Efficacy of a spatial repellent for control of Aedes-borne virus transmission: A cluster-randomized trial in Iquitos,Peru

Over half the world’s population is at risk for viruses transmitted by Aedes mosquitoes, such as dengue and Zika. The primary vector, Aedes aegypti, thrives in urban environments. Despite decades of effort, cases and geographic range of Aedes-borne viruses (ABVs) continue to expand. Rigorously proven vector control interventions that measure protective efficacy against ABV diseases are limited to Wolbachia in a single trial in Indonesia and do not include any chemical intervention. Spatial repellents, a new option for efficient deployment, are designed to decrease human exposure to ABVs by releasing active ingredients into the air that disrupt mosquito–human contact. A parallel, cluster-randomized controlled trial was conducted in Iquitos, Peru, to quantify the impact of a transfluthrin-based spatial repellent on human ABV infection. From 2,907 households across 26 clusters (13 per arm), 1,578 participants were assessed for seroconversion (primary endpoint) by survival analysis. Incidence of acute disease was calculated among 16,683 participants (secondary endpoint). Adult mosquito collections were conducted to compare Ae. aegypti abundance, blood-fed rate, and parity status through mixed-effect difference-in-difference analyses. The spatial repellent significantly reduced ABV infection by 34.1% (one-sided 95% CI lower limit, 6.9%; one-sided P value = 0.0236, z = 1.98). Aedes aegypti abundance and blood-fed rates were significantly reduced by 28.6 (95% CI 24.1%, ∞); z = −9.11) and 12.4% (95% CI 4.2%, ∞); z = −2.43), respectively. Our trial provides conclusive statistical evidence from an appropriately powered, preplanned cluster-randomized controlled clinical trial of the impact of a chemical intervention, in this case a spatial repellent, to reduce the risk of ABV transmission compared to a placebo.

Aedes-borne viral diseases (ABVDs) [e.g., dengue (DENV), chikungunya, Zika (ZIKV), and yellow fever] are devastating, expanding global public health threats that disproportionally affect low- and middle-income countries. DENV, one of the most rapidly increasing vector-borne infectious diseases, results in ∼400 million infections each year (1, 2), with 4 billion people at risk for infection annually (3). Currently, the primary means for ABVD prevention is controlling the primary mosquito vector, Aedes aegypti. Existing vector control interventions, however, have failed to prevent ABV transmission and epidemics (4–6).There is an urgent need to develop evidence-based guidance for the use of new and existing ABV vector control tools. The evidence base for vector control against ABVs is weak, despite considerable government investments in World Health Organization (WHO)-recommended control of larval habitats (larviciding, container removal) and ultra-low-volume insecticide spraying (4, 5, 7–9). These strategies continue to be implemented despite the lack of rigorously generated data from controlled clinical trials demonstrating they reduce ABV infection or disease (6). The only ABV intervention with a proven epidemiological impact in a cluster-randomized control trial (cRCT) assessed community mobilization to reduce mosquito larval habitats (10). A recent test-negative trial with Wolbachia-infected mosquitoes reported a significant reduction of DENV illness in Indonesia (11).Spatial repellents (SRs) are devices that contain volatile active ingredients that disperse in air. The active ingredients can repel mosquitoes from entering a treated space, inhibit attraction to human host cues, or disrupt mosquito biting and blood-feeding behavior and, thus, interfere with mosquito–human contact (12–14). Any of these outcomes reduce the probability of pathogen transmission. Pyrethroid-based SRs have shown efficacy in reducing malaria infections in China (15) and Indonesia (16). There have, however, been no clinical trials evaluating the protective efficacy (PE) of SRs against ABV infection or disease.To generate evidence for public health consideration, we conducted a double-blinded, parallel cRCT to demonstrate and quantify the PE of a transfluthrin-based SR to reduce ABV infection incidence over 2 y in a human cohort in Iquitos, Peru.     

Embolization of a septal branch perforation using subcutaneous fat during a percutaneous coronary intervention of chronic total occlusion by retrograde approach

We describe a case of septal branch perforation during percutaneous coronary intervention of a right coronary artery chronic total occlusion. The septal branch perforation was treated with administration of autologous fat into the septal branch with significant reduction of extravasation. This treatment was followed by prolonged balloon inflation at the exit point of the septal branch in the donor artery which definitively sealed the perforation.     

Umbilical Negative Pressure Dressing for Transumbilical Appendectomy in Childern

Methods:This study was a retrospective chart review of 1377 patients (2–20 years) undergoing laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis in 2 tertiary care referral centers from January 2007 through December 2012. Twenty-two different operative technique/dressing variations were documented. The 6 technique/dressing groups with >50 patients were assessed, including a total of 1283 patients.Results:The surgical site infection rate of the 220 patients treated with TULAA and application of an umbilical vacuum dressing with dry gauze is 1.8% (95% CI, 0.0–10.3%). This compares to an infection rate of 4.1% (95% CI, 1.3–10.5%) in 97 patients with dry dressing without vacuum. In the 395 patients who received an umbilical vacuum dressing with gauze and bacitracin, the surgical site infection rate was found to be 4.3% (95% CI, 2.7–6.8%).Conclusions:Application of an umbilical negative-pressure dressing with dry gauze lowers the rate of umbilical site infections in patients undergoing transumbilical laparoscopic-assisted appendectomy for acute appendicitis.     

Are drug-eluting stents superior to bare metal stents when compared to coronary artery bypass surgery? Show me the data

Recent randomized trials comparing coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) versus drug eluting stents (DES) observed better survival, survival free of myocardial infarction (MI) and free from death, MI and stroke in patients with 3-vessel disease and diabetics if they were treated with DES. In the past, when we used bare metal stent (BMS) and meta-analysis of randomized trials with BMS and CABG, patients with 3-vessel disease and those with diabetes at 5 years of follow up had similar incidence of death, MI and stroke with CABG and BMS. The results reported recently by the SYNTAX and FREEDOM trials suggested a lack of clinical benefit with DES compared to BMS. The author in the article compared these recent results with the above meta-analysis and made an indirect comparison among DES, BMS and CABG. Reasons for these intriguing findings were discussed, and also a search for potential solutions was conducted.