[Immunogenicity and reactogenicity of DTPa-IPV-HBV/Hib and DTPa-IPV/Hib vaccines coadministered with 7-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine as primary vaccination and booster in healthy infants, according to the French vaccination calendar]. / Immunogénicité et réactogénicité des vaccins DTCa-P-HepB/Hib et DTCa-P/Hib coadministrés avec le vaccin pneumococcique osidique conjugué, adsorbé, chez des nourrissons en primovaccination et en rappel selon le calendrier vaccinal français.

OBJECTIVE: Assessment of immunogenicity and reactogenicity of DTPa-IPV/Hib (Infanrixquinta) and DTPa-IPV-HBV/Hib (Infanrixhexa) combined vaccines coadministered in healthy infants with 7-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (Prevenar), according to the current French vaccine recommendations. METHOD: Multicenter, open label, non-controlled study performed in France. Each subject received 1 dose of DTPa-IPV-HBV/Hib combined vaccine at 2, 4 and 16-18 months of age, coadministered with conjugated pneumococcal vaccine and 1 dose of DTPa-IPV/Hib vaccine at 3 months of age coadministered with conjugated pneumococcal vaccine. RESULTS: Among the 102 enrolled infants, 64 were analysed (10.09 weeks+/-1.22 of age; boys: 58%) in the According-To-Protocol (ATP) immunogenicity cohort. One month after the administration of the booster dose of DTPa-IPV-HBV/Hib vaccine, 93.8% of subjects had protective titres for anti-HBs antibody superior or equal to 10 mIU/ml (primary objective). Seroprotection rate against Haemophilus influenzae type b component (anti-PRP antibody >or=0.15 microg/ml) was 98.4% and the immune response for the 7-valent pneumococcal serotypes (antipneumococcal antibody >or=0,05 microg/ml) was between 98.4 and 100%. Local reactogenicity increased with the number of doses administered, but was comparable between combined vaccines and conjugated pneumococcal vaccine. The incidence of fever increased between the primary vaccination and the booster. CONCLUSION: The immunogenicity and reactogenicity profile of DTPa-IPV-HBV/Hib and DTPa-IPV/Hib combined vaccines coadministered with conjugated pneumococcal vaccine according to the schedule recommended in the French vaccine calendar is acceptable and similar to previous reports.

Long-term humoral and cell-mediated immunity after acellular pertussis vaccination compares favourably with whole-cell vaccines 6 years after booster vaccination in the second year of life.

Humoral and cell-mediated immune responses (CMI) were evaluated in subjects 3 and 6 years after primary and booster vaccination with either three-component acellular (Pa) or whole-cell (Pw) vaccines. Low anti-pertussis toxin (PT) antibody levels confirmed the absence of pertussis disease, consistent with ongoing protection. Anti-pertactin (PRN) antibodies, remained at higher levels in Pa-vaccinated subjects. At year 6, CMI responses continued to be present and were higher in Pa-vaccinated than Pw-vaccinated subjects. Long-term protection with Pa vaccines can be expected to be at least as good as that provided by efficacious Pw vaccines.

Self-assessment of immediate post-vaccination pain after two different MMR vaccines administered as a second dose in 4- to 6-year-old children.

The aim of this study was to compare self-reported immediate post-vaccination pain and safety of Priorix versus RORVax in 4- to 6-year-old children receiving their second dose of MMR vaccine, using the Faces Pain Scale-Revised (FPS-R), a validated self-report pain scale recommended by the French National Accreditation Agency and Health Evaluation. A total of 620 children from 28 French pediatricians completed all study procedures. Immediate post-vaccination pain was reported by 17.8% of the subjects in Priorix group (N=309) and by 44.7% of the subjects in RORVax group (N=311) [OR=3.7; P<0.001]. Parents' pain scores correlated significantly with children's scores. The reduction of immediate pain incidence in Priorix group persisted over the 4 post-vaccination days. This study, using a validated self-assessment pain scale, confirmed previous data showing a significantly lower incidence of immediate post-vaccination pain with Priorix as compared to RORVax.

The efficacy of intravenous 0.15 versus 0.25 mg/kg intraoperative morphine for immediate postoperative analgesia after remifentanil-based anesthesia for major surgery.

UNLABELLED: We evaluated the effect of perioperative administration of two doses of morphine for postoperative analgesia after remifentanil-based anesthesia. The prospective, randomized study included 245 patients from 33 centers. All patients were scheduled for abdominal or urological surgery lasting more than 1 h. General anesthesia used remifentanil as the perioperative opioid (1 microg/kg as a bolus then, 0.5 microg/kg as a continuous infusion). A morphine bolus of 0. 15 mg/kg (0.15-mg group) or 0.25 mg/kg (0.25-mg group) was administered 30 min before the end of surgery. In the postanesthesia care unit, pain scores for patients were evaluated by using behavioral pain scores of 1-3, verbal pain scores of 0-3, and visual analog scale scores of 0-10). Postoperative analgesia was obtained by a morphine titration (3 mg every 5 min). Demographic and surgery characteristics were similar in both groups. The delay for first demand of morphine was similar in the 0.15-mg and the 0.25-mg groups (26 [9-60] and 30 [10-60] min, respectively). The frequency of morphine titration was similar in both groups (75% and 66%, respectively). The amount of morphine used in the postanesthesia care unit was smaller in the 0.25-mg group (0.16 [0.0-1.25] vs 0.10 [0.0-0.56] mg/kg; P = 0.008). In the 0.25-mg group, the behavioral pain score was lower at 15 min, the verbal pain score was lower at 60 min (P < 0.001), and similar at 30 min. The visual analog scale pain score at 30 min and 60 min was similar in both groups. The incidence of minor side effects was similar in both groups. However, three cases of postoperative respiratory depression occurred in the 0.25-mg group compared with no cases in the 0.15-mg group. In conclusion, perioperative administration of morphine alone does not provide entirely adequate immediate postoperative pain control after remifentanil-based anesthesia in major surgery. IMPLICATIONS: The administration of 0.15 or 0.25 mg/kg perioperative morphine during remifentanil-based anesthesia for major surgery does not preclude additional morphine administration in the postanesthesia care unit. The larger dose of 0.25 mg/kg slightly improves postoperative analgesia; however, it may be responsible for postoperative respiratory depression.

Ondansetron compared with metoclopramide in the treatment of established postoperative nausea and vomiting. The French Ondansetron Study Group.

We have studied 746 males and females undergoing general anaesthesia for any type of surgical procedure in a double-blind, controlled, randomized study. After experiencing at least one nausea and/or one emetic episode in the 6 h after recovery from anaesthesia, patients received either ondansetron 4 mg i.v. or metoclopramide 10 mg i.v. Patients were observed for postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) for 24 h after drug administration. Complete control of PONV was achieved more frequently in the ondansetron-treated patients compared with the metoclopramide-treated patients during the 24-h period (59% vs 41% (P < 0.001) and 44% vs 34% (P = 0.006) for emetic episodes and nausea, respectively). Furthermore, ondansetron was associated with greater patient satisfaction than metoclopramide (P < 0.001) with 49% and 32% of patients, respectively, very satisfied. The overall incidence of adverse events was similar in the ondansetron (7%) and metoclopramide (8%) groups. Ondansetron was as well tolerated and more effective than metoclopramide for all assessment criteria in the treatment of established PONV.