ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Mass COVID-19 immunization campaigns altered the pandemic's progress by protecting the vaccine recipient and reducing transmission. However, evidence for indirect vaccine effectiveness (IVE) is limited due to the difficulties of ascertaining this type of protection. METHODS: Using linked national Brazilian databases, we adapted the test-negative design to evaluate the IVE against symptomatic infection. We analyzed data from January 1 to December 1, 2021 (pre-omicron) and January 1 to April 30, 2022 (omicron BA.1 and BA.2). We compared the probability of testing positive across various levels of second ancestral-strain monovalent COVID-19 vaccine dose coverage, including only unvaccinated individuals in the main analysis and both vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals in additional analyses. Sensitivity analysis focused on children younger than 12 years who did not have access to COVID-19 vaccines during the pre-omicron period. RESULTS: We included 11,039,315 unvaccinated individuals tested during the pre-omicron study period. IVE was minimal until 30% vaccination coverage (<10%), then it followed a dose-dependent pattern, peaking at 37.7 (95% confidence interval 32-42.8) at 70% coverage. For children younger than 12 years, IVE peaked at 59.8% (95% confidence interval 52.7-65.9) at 70% coverage. During the omicron period, IVE remained constant at about 5% across all comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings confirm that high vaccination coverage using vaccines that prevent infection indirectly protects the community. However, IVE was substantially higher during the pre-omicron period.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccine Efficacy , Humans , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/epidemiology , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19 Vaccines/immunology , COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , Female , Adult , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Male , Child , Middle Aged , Case-Control Studies , Adolescent , Young Adult , Child, Preschool , Infant , Vaccination Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Mass Vaccination/methods , VaccinationABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is a technically complex operation, with a relatively high risk for complications. The ability to rescue patients from post-PD complications is as a recognized quality measure. Tailored protocols were instituted at our low volume facility in the year 2013. AIM: To document the rate of rescue from post-PD complications with tailored protocols in place as a measure of quality. METHODS: A retrospective audit was performed to collect data from patients who experienced major post-PD complications at a low volume pancreatic surgery unit in Trinidad and Tobago between January 1, 2013 and June 30, 2023. Standardized definitions from the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery were used to define post-PD complications, and the modified Clavien-Dindo classification was used to classify post-PD complications. RESULTS: Over the study period, 113 patients at a mean age of 57.5 years (standard deviation [SD] ± 9.23; range: 30-90; median: 56) underwent PDs at this facility. Major complications were recorded in 33 (29.2%) patients at a mean age of 53.8 years (SD: ± 7.9). Twenty-nine (87.9%) patients who experienced major morbidity were salvaged after aggressive treatment of their complication. Four (3.5%) died from bleeding pseudoaneurysm (1), septic shock secondary to a bile leak (1), anastomotic leak (1), and myocardial infarction (1). There was a significantly greater salvage rate in patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists scores ≤ 2 (93.3% vs 25%; P = 0.0024). CONCLUSION: This paper adds to the growing body of evidence that volume alone should not be used as a marker of quality for patients requiring PD. Despite low volumes at our facility, we demonstrated that 87.9% of patients were rescued from major complications. We attributed this to several factors including development of rescue protocols, the competence of the pancreatic surgery teams and continuous, and adaptive learning by the entire institution, culminating in the development of tailored peri-pancreatectomy protocols.
ABSTRACT
Background: Asthma is a complex disease and a severe global public health problem resulting from interactions between genetic background and environmental exposures. It has been suggested that gut microbiota may be related to asthma development; however, such relationships needs further investigation. Objective: This study aimed to characterize the gut microbiota as well as the nasal lavage cytokine profile of asthmatic and nonasthmatic individuals. Methods: Stool and nasal lavage samples were collected from 29 children and adolescents with type 2 asthma and 28 children without asthma in Brazil. Amplicon sequencing of the stool bacterial V4 region of the 16S rRNA gene was performed using Illumina MiSeq. Microbiota analysis was performed by QIIME 2 and PICRUSt2. Type 2 asthma phenotype was characterized by high sputum eosinophil counts and positive skin prick tests for house dust mite, cockroach, and/or cat or dog dander. The nasal immune marker profile was assessed using a customized multiplex panel. Results: Stool microbiota differed significantly between asthmatic and nonasthmatic participants (P = .001). Bacteroides was more abundant in participants with asthma (P < .05), while Prevotella was more abundant in nonasthmatic individuals (P < .05). In people with asthma, the relative abundance of Bacteroides correlated with IL-4 concentration in nasal lavage samples. Inference of microbiota functional capacity identified differential fatty acid biosynthesis in asthmatic compared to nonasthmatic subjects. Conclusion: The stool microbiota differed between asthmatic and nonasthmatic young people in Brazil. Asthma was associated with higher Bacteroides levels, which correlated with nasal IL-4 concentration.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccines have been shown to protect pregnant individuals against mild and severe COVID-19 outcomes. However, limited safety data are available for inactivated (CoronaVac) and mRNA (BNT162b2) vaccines during pregnancy regarding their effect on birth outcomes and neonatal mortality, especially in low- and middle-income countries. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective population-based cohort study in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, with 17â513 singleton live births conceived between 15 May 2021 and 23 October 2021. The primary exposure was maternal vaccination with CoronaVac or mRNA BNT162b2 vaccines and sub-analyses were performed by the gestational trimester of the first dose and the number of doses given during pregnancy. The outcomes were pre-term birth (PTB), small for gestational age (SGA), low birthweight (LBW), low Apgar 5 and neonatal death. We used the Cox model to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) with a 95% CI and applied the inverse probability of treatment weights to generate adjusted HRs. RESULTS: We found no significant increase in the risk of PTB (HR: 0.98; 95% CI 0.88, 1.10), SGA (HR: 1.09; 95% CI 0.96, 1.27), LBW (HR: 1.00; 95% CI 0.88, 1.14), low Apgar 5 (HR: 0.81; 95% CI 0.55, 1.22) or neonatal death (HR: 0.88; 95% CI 0.56, 1.48) in women vaccinated with CoronaVac or BNT162b2 vaccines. These findings were consistent across sub-analyses stratified by the gestational trimester of the first dose and the number of doses given during pregnancy. We found mild yet consistent protection against PTB in women who received different vaccine platforms during the third trimester of pregnancy (any vaccines, HR: 0.78; 95% CI 0.63, 0.98; BNT162b2, HR: 0.75; 95% CI 0.59, 0.99). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that COVID-19 vaccination in all trimesters of pregnancy, irrespective of the vaccine type, is safe and does not increase the risk of adverse birth outcomes or neonatal deaths.
Subject(s)
BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19 , Infant Mortality , Perinatal Death , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious , Premature Birth , Female , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Pregnancy , BNT162 Vaccine/adverse effects , Brazil/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/adverse effects , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/epidemiology , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/prevention & control , Premature Birth/epidemiology , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Brazil and Scotland have used mRNA boosters in their respective populations since September 2021, with Omicron's emergence accelerating their booster program. Despite this, both countries have reported substantial recent increases in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases. The duration of the protection conferred by the booster dose against symptomatic Omicron cases and severe outcomes is unclear. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Using a test-negative design, we analyzed national databases to estimate the vaccine effectiveness (VE) of a primary series (with ChAdOx1 or BNT162b2) plus an mRNA vaccine booster (with BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273) against symptomatic Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and severe COVID-19 outcomes (hospitalization or death) during the period of Omicron dominance in Brazil and Scotland compared to unvaccinated individuals. Additional analyses included stratification by age group (18 to 49, 50 to 64, ≥65). All individuals aged 18 years or older who reported acute respiratory illness symptoms and tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection between January 1, 2022, and April 23, 2022, in Brazil and Scotland were eligible for the study. At 14 to 29 days after the mRNA booster, the VE against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection of ChAdOx1 plus BNT162b2 booster was 51.6%, (95% confidence interval (CI): [51.0, 52.2], p < 0.001) in Brazil and 67.1% (95% CI [65.5, 68.5], p < 0.001) in Scotland. At ≥4 months, protection against symptomatic infection waned to 4.2% (95% CI [0.7, 7.6], p = 0.02) in Brazil and 37.4% (95% CI [33.8, 40.9], p < 0.001) in Scotland. VE against severe outcomes in Brazil was 93.5% (95% CI [93.0, 94.0], p < 0.001) at 14 to 29 days post-booster, decreasing to 82.3% (95% CI [79.7, 84.7], p < 0.001) and 98.3% (95% CI [87.3, 99.8], p < 0.001) to 77.8% (95% CI [51.4, 89.9], p < 0.001) in Scotland for the same periods. Similar results were obtained with the primary series of BNT162b2 plus homologous booster. Potential limitations of this study were that we assumed that all cases included in the analysis were due to the Omicron variant based on the period of dominance and the limited follow-up time since the booster dose. CONCLUSIONS: We observed that mRNA boosters after a primary vaccination course with either mRNA or viral-vector vaccines provided modest, short-lived protection against symptomatic infection with Omicron but substantial and more sustained protection against severe COVID-19 outcomes for at least 3 months.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , Brazil/epidemiology , BNT162 Vaccine , Case-Control Studies , Scotland/epidemiology , RNA, MessengerABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Most studies assessing pathophysiological heterogeneity in asthma have been conducted in high-income countries (HICs), with little known about the prevalence and characteristics of different asthma inflammatory phenotypes in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs). This study assessed sputum inflammatory phenotypes in five centres, in Brazil, Ecuador, Uganda, New Zealand (NZ) and the United Kingdom (UK). METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of 998 asthmatics and 356 non-asthmatics in 2016-20. All centres studied children and adolescents (age range 8-20 years), except the UK centre which involved 26-27 year-olds. Information was collected using questionnaires, clinical characterization, blood and induced sputum. RESULTS: Of 623 asthmatics with sputum results, 39% (243) were classified as eosinophilic or mixed granulocytic, i.e. eosinophilic asthma (EA). Adjusted for age and sex, with NZ as baseline, the UK showed similar odds of EA (odds ratio 1.04, 95% confidence interval 0.37-2.94) with lower odds in the LMICs: Brazil (0.73, 0.42-1.27), Ecuador (0.40, 0.24-0.66) and Uganda (0.62, 0.37-1.04). Despite the low prevalence of neutrophilic asthma in most centres, sputum neutrophilia was increased in asthmatics and non-asthmatics in Uganda. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first time that sputum induction has been used to compare asthma inflammatory phenotypes in HICs and LMICs. Most cases were non-eosinophilic, including in settings where corticosteroid use was low. A lower prevalence of EA was observed in the LMICs than in the HICs. This has major implications for asthma prevention and management, and suggests that novel prevention strategies and therapies specifically targeting non-eosinophilic asthma are required globally.
Subject(s)
Asthma , Humans , Cross-Sectional Studies , Asthma/epidemiology , Asthma/drug therapy , Phenotype , Brazil/epidemiology , New Zealand/epidemiologySubject(s)
BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19 Vaccines , Female , Pregnancy , Humans , Brazil , Antibodies, ViralABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Many authorities advocate for Whipple's procedures to be performed in high-volume centers, but many patients in poor developing nations cannot access these centers. We sought to determine whether clinical outcomes were acceptable when Whipple's procedures were performed in a low-volume, resource-poor setting in the West Indies. AIM: To study outcomes of Whipple's procedures in a pancreatic unit in the West Indies over an eight-year period from June 1, 2013 to June 30, 2021. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of all patients undergoing Whipple's procedures in a pancreatic unit in the West Indies over an eight-year period from June 1, 2013 to June 30, 2021. RESULTS: This center performed an average of 11.25 procedures per annum. There were 72 patients in the final study population at a mean age of 60.2 years, with 52.7% having American Society of Anesthesiologists scores ≥ III and 54.1% with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group scores ≥ 2. Open Whipple's procedures were performed in 70 patients and laparoscopic assisted procedures in 2. Portal vein resection/reconstruction was performed in 19 (26.4%) patients. In patients undergoing open procedures there was 367 ± 54.1 min mean operating time, 1394 ± 656.8 mL mean blood loss, 5.24 ± 7.22 d mean intensive care unit stay and 15.1 ± 9.53 d hospitalization. Six (8.3%) patients experienced minor morbidity, 10 (14%) major morbidity and there were 4 (5.5%) deaths. CONCLUSION: This paper adds to the growing body of evidence that volume alone should not be used as a marker of quality for patients requiring Whipple's procedures. Low volume centers in resource poor nations can achieve good short-term outcomes. This is largely due to the process of continuous, adaptive learning by the entire hospital.
ABSTRACT
Background: Typically, the celiac trunk and superior mesenteric artery branch off separately from the anterior aspect of the abdominal aorta. The celiacomesenteric trunk (CMT) is a rare variant in which those arteries share a common origin. We sought to compare the prevalence of CMT in the Caribbean with the global prevalence as calculated by a systematic review. Methods: In this study, we evaluated all consecutive patients who had multiphase contrast-enhanced CT scans at two major referral centres in the Caribbean from August 30, 2017, to September 1, 2019. In patients with a CMT, we recorded demographic and anatomic details. We then conducted a systematic literature search and retrieved raw data to calculate the global prevalence (number of individuals with a CMT divided by the sum total of study samples). We compared CMT prevalence in our sample with the global prevalence using Pearson's chi-square and Fisher's exact tests. Statistical significance was considered to be present when the P value was <0.05. Results: From 832 CTs, 665 scans met the inclusion criteria. There were 16 (2.41%) CMTs: 3 (0.45%) classic CMTs, 12 (1.8%) hepato-mesenteric trunks, and 1 (0.15%) hepato-spleno-mesenteric trunk. Forty-two studies reported on CMTs in a total of 74,320 persons. The global CMT prevalence was comparable (3.88%; P = 0.054), but the incidence of hepato-mesenteric variants was significantly lower in our sample (1.8% vs. 3.24%; P = 0.0352). Conclusion: There was no difference in the prevalence of a classic CMT in the Caribbean compared to the global prevalence. However, the hepato-mesenteric trunk (incomplete CMT variant) was significantly less prevalent in the Caribbean. Advances in Knowledge: Healthcare professionals performing hepatobiliary interventions must be aware of these differences in order to minimize morbidity during their interventions.
ABSTRACT
Conventional data suggest that complex operations, such as a pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), should be limited to high volume centers. However, this is not practical in small, resource-poor countries in the Caribbean. In these settings, patients have no option but to have their PDs performed locally at low volumes, occasionally by general surgeons. In this paper, we review the evolution of the concept of the high-volume center and discuss the feasibility of applying this concept to low and middle-income nations. Specifically, we discuss a modification of this concept that may be considered when incorporating PD into low-volume and resource-poor countries, such as those in the Caribbean. This paper has two parts. First, we performed a literature review evaluating studies published on outcomes after PD in high volume centers. The data in the Caribbean is then examined and we discuss the incorporation of this operation into resource-poor hospitals with modifications of the centralization concept. In the authors' opinions, most patients who require PD in the Caribbean do not have realistic opportunities to have surgery in high-volume centers in developed countries. In these settings, their only options are to have their operations in the resource-poor, low-volume settings in the Caribbean. However, post-operative outcomes may be improved, despite low-volumes, if a modified centralization concept is encouraged.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Little is known about vaccine effectiveness over time among adolescents, especially against the SARS-CoV-2 omicron (B.1.1.529) variant. This study assessed the associations between time since two-dose vaccination with BNT162b2 and the occurrence of symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe COVID-19 among adolescents in Brazil and Scotland. METHODS: We did test-negative, case-control studies in adolescents aged 12-17 years with COVID-19-related symptoms in Brazil and Scotland. We linked records of SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR and antigen tests to national vaccination and clinical records. We excluded tests from individuals who did not have symptoms, were vaccinated before the start of the national vaccination programme, received vaccines other than BNT162b2 or a SARS-CoV-2 booster dose of any kind, or had an interval between their first and second dose of fewer than 21 days. Additionally, we excluded negative SARS-CoV-2 tests recorded within 14 days of a previous negative test, negative tests recorded within 7 days after a positive test, any test done within 90 days after a positive test, and tests with missing sex and location information. Cases (SARS-CoV-2 test-positive adolescents) and controls (test-negative adolescents) were drawn from a sample of individuals in whom tests were collected within 10 days of symptom onset. We estimated the adjusted odds ratio and vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic COVID-19 for both countries and against severe COVID-19 (hospitalisation or death) for Brazil across fortnightly periods. FINDINGS: We analysed 503 776 tests from 2 948 538 adolescents in Brazil between Sept 2, 2021, and April 19, 2022, and 127 168 tests from 404 673 adolescents in Scotland between Aug 6, 2021, and April 19, 2022. Vaccine effectiveness peaked at 14-27 days after the second dose in both countries during both waves, and was significantly lower against symptomatic infection during the omicron-dominant period in Brazil (64·7% [95% CI 63·0-66·3]) and in Scotland (82·6% [80·6-84·5]), than it was in the delta-dominant period (80·7% [95% CI 77·8-83·3] in Brazil and 92·8% [85·7-96·4] in Scotland). Vaccine efficacy started to decline from 27 days after the second dose for both countries, reducing to 5·9% (95% CI 2·2-9·4) in Brazil and 50·6% (42·7-57·4) in Scotland at 98 days or more during the omicron-dominant period. In Brazil, protection against severe disease remained above 80% from 28 days after the second dose and was 82·7% (95% CI 68·8-90·4) at 98 days or more after receiving the second dose. INTERPRETATION: We found waning vaccine protection of BNT162b2 against symptomatic COVID-19 infection among adolescents in Brazil and Scotland from 27 days after the second dose. However, protection against severe COVID-19 outcomes remained high at 98 days or more after the second dose in the omicron-dominant period. Booster doses for adolescents need to be considered. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council), Scottish Government, Health Data Research UK BREATHE Hub, Fiocruz, Fazer o Bem Faz Bem programme, Brazilian National Research Council, and Wellcome Trust. TRANSLATION: For the Portuguese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Adolescent , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Brazil/epidemiology , Case-Control Studies , BNT162 Vaccine , Vaccine Efficacy , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
Although severe COVID-19 in children is rare, they may develop multisystem inflammatory syndrome, long-COVID and downstream effects of COVID-19, including social isolation and disruption of education. Data on the effectiveness of the CoronaVac vaccine is scarce during the Omicron period. In Brazil, children between 6 to 11 years are eligible to receive the CoronaVac vaccine. We conducted a test-negative design to estimate vaccine effectiveness using 197,958 tests from January 21, 2022, to April 15, 2022, during the Omicron dominant period in Brazil among children aged 6 to 11 years. The estimated vaccine effectiveness for symptomatic infection was 39.8% (95% CI 33.7-45.4) at ≥14 days post-second dose. For hospital admission vaccine effectiveness was 59.2% (95% CI 11.3-84.5) at ≥14 days. Two doses of CoronaVac in children during the Omicron period showed low levels of protection against symptomatic infection, and modest levels against severe illness.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Case-Control Studies , Child , Humans , Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome , Vaccine Efficacy , Post-Acute COVID-19 SyndromeABSTRACT
To date, no information has been published on the effectiveness of inactivated whole-virus COVID-19 vaccines plus heterologous booster against symptomatic infection and severe outcomes (hospitalization or death) during the dominance of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant period. We evaluated the vaccine effectiveness (VE) of CoronaVac plus BNT162b2 booster during the period of dominance of the Omicron variant in Brazil (January to April 2022). Using a test-negative design, we analysed data for 2,471,576 individuals tested during the Omicron variant's dominant period using a nationally linked database from Brazil. Compared to unvaccinated, vaccinees maintained protection against severe outcomes, with an estimated VE of 84.1% (95% CI:83.2-84.9) at more than 120 days after BNT162b2 booster. Furthermore, while we detected a high level of protection against severe outcomes for individuals up to 79 years old, waning was observed for individuals aged ≥80 years, with VE decreasing from 81.3% (95% CI:77.9-84.2) at 31-60 days to 72.9% (95% CI:70.6-75.1) at 120 days or more after the booster dose. However, no significant protection against symptomatic infection was observed at this time period. In conclusion, except for individuals aged ≥80 years, CoronaVac plus a BNT162b2 booster dose offered high and durable protection against severe outcomes due to Omicron.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , BNT162 Vaccine , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: COVID-19 vaccines have proven highly effective among individuals without a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, but their effectiveness in preventing symptomatic infection and severe outcomes among individuals with previous infection is less clear. We aimed to estimate the effectiveness of four COVID-19 vaccines against symptomatic infection, hospitalisation, and death for individuals with laboratory-confirmed previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: Using national COVID-19 notification, hospitalisation, and vaccination datasets from Brazil, we did a test-negative, case-control study to assess the effectiveness of four vaccines (CoronaVac [Sinovac], ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 [AstraZeneca], Ad26.COV2.S [Janssen], and BNT162b2 [Pfizer-BioNtech]) for individuals with laboratory-confirmed previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. We matched cases with RT-PCR positive, symptomatic COVID-19 with up to ten controls with negative RT-PCR tests who presented with symptomatic illnesses, restricting both groups to tests done at least 90 days after an initial infection. We used multivariable conditional logistic regression to compare the odds of test positivity and the odds of hospitalisation or death due to COVID-19, according to vaccination status and time since first or second dose of vaccines. FINDINGS: Between Feb 24, 2020, and Nov 11, 2021, we identified 213 457 individuals who had a subsequent, symptomatic illness with RT-PCR testing done at least 90 days after their initial SARS-CoV-2 infection and after the vaccination programme started. Among these, 30 910 (14·5%) had a positive RT-PCR test consistent with reinfection, and we matched 22 566 of these cases with 145 055 negative RT-PCR tests from 68 426 individuals as controls. Among individuals with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic infection 14 or more days from vaccine series completion was 39·4% (95% CI 36·1-42·6) for CoronaVac, 56·0% (51·4-60·2) for ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, 44·0% (31·5-54·2) for Ad26.COV2.S, and 64·8% (54·9-72·4) for BNT162b2. For the two-dose vaccine series (CoronaVac, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, and BNT162b2), effectiveness against symptomatic infection was significantly greater after the second dose than after the first dose. Effectiveness against hospitalisation or death 14 or more days from vaccine series completion was 81·3% (75·3-85·8) for CoronaVac, 89·9% (83·5-93·8) for ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, 57·7% (-2·6 to 82·5) for Ad26.COV2.S, and 89·7% (54·3-97·7) for BNT162b2. INTERPRETATION: All four vaccines conferred additional protection against symptomatic infections and severe outcomes among individuals with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. The provision of a full vaccine series to individuals after recovery from COVID-19 might reduce morbidity and mortality. FUNDING: Brazilian National Research Council, Fundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Oswaldo Cruz Foundation, JBS, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation, and Generalitat de Catalunya.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Ad26COVS1 , BNT162 Vaccine , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Case-Control Studies , ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 , Humans , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: More doses of CoronaVac have been administered worldwide than any other COVID-19 vaccine. However, the effectiveness of COVID-19 inactivated vaccines in pregnant women is still unknown. We estimated the vaccine effectiveness (VE) of CoronaVac against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 in pregnant women in Brazil. METHODS: We conducted a test-negative design study in all pregnant women aged 18-49 years with COVID-19-related symptoms in Brazil from March 15, 2021, to October 03, 2021, linking records of negative and positive SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests to national vaccination records. We also linked records of test-positive cases with notifications of severe, hospitalised or fatal COVID-19. Using logistic regression, we estimated the adjusted odds ratio and VE against symptomatic COVID-19 and against severe COVID-19 by comparing vaccine status in test-negative subjects to test-positive symptomatic cases and severe cases. RESULTS: Of the 19,838 tested pregnant women, 7424 (37.4%) tested positive for COVID-19 and 588 (7.9%) had severe disease. Only 83% of pregnant women who received the first dose of CoronaVac completed the vaccination scheme. A single dose of the CoronaVac vaccine was not effective at preventing symptomatic COVID-19. The effectiveness of two doses of CoronaVac was 41% (95% CI 27.1-52.2) against symptomatic COVID-19 and 85% (95% CI 59.5-94.8) against severe COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: A complete regimen of CoronaVac in pregnant women was effective in preventing symptomatic COVID-19 and highly effective against severe illness in a setting that combined high disease burden and marked COVID-19-related maternal deaths.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza Vaccines , Influenza, Human , Adolescent , Adult , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Case-Control Studies , Female , Humans , Influenza, Human/prevention & control , Middle Aged , Pregnancy , Pregnant Women , SARS-CoV-2 , Young AdultABSTRACT
There is considerable interest in the waning of effectiveness of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines and vaccine effectiveness (VE) of booster doses. Using linked national Brazilian databases, we undertook a test-negative design study involving almost 14 million people (~16 million tests) to estimate VE of CoronaVac over time and VE of BNT162b2 booster vaccination against RT-PCR-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and severe COVID-19 outcomes (hospitalization or death). Compared with unvaccinated individuals, CoronaVac VE at 14-30 d after the second dose was 55.0% (95% confidence interval (CI): 54.3-55.7) against confirmed infection and 82.1% (95% CI: 81.4-82.8) against severe outcomes. VE decreased to 34.7% (95% CI: 33.1-36.2) against infection and 72.5% (95% CI: 70.9-74.0) against severe outcomes over 180 d after the second dose. A BNT162b2 booster, 6 months after the second dose of CoronaVac, improved VE against infection to 92.7% (95% CI: 91.0-94.0) and VE against severe outcomes to 97.3% (95% CI: 96.1-98.1) 14-30 d after the booster. Compared with younger age groups, individuals 80 years of age or older had lower protection after the second dose but similar protection after the booster. Our findings support a BNT162b2 booster vaccine dose after two doses of CoronaVac, particularly for the elderly.
Subject(s)
BNT162 Vaccine , COVID-19 , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Brazil/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , SARS-CoV-2 , Vaccine EfficacyABSTRACT
Workplace bullying (WB) is associated with Common mental disorders (CMD) in high-income countries, but there is a lack of evidence relating to this subject in low- and middle-income countries. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the association between bullying and CMD in Brazil. A cross-sectional study with 907 judicial civil servants from Porto Alegre, southern Brazil, was carried out. WB was measured by the Negative Acts Questionnaire (NAQ-r) and CMD by the Self-Reporting Questionnaire (SRQ-20). Logistic regression was used to analyse data and test hypotheses. The overall prevalence of CMD was 32.8%, while the overall prevalence of bullying was 18.3%. WB was strongly associated with CMD, even after controlling for confounders. After adjustment for sociodemographic, personality and occupational confounders, weekly and daily exposures to negative acts increased 4.32 (95% CI: 2.00-9.33) and 6.80 (95% CI: 3.42-13.51) times the risk of CMD, respectively. Considering the operational definition, bullied workers had a 3.45 (95% CI: 2.26-5.25) higher risk of CMD. The results are consistent with studies from high-income countries. Different ways of categorising exposure to WB and testing association with CMD are suggested. Interventions to prevent bullying, focusing on work processes and psychosocial factors at work, could reduce the risk of mental health problems.
Subject(s)
Bullying , Mental Disorders , Occupational Stress , Bullying/psychology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Mental Disorders/epidemiology , Prevalence , Surveys and Questionnaires , Workplace/psychologyABSTRACT
Pancreatic surgery has been one of the last areas for the application of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) because there are many factors that make laparoscopic pancreas resections difficult. The concept of service centralization has also limited expertise to a small cadre of high-volume centres in resource rich countries. However, this is not the environment that many surgeons in developing countries work in. These patients often do not have the opportunity to travel to high volume centres for care. Therefore, we sought to review the existing data on MIS for the pancreas and to discuss. In this paper, we review the evolution of MIS on the pancreas and discuss the incorporation of this service into low-volume and resource-poor countries, such as those in the Caribbean. This paper has two parts. First, we performed a literature review evaluating all studies published on laparoscopic and robotic surgery of the pancreas. The data in the Caribbean is examined and we discuss tips for incorporating this operation into resource poor hospital practice. Low pancreatic case volume in the Caribbean, and financial barriers to MIS in general, laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy, enucleation and cystogastrostomy are feasible operations to integrate in to a resource-limited healthcare environment. This is because they can be performed with minimal to no consumables and require an intermediate MIS skillset to complement an open pancreatic surgeon's peri-operative experience.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: There are many known variations in the arterial supply to the liver. We sought to document the incidence and details of anomalies of the extrahepatic arteries in an unselected population in the West Indies. METHODS: This study spanned 24 months. All 205 CT scans were evaluated at a hepatobiliary referral center in Trinidad and Tobago. We described the anomalies of the arterial supply to the liver using the conventional classification proposed by Michels. RESULTS: 205 CT scans were evaluated, and 112 persons (54.6%) had conventional Type 1 anatomy. However, compared to the incidence in the existing medical literature, we encountered a greater incidence of replaced right hepatic arteries (18.1% vs 11%; P 0.04) and a lower incidence of accessory right hepatic arteries (2.4% vs 7%; P 0.030). CONCLUSION: Although 54.6% of persons in this West Indian population have conventional hepatic arterial supply, the distribution of anatomic variants of the right hepatic artery is quite different to that seen in North American and European centers. We found a higher incidence of replaced right hepatic arteries and a lower incidence of accessory right hepatic arteries.