Superior canal dehiscence syndrome: clinical manifestations and radiologic correlations.

The objective of this study is to describe the superior canal dehiscence syndrome (SCDS) and its vestibule-cochlear manifestations, while analyzing dehiscence size, audiogram and vestibular-evoked myogenic potential (VEMP) changes following dehiscence obliteration. We conducted a prospective study in a tertiary referral center. All Patients diagnosed and surgically treated for SCDS were operated through a middle fossa craniotomy (MFC). Clinical and radiological data were collected. The main outcome measures were Air-bone gaps, Pure-tone average (PTA), speech discrimination scores (SDS) and VEMP thresholds and were correlated to dehiscence size. 28 patients were included in this study with a mean dehiscence size of 4.68 mm. Phonophobia and imbalance were the most debilitating cochlear and vestibular symptoms, respectively. At 2 months postoperatively, low-frequency air-bone gaps showed a statistically significant improvement (p < 0.001). SDS and PTA did not show any statistically significant changes 2 months postoperatively (p = 0.282 and p = 0.295, respectively). VEMP threshold differences between operated and contralateral ears were statistically significant preoperatively (p < 0.001) and non-significant 2 months postoperatively (p = 0.173). Dehiscence size only showed a statistically significant correlation with preoperative total cochlear symptoms, while remaining insignificant with all other variables measured. Air-bone gaps, VEMP and computerized tomography remain essential tools in diagnosing and following SCDS. Dehiscence size is an independent factor in the analysis of SCDS, with cochlear symptomatology being associated to dehiscence sizes. Finally, it is shown that overall symptomatology, audiometric results and VEMP thresholds return to normal values post-obliteration, confirming the continuing success of the MFC approach for SCDS obliteration.

Short and long-term safety of the 2009 AS03-adjuvanted pandemic vaccine.

BACKGROUND: This study assessed the short and the long term safety of the 2009 AS03 adjuvanted monovalent pandemic vaccine through an active web-based electronic surveillance. We compared its safety profile to that of the seasonal trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV) for 2010-2011. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Health care workers (HCW) vaccinated in 2009 with the pandemic vaccine (Arepanrix ® from GSK) or HCW vaccinated in 2010 with the 2010-2011 TIV were invited to participate in a web-based active surveillance of vaccine safety. They completed two surveys the day-8 survey covered the first 7 days post-vaccination and the day-29 survey covered events occurring 8 to 28 days after vaccination. Those who reported a problem were called by a nurse to obtain details. The main outcome was the occurrence of a new health problem or the worsening of an existing health condition that resulted in a medical consultation or work absenteeism. For the pandemic vaccine, a six-month follow-up for the occurrence of serious adverse events (SAE) was conducted. Among the 6242 HCW who received the pandemic vaccine, 440 (7%) reported 468 events compared to 328 of the 7645 HCW (4.3%) who reported 339 events after the seasonal vaccine. The 2009 pandemic vaccine was associated with significantly more local reactions than the 2010-2011 seasonal vaccine (1% vs. 0.03%, p<0.001). Paresthesia was reported by 7 HCW (0.1%) after the pandemic vaccine but by none after the seasonal vaccine. For the pandemic vaccine, no clustering of SAE was found in the 6 month follow-up. CONCLUSION: The 2009 pandemic vaccine seems to have a good safety profile, similar to the 2010-2011 TIV, with the exception of local reactions. This surveillance was adequately powered to identify AE associated with an excess risk ≥1 per 1000 vaccinations but is insufficient to detect rare AE. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01289418, NCT01318876.

Higher risk of measles when the first dose of a 2-dose schedule of measles vaccine is given at 12-14 months versus 15 months of age.

BACKGROUND: In 2011, >750 cases of measles were reported in Quebec, Canada, where a routine 2-dose measles immunization schedule, in which measles vaccine is given at 12 and 18 months of age, had been in effect since 1996. Effectiveness of this schedule was assessed during a high school outbreak. METHODS: Cases were identified by passive followed by active surveillance. Classical cases met the national surveillance definition; attenuated cases showed clinical signs and high measles-specific immunoglobulin G but did not fulfill all classical criteria. Immunization status was ascertained from written records, and vaccine effectiveness (VE) was calculated as 1 - [(risk of measles in vaccinated individuals)/(risk in unvaccinated individuals)] × 100%. RESULTS: Among 1306 students, 110 measles cases were identified; 98 were classical cases, and 12 were attenuated cases. The attack rates among unvaccinated and fully vaccinated students were 82% and 4.8%, respectively. The VE among 2-dose recipients was 95.5% against classical and 94.2% against all (classical + attenuated) measles. Among 2-dose recipients, attack rates with first immunization at 12 and ≥15 months of age were 5.8% and 2.0%, respectively, with corresponding VE values of 93.0% and 97.5%. The risk of measles in 2-dose recipients was significantly (3-4-fold) higher when vaccine was first administered at 12 months of age, compared with ≥15 months of age (P = .04). CONCLUSIONS: Despite compliance with the recommended 2-dose measles immunization schedule, 6% of high school students were susceptible during this outbreak. Residual susceptibility was 2-4-fold higher among 2-dose recipients who had received the first dose of vaccine prior to 15 months of age. If confirmed in other settings, these results suggest that administration of the first dose of measles vaccine before 15 months of age may not be optimal for measles elimination efforts.

Safe vaccination of patients with egg allergy with an adjuvanted pandemic H1N1 vaccine.

BACKGROUND: Because influenza vaccine contains some residual egg protein, there is a theoretic risk of anaphylaxis when vaccinating patients with egg allergy. The objective of this study was to estimate the risk of anaphylaxis in children with egg allergy administered an adjuvanted monovalent 2009 pandemic influenza A/H1N1 influenza vaccine (Arepanrix; GlaxoSmithKline, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada). METHODS: Patients with confirmed egg allergy with a history of respiratory or cardiovascular reactions after egg ingestion were vaccinated in 2 divided doses (10% and 90%) administered at a 30-minute interval, whereas children with other types of egg-induced allergic reactions were vaccinated with a single dose. All patients remained under observation for 60 minutes after vaccination. A 24-hour follow-up telephone call was made to detect any delayed reaction. The main outcome was the occurrence of an anaphylactic reaction according to criteria specified by the Brighton Collaboration. RESULTS: Among the 830 patients with confirmed egg allergy, only 9% required the vaccine to be administered in divided doses. No patient had an anaphylactic reaction. Nine patients had minor allergic symptoms treated with an antihistamine (1 in the 60 minutes after vaccination and 8 in the following 23 hours), and 3 others received salbutamol (1 in the first 60 minutes after vaccination). Further vaccination of more than 3600 other children with reported egg allergy caused no anaphylaxis based on the criteria of the Brighton Collaboration, although 2 patients received epinephrine for symptoms compatible with allergy. CONCLUSION: Although anaphylaxis after influenza immunization is a theoretic risk, vaccination of patients with egg allergy with an adjuvanted monovalent pH1N1 influenza vaccine resulted in no cases of anaphylaxis and on that basis appears safe.