ABSTRACT
La dehiscencia de heridas quirúrgicas es un problema habitual en la práctica clínica que requiere una solución eficaz, sobre todo cuando se exponen estructuras nobles o material protésico. El injerto de grasa autóloga es una técnica segura y sencilla que puede solucionar úlceras crónicas. Presentamos el caso de un paciente diabético con una úlcera refractaria con exposición de su bypass, que alcanzó la curación completa tras realizar un injerto graso. (AU)
Surgical wound dehiscence is a common problem in clinical practice that requires an effective solution, especially when noble structures or prosthetic material are exposed. Autologous fat grafting is a safe and simple technique that can solve chronic ulcers. We present the case of a diabetic patient with a refractory ulcer with exposure of his bypass, who achieved complete healing after performing a fat graft. (AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Aged , Transplants , Diabetic Foot , Surgical Wound Dehiscence , Wound Healing , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Alcohol Drinking , Smokers , NecrosisABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To assess the agreement between two rapid detection tests (RDT) for antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 infection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study that used a random sample of non-hospitalized patients from the primary care management division of the Healthcare Area of Leon (58 RT-PCR-positive cases and 52 RT-PCR-negative cases). Information regarding symptoms was collected and all patients were simultaneously tested using two RDTs (Combined - cRDT and Differentiated - dRDT). The results of both tests were evaluated using the chi-square test and, for degree of agreement, the kappa coefficient. RESULTS: About 52% of the participants were women (mean age: 48.2±11.0 years). A total of 58.2% were positive for d-RDT and 41.2% were positive for c-RDT. In the subjects who were RT-PCR-positive, d-RDT was positive in 72.4% and c-RDT in 55.2%; in those who were RT-PCR-negative, the percentages were 42.3% and 26.9%, respectively. The kappa coefficient observed between the two RDTs was 0.644, and was higher in patients without a fever or anosmia (0.725) and lower in those with a fever or anosmia (0.524). CONCLUSIONS: There is good agreement between the tests used in this study. Given the sensitivity observed, they can be very useful as a complement to RT-PCR
OBJETIVO: Evaluar la concordancia entre dos pruebas de detección rápida (PDR) de anticuerpos en la infección por SARS-CoV-2. MATERIALES Y MÉTODOS: Estudio transversal. Se utilizó una muestra aleatoria de pacientes no hospitalizados de la Gerencia de Atención Primaria del Área de Salud de León (58 con RT-PCR positiva y 52 con RT-PCR negativa). Se recogió información sobre síntomas y a todos se les realizó simultáneamente dos PDR (combinada: PRD-C y diferenciada: PRD-D). Los resultados de ambas pruebas fueron evaluados mediante X2 y el grado de concordancia con el índice Kappa. RESULTADOS: Un 52% de los participantes fueron mujeres (edad media: 48,2 ± 11,0 años). El 58,2% fue positivo a la PDR-D y 41,2% a la PDR-C. En los sujetos RT-PCR + la PDR-D fue positiva en el 72,4% y la PDR-C en el 55,2%; en el caso de los RT-PCR - en el 42,3% y 26,9%, respectivamente. El índice Kappa observado entre las dos PDR fue del 0,644, siendo mayor en pacientes sin fiebre ni anosmia (0,725) y menor en aquellos con fiebre o anosmia (0,524). CONCLUSIONES: Existe una buena concordancia entre los test utilizados en este estudio. Dada la sensibilidad obtenida, pueden ser de gran utilidad como complemento a las RT-PCR
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adult , Middle Aged , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome/diagnosis , Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus/isolation & purification , Antibodies, Viral/isolation & purification , Sensitivity and Specificity , Point-of-Care Testing/statistics & numerical data , Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction/statistics & numerical data , Cross-Sectional StudiesABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To assess the agreement between two rapid detection tests (RDT) for antibodies against SARS-CoV-2 infection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study that used a random sample of non-hospitalized patients from the primary care management division of the Healthcare Area of Leon (58 RT-PCR-positive cases and 52 RT-PCR-negative cases). Information regarding symptoms was collected and all patients were simultaneously tested using two RDTs (Combined - cRDT and Differentiated - dRDT). The results of both tests were evaluated using the chi-square test and, for degree of agreement, the kappa coefficient. RESULTS: About 52% of the participants were women (mean age: 48.2±11.0 years). A total of 58.2% were positive for d-RDT and 41.2% were positive for c-RDT. In the subjects who were RT-PCR-positive, d-RDT was positive in 72.4% and c-RDT in 55.2%; in those who were RT-PCR-negative, the percentages were 42.3% and 26.9%, respectively. The kappa coefficient observed between the two RDTs was 0.644, and was higher in patients without a fever or anosmia (0.725) and lower in those with a fever or anosmia (0.524). CONCLUSIONS: There is good agreement between the tests used in this study. Given the sensitivity observed, they can be very useful as a complement to RT-PCR.
