RESUMO
BackgroundA correlation between prior exposure to Mycoplasma pneumoniae (IgG positive) and better clinical response to COVID-19 was elusive. MethodsA retrospective review of all COVID-19 infected patients treated at Wuhan Union Hospital from Feb 1 to Mar 20 was carried out. Continuous variables were described as mean, median, and interquartile range (IQR), while categorical variables were compared by X2 test or Fishers exact test between COVID-19 infected patients with mycoplasma lgG (-) and mycoplasma lgG (+). ResultsStatistically significant differences were shown in terms of laboratory test results. COVID-19 infected patients with mycoplasma lgG positivity had a higher lymphocyte count and percentage (p=0.026, p=0.017), monocyte count and percentage (p=0.028, p=0.006) and eosinophil count and percentage (p=0.039, p=0.007), and a lower neutrophil count and percentage (p=0.044, p=0.006) than COVID-19 infected patients without mycoplasma lgG. Other routine blood tests, including coagulation tests, blood biochemistry and infection-related biomarkers did not significantly differ except for thrombin time (p=0.001) and lactate dehydrogenase (p=0.008). Furthermore, requirement and use of a nasal catheter or oxygen mask was significantly lower in COVID-19 infected patients with mycoplasma lgG positivity (p=0.029). ConclusionsOur findings indicate that mycoplasma IgG positivity is a potential protective factor for SARS-CoV-2 infection.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND@#Autologous fat grafting has gained popularity in breast augmentation. Various methods can be used to estimate the volume retention rate. This systematic review aimed to establish whether the type of method used for measuring breast volume is a factor that influences the reported volume retention rate.@*METHODS@#Studies were identified using the electronic databases PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science from inception of the database up to February 2019. Articles describing autologous fat grafting for breast augmentation were selected based on pre-determined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The characteristics of the included studies were summarized, and the reported volume retention rate from the studies was compared. A quality assessment of all included articles was performed using the methodological index for non-randomized studies criteria.@*RESULTS@#A total of 618 articles were identified, of which 12 studies, with a total of 1337 cases, were eligible. The retention rate of injected adipose tissue varied when the method of fat grafting and volume analysis used were both the same, as well as when the method of fat grafting was the same but the method of volumetric evaluation used was different.@*CONCLUSIONS@#Currently, the tools available for estimating the volume retention rate come with limitations. In order to objectively evaluate the percentage of graft retention, a standard protocol that applies to the different methods should be established in the future.
RESUMO
Background@#Autologous fat grafting has gained popularity in breast augmentation. Various methods can be used to estimate the volume retention rate. This systematic review aimed to establish whether the type of method used for measuring breast volume is a factor that influences the reported volume retention rate.@*Methods@#Studies were identified using the electronic databases PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science from inception of the database up to February 2019. Articles describing autologous fat grafting for breast augmentation were selected based on pre-determined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The characteristics of the included studies were summarized, and the reported volume retention rate from the studies was compared. A quality assessment of all included articles was performed using the methodological index for non-randomized studies criteria.@*Results@#A total of 618 articles were identified, of which 12 studies, with a total of 1337 cases, were eligible. The retention rate of injected adipose tissue varied when the method of fat grafting and volume analysis used were both the same, as well as when the method of fat grafting was the same but the method of volumetric evaluation used was different.@*Conclusions@#Currently, the tools available for estimating the volume retention rate come with limitations. In order to objectively evaluate the percentage of graft retention, a standard protocol that applies to the different methods should be established in the future.
