The Optimal Primary Treatment for Pediatric Perianal Abscess and Anal Fistula: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis

BackgroundPerianal abscesses and anal fistulas are common. The principle of intention-to-treat has not been considered in previous systemic reviews. Thus, the comparison between primary and post-recurrence management was confused, and the recommendation of primary treatment is obscure. The current study aims to identify the optimal initial treatment for pediatric patients.MethodsUsing PRISMA guidelines, studies were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar without any language or study design restriction. The inclusion criteria include original articles or articles with original data, studies of management for a perianal abscess with or without anal fistula, and patient age of <18 years. Patients with local malignancy, Crohn's disease, or other underlying predisposing conditions were excluded. Studies without analyzing recurrence, case series of <5, and irrelevant articles were excluded in the screening stage. Of the 124 screened articles, 14 articles had no full texts or detailed information. Articles written in a language other than English or Mandarin were translated by Google Translation first and confirmed with native speakers. After the eligibility process, studies that compared identified primary managements were then included in the qualitative synthesis.ResultsThirty-one studies involving 2507 pediatric patients met the inclusion criteria. The study design consisted of two prospective case series of 47 patients and retrospective cohort studies. No randomized control trials were identified. Meta-analyses for recurrence after initial management were performed with a random-effects model. Conservative treatment and drainage revealed no difference (Odds ratio [OR], 1.222; 95% Confidential interval [CI]: 0.615–2.427, p = 0.567). Conservative management had a higher risk of recurrence than surgery without statistical significance (OR 0.278, 95% CI: 0.109–0.707, p = 0.007). Compared with incision/drainage, surgery can prevent recurrence remarkably (OR 4.360, 95% CI: 1.761–10.792, p = 0.001). Subgroup analysis of different approaches within conservative treatment and operation was not performed for lacking information.ConclusionStrong recommendations cannot be made due to the lack of prospective or randomized controlled studies. However, the current study based on real primary management supports initial surgical intervention for pediatric patients with perianal abscesses and anal fistula to prevent recurrence.Level of evidenceType of study: Systemic review; Evidence level: Level II.     

Robust antibody response after a third BNT162b2 vaccine compared to the second among immunocompromised and healthy individuals,a prospective longitudinal cohort study

PurposeAs protection from COVID-19 following two doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine showed a time dependent waning, a third (booster) dose was administrated. This study aims to compare the antibody response following the third dose versus the second and to evaluate post-booster seroconversion.MethodsA prospective observational study conducted in Maccabi Healthcare Services. Serial SARS-CoV-2 Spike IgG tests, 1,2,3 and 6 months following the second vaccine dose and one month following the third were obtained. Neutralizing antibody levels were measured in a subset of participants. Per individual SARS-CoV-2 Spike IgG titer ratios were calculated one month after the booster administration compared to titers one month following the second dose and prior to booster.ResultsAmong 110 participants, 56 (51%) were women. Mean age was 61.7 ± 1.9 years and 66 (60%) were immunocompromised. One month after third dose, IgG titers were induced 7.83 (95 %CI 5.25–11.67) folds and 2.40 (95 %CI 1.90–3.03) folds compared to one month after the second, in the immunocompromised and immunocompetent groups, respectively. Of the 17 immunocompromised participants who were seronegative after the second dose, 4 (24%) became seropositive following the third. Comparing the titers prior to the third dose, an increase of 50.7 (95 %CI 32.5–79.1) fold in the immunocompromised group and 25.7 (95 %CI 19.1–34.7) fold in and immunocompetent group, was observed.ConclusionA third BNT162b2 vaccine elicited robust humoral response, superior to the response observed following the second, among immunocompetent and immunocompromised individuals.     

European consensus on patient contact shielding

Patient contact shielding has been in use for many years in radiology departments in order to reduce the effects and risks of ionising radiation on certain organs. New technologies in projection imaging and CT scanning such as digital receptors and automatic exposure control (AEC) systems have reduced doses and improved image consistency. These changes and a greater understanding of both the benefits and the risks from the use of shielding have led to a review of shielding use in radiology. A number of professional bodies have already issued guidance in this regard. This paper represents the current consensus view of the main bodies involved in radiation safety and imaging in Europe: European Federation of Organisations for Medical Physics, European Federation of Radiographer Societies, European Society of Radiology, European Society of Paediatric Radiology, EuroSafe Imaging, European Radiation Dosimetry Group (EURADOS), and European Academy of DentoMaxilloFacial Radiology (EADMFR). It is based on the expert recommendations of the Gonad and Patient Shielding (GAPS) Group formed with the purpose of developing consensus in this area. The recommendations are intended to be clear and easy to use. They are intended as guidance, and they are developed using a multidisciplinary team approach. It is recognised that regulations, custom and practice vary widely on the use of patient shielding in Europe and it is hoped that these recommendations will inform a change management program that will benefit patients and staff.     

免疫抑制儿童感染新型冠状病毒Omicron变异株病毒清除时间的回顾性队列研究

背景：儿童新型冠状（新冠）病毒Omicron变异株流行期间，免疫抑制状态儿童新冠病毒清除时间定量分析研究较少。 目的：探讨新冠病毒Omicron株感染后免疫抑制和非免疫抑制儿童病毒清除的时间差别，为公共卫生政策制定和精准疫情防控措施提供临床数据。 设计：回顾性队列研究。 方法：以新冠病毒Omicron变异株感染住院患儿为队列人群，分为免疫抑制组和非免疫抑制组，免疫抑制分为绝对免疫抑制、相对免疫抑制和实施免疫抑制疗法，以免疫抑制组病例的性别、年龄和新冠病毒感染的分型与非免疫抑制组行1∶3匹配。以鼻咽拭子新冠病毒PCR检测拷贝数阈（Ct）值≥35为队列终点。 主要结局指标：新冠病毒清除时间。 结果：2022年4月12日至2022年5月12日在上海市新冠病毒感染定点收治医院符合本文共同纳入和排除标准的连续病例728例。免疫抑制组33例，其中绝对免疫抑制8例，相对免疫抑制23例，接受免疫抑制疗法2例（不包括绝对和相对免疫抑制患儿）。非免疫抑制组匹配后99例。2组临床症状、新冠病毒感染治疗和疫苗接种次数差异均无统计学意义。免疫抑制组和非免疫抑制组新冠病毒清除时间分别为（16.5±6.8）和（10.3±4.4）d，差异有统计学意义。免疫抑制组和非免疫抑制组新冠病毒感染轻型病例病毒清除时间分别为（14.0 ± 8.3）和（9.7 ± 3.1）d，普通型病例病毒清除时间分别为（18.3 ± 4.9）和（11.2 ± 5.9）d，差异均有统计学意义。2组单日病毒清除率在第9~14天时差异有统计学意义（P为0.005~0.039）。2组普通型病例单日病毒清除率在第10~15天时差异有统计学意义。免疫抑制组新冠病毒感染2周后核酸检测再次呈阳性3例（9%），临床分型均较前轻，3例均未接种新冠疫苗。 结论：Omicron株感染的免疫抑制患儿病毒清除时间较非免疫抑制患儿显著延长，主要反映在第9~14天，免疫抑制患儿病毒复阳风险高，提示需要更长的隔离时间和转阴后严格的病毒监测。     

儿童1型糖尿病骨密度变化及影响因素分析

目的 测定儿童1型糖尿病(T1DM)患者骨密度(BMD),分析探讨骨密度变化的影响因素。方法 选取于2018年1月—2021年6月于我院收治的儿童1型糖尿病患者76例,收集性别、年龄、发病年龄、身高、体重、BMI、病程等基本资料,检测空腹血糖、空腹C肽、糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)、血碳酸氢根(HCO3-)、血清碱性磷酸酶(ALP),应用双能X线吸收测定法测定骨密度,获取Z值。结果 76例儿童1型糖尿病患者骨密度Z值为-0.93±2.14。HbA1c、病程与骨密度Z值呈负相关,差异具有统计学意义(分别B=-0.334,P<0.001;B=-0.191,P=0.017)。结论 儿童1型糖尿病患者骨密度低于健康儿童,血糖控制不良、病程长是1型糖尿病儿童骨密度减低的危险因素。