Search

Background: We aimed to determine the timeliness of rabies post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) and the proportion of individuals with an adequate antibody response post-PEP among those attending the Belgian national reference center., Methods: Retrospective analysis of patient records who attended our center from 2018 to 2023. Delay was defined as rabies immunoglobulin (RIG) and vaccine initiation beyond 2 calendar days after exposure. Antibodies were measured by rapid fluorescent focus inhibition test (RFFIT) after PEP in high-risk exposures. A titer ≥0.5 IU/ml was considered adequate., Results: We reviewed 317 patient records. Among individuals with inland exposure (n = 103), 85 % timely received PEP. Among travelers exposed abroad (n = 214), administration of RIG and vaccine initiation were timely in 30 % and 50 % of cases, respectively. An adequate antibody response was detected in 99.5 % (195/196) individuals., Conclusion: Substantial PEP delays among travelers were observed. The robust antibody responses suggest that routine serological follow-up is not necessary for all patients., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Bacterial sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are highly prevalent among men who have sex with men who use HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), which leads to antimicrobial consumption linked to the emergence of antimicrobial resistance. We aimed to assess use of an antiseptic mouthwash as an antibiotic sparing approach to prevent STIs., Methods: We invited people using PrEP who had an STI in the past 24 months to participate in this single-centre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, AB/BA crossover superiority trial at the Institute of Tropical Medicine in Antwerp, Belgium. Using block randomisation (block size eight), participants were assigned (1:1) to first receive Listerine Cool Mint or a placebo mouthwash. They were required to use the study mouthwashes daily and before and after sex for 3 months each and to ask their sexual partners to use the mouthwash before and after sex. Participants were screened every 3 months for syphilis, chlamydia, and gonorrhoea at the oropharynx, anorectum, and urethra. The primary outcome was combined incidence of these STIs during each 3-month period, assessed in the intention-to-treat population, which included all participants who completed at least the first 3-month period. Safety was assessed as a secondary outcome. This trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03881007., Findings: Between April 2, 2019, and March 13, 2020, 343 participants were enrolled: 172 in the Listerine followed by placebo (Listerine-placebo) group and 171 in the placebo followed by Listerine (placebo-Listerine) group. The trial was terminated prematurely because of the COVID-19 pandemic. 151 participants completed the entire study, and 89 completed only the first 3-month period. 31 participants withdrew consent, ten were lost to follow-up, and one acquired HIV. In the Listerine-placebo group, the STI incidence rate was 140·4 per 100 person-years during the Listerine period, and 102·6 per 100 person-years during the placebo period. In the placebo-Listerine arm, the STI incidence rate was 133·9 per 100 person-years during the placebo period, and 147·5 per 100 person-years during the Listerine period. We did not find that Listerine significantly reduced STI incidence (IRR 1·17, 95% CI 0·84-1·64). Numbers of adverse events were not significantly higher than at baseline and were similar while using Listerine and placebo. Four serious adverse events (one HIV-infection, one severe depression, one Ludwig's angina, and one testicular carcinoma) were not considered to be related to use of mouthwash., Interpretation: Our findings do not support the use of Listerine Cool Mint as a way to prevent STI acquisition among high-risk populations., Funding: Belgian Research Foundation - Flanders (FWO 121·00)., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Two animal groups were subjected to electroretinographic studies under identical circumstances with the exception of the coating agent on the surface of the corneal electrode, which consisted in one group of an ophthalmic artificial tear solution containing 1.6% hydroxyethylcellulose, and in the other group, an ophthalmic artificial tear solution containing 0.2% hydroxyethylcellose. A similar comparative recording was performed on five human subjects. Electrophysiological responses recorded with 0.2% ophthalmic artificial tear solution increased up to 81%, as compared to the values obtained with the 1.6% solution. The difference in electrical conductivity of these two solutions, which is also time dependent, correlated with differences in electroretinographic amplitudes. I cannot explain these observations at the present time.