Search

Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of MF59-adjuvanted pandemic influenza A/H1N1 vaccine in children., Methods: A systematic review of the literature was performed after searching the MedLine and Embase electronic databases, and manual search in specialties journals, with MeSH terms and and free terms. Inclusion criteria were clinical trials with children vaccinated with MF59-adjuvanted influenza A/H1N1 vaccine, compared with other vaccines doses with/without MF59-adjuvanted. The immunogenicity and safety of the vaccine was recorded. The quality of the studies included was assessed by CASPe checklist., Results: Four clinical trials with moderate quality were selected. The local and systemic adverse effects were rare and mild, with no differences between groups. Seroconversion and seroprotection levels were higher with MF59-adjuvanted vaccines. Antibody titres were also higher with the adjuvant vaccines., Conclusions: The adjuvant vaccine has a good efficacy and safety profile. The adverse effects that may occur are common and appear similarly in both vaccination groups., (Copyright © 2012 Asociación Española de Pediatría. Published by Elsevier Espana. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Streptococcal pharyngitis is one of the most frequent reasons for consultations in primary and paediatric care. An inadequate treatment could cause adverse effects and bacterial resistance. The rapid antigen tests are an important advance, enabling the diagnosis of infection by Streptococcus pyogenes to be diagnosed in a few minutes. The aim of this review is to assess the rapid antigen-detection test in the diagnosis of S. pyogenes from throat samples., Material and Methods: Systematic review and meta-analysis (2000-09). Source database: MedLine, Embase, Cochrane Library, Cinahl, CRD, ECRI, Hayes and HTA's agencies. The quality of included studies was measured according to Quadas's criteria. The diagnostic validity indices have been calculated. A meta-analysis was performed in order to synthesize the results of the different evaluated studies., Results: Twenty four studies were included. The quality was moderate. The sensitivity ranged between 65.6% and 96.4%; specificity from 68.7%-99.3%; the positive predictive value was between 59.4%-97.4%; and the negative predictive value from 87.8%-98%. The meta-analysis determined an overall sensitivity of 0.85 [95% CI, 0.84-0.87], specificity was 0.96 [95% CI, 0.96-0.97], likelihood ratio (+) 22.21 [95% CI, 15.12-32.63], and likelihood ratio (-) 0.15 [95% CI, 0.13-0.18]. The rapid antigen-detection test demonstrated a good diagnostic performance., Conclusions: Rapid tests offer good accuracy for use as diagnostic method, however, these devices have to be complemented with the microbiological culture, because there are false positive and negative results., (Copyright 2009 Asociación Española de Pediatría. Published by Elsevier Espana. All rights reserved.)