to general surgery, there is a lack of quality evidence investigating the impact of PNP pressures on outcomes within urology. Low pressure PNP appears non-inferior to high pressure PNP. More research is required to validate this finding, particularly post-cystectomy and nephrectomy.


Subject(s)
Pneumoperitoneum, Artificial , Urologic Surgical Procedures, Male , COVID-19 , Humans , Male , Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures , Pain, Postoperative/etiology , Pneumoperitoneum, Artificial/adverse effects , Pneumoperitoneum, Artificial/methods , Retrospective Studies , Urologic Surgical Procedures, Male/methods
9.
BJU Int ; 125(6): 749, 2020 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1556518
10.
Eur Surg Res ; 63(1): 40-45, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1495756

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: The disruption to surgical training and medical education caused by the global COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the need for realistic, reliable, and engaging educational opportunities available outside of the operating theatre and accessible for trainees of all levels. This article presents the design and development of a virtual reality curriculum which simulates the surgical mentorship experience outside of the operating theatre, with a focus on surgical anatomy and surgical decision-making. METHOD: This was a multi-institutional study between London's King's College and Imperial College. The index procedure selected for the module was robotic radical prostatectomy. For each stage of the surgical procedure, subject-matter experts (N = 3) at King's College London, identified (1) the critical surgical-decision making points, (2) critical anatomical landmarks, and (3) tips and techniques for overcoming intraoperative challenges. Content validity was determined by an independent panel of subject-matter experts (N = 8) at Imperial College, London, using Fleiss' kappa statistic. The experts' teaching points were combined with operative footage and illustrative animations, and projected onto a virtual reality headset. The module was piloted to surgical science students (N = 15). Quantitative analysis compared participants' confidence regarding their anatomical knowledge before and after taking the module. Qualitative data were gathered from students regarding their views on using the virtual reality model. RESULTS: Multi-rater agreement between experts was above the 70.0% threshold for all steps of the procedure. Seventy-three percentage of pilot study participants "agreed" or "strongly agreed" that they achieved a better understanding of surgical anatomy and the rationale behind each procedural step. This was reflected in an increase in the median knowledge score after trialing the curriculum (p < 0.001). 100% of subject-matter experts and 93.3% of participants "agreed" or "strongly agreed" that virtual mentorship would be useful for future surgical training. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that virtual surgical mentorship could be a feasible and cost-effective alternative to traditional training methods with the potential to improve technical skills, such as operative proficiency and nontechnical skills such as decision-making and situational judgement.


Subject(s)
Augmented Reality , COVID-19 , Robotics , Clinical Competence , Computer Simulation , Curriculum , Humans , Male , Pandemics , Pilot Projects , Prostatectomy/education , Prostatectomy/methods , SARS-CoV-2
12.
Eur Urol Open Sci ; 22: 23-33, 2020 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-912192

ABSTRACT

CONTEXT: The role of robot-assisted surgery continues to expand at a time when trainers and proctors have travel restrictions during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. OBJECTIVE: To provide guidance on setting up and running an optimised telementoring service that can be integrated into current validated curricula. We define a standardised approach to training candidates in skill acquisition via telepresence technologies. We aim to describe an approach based on the current evidence and available technologies, and define the key elements within optimised telepresence services, by seeking consensus from an expert committee comprising key opinion leaders in training. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: This project was carried out in phases: a systematic review of the current literature, a teleconference meeting, and then an initial survey were conducted based on the current evidence and expert opinion, and sent to the committee. Twenty-four experts in training, including clinicians, academics, and industry, contributed to the Delphi process. An accelerated Delphi process underwent three rounds and was completed within 72 h. Additions to the second- and third-round surveys were formulated based on the answers and comments from the previous rounds. Consensus opinion was defined as ≥80% agreement. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: There was 100% consensus regarding an urgent need for international agreement on guidance for optimised telepresence. Consensus was reached in multiple areas, including (1) infrastructure and functionality; (2) definitions and terminology; (3) protocols for training, communication, and safety issues; and (4) accountability including ethical and legal issues. The resulting formulated guidance showed good internal consistency among experts, with a Cronbach alpha of 0.90. CONCLUSIONS: Using the Delphi methodology, we achieved international consensus among experts for development and content validation of optimised telepresence services for robotic surgery training. This guidance lays the foundation for launching telepresence services in robotic surgery. This guidance will require further validation. PATIENT SUMMARY: Owing to travel restrictions during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, development of remote training and support via telemedicine is becoming increasingly important. We report a key opinion leader consensus view on a standardised approach to telepresence.

13.
Eur Urol ; 78(6): 775-776, 2020 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-807797

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has generated large volumes of clinical data that can be an invaluable resource towards answering a number of important questions for this and future pandemics. Artificial intelligence can have an important role in analysing such data to identify populations at higher risk of COVID-19-related urological pathologies and to suggest treatments that block viral entry into cells by interrupting the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2-transmembrane serine protease 2 (ACE2-TMPRSS2) pathway.


Subject(s)
Artificial Intelligence , COVID-19/diagnosis , Urology , Big Data , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Symptom Assessment
14.
BJU Int ; 126(2): 225-234, 2020 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-209971

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To determine the risk of COVID-19 transmission during minimally invasive surgical (MIS) procedures METHODS: Surgical society statements regarding the risk of COVID transmission during MIS procedures were reviewed. In addition, the available literature on COVID-19 and other viral transmission in CO2 pneumoperitoneum, as well as the presence of virus in the plume created by electrocautery during MIS was reviewed. The society recommendations were compared to the available literature on the topic to create our review and recommendations to mitigate COVID-19 transmission. RESULTS: The recommendations promulgated by various surgical societies evolved over time as more information became available on COVID-19 transmission. Review of the available literature on the presence of COVID-19 in CO2 pneumoperitoneum was inconclusive. There is no clear evidence of the presence of COVID-19 in plume created by electrocautery. Technologies to reduce CO2 pneumoperitoneum release into the operating room as well as filter viral particles are available and should reduce the exposure risk to operating room personnel. CONCLUSION: There is no clear evidence of COVID-19 virus in the CO2 used during MIS procedures or in the plume created by electrocautery. Until the presence or absence of COVID-19 viral particles has been clearly established, measures to mitigate CO2 and surgical cautery plume release into the operating room should be performed. Further study on the presence of COVID-19 in MIS pneumoperitoneum and cautery plume is needed.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Disease Transmission, Infectious/prevention & control , Infection Control/standards , Operating Rooms/standards , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , Robotic Surgical Procedures/standards , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Global Health , Humans , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2
18.
BJU Int ; 125(6): E7-E14, 2020 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-35103

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To discuss the impact of COVID-19 on global health, particularly on urological practice and to review some of the available recommendations reported in the literature. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In the current narrative review the PubMed database was searched to identify all the related reports discussing the impact of COVID-19 on the urological field. RESULTS: The COVID-19 pandemic is the latest and biggest global health threat. Medical and surgical priorities have changed dramatically to cope with the current challenge. These changes include postponements of all elective outpatient visits and surgical procedures to save facilities and resources for urgent cases and patients with COVID-19 patients. This review discuss some of the related changes in urology. CONCLUSIONS: Over the coming weeks, healthcare workers including urologists will be facing increasingly difficult challenges, and consequently, they should adopt triage strategy to avoid wasting of medical resources and they should endorse sufficient protection policies to guard against infection when dealing with COVID-19 patients.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Urologic Surgical Procedures , Betacoronavirus/physiology , COVID-19 , Elective Surgical Procedures , Global Health , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Triage , Urinary Tract/microbiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL