Search

To assess whether probiotic supplementation may reduce disease-linked systemic immune activation in people living with HIV with the immunologic nonresponder phenotype.Phase 2b, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot trial.HIV-positive individuals with blood CD4+ T-cell counts350/mm3 despite viral suppression were randomized to 2:1 to receive De Simone Formulation Probiotic (DSFP; "Visbiome" commercially) or placebo for 48 weeks; target enrollment was 36 patients. The primary endpoint was the change in blood CD8+ T-cell coexpression of human leukocyte antigen-DR isotype and CD38 ("CD8 activation"). Secondary endpoints included biomarkers of inflammation, immune reconstitution, bacterial translocation, and gut permeability. Adjusted linear regression and linear mixed regression methods evaluated the differences between study arms from baseline to week 48. Study monitoring was performed by the CIHR Canadian HIV Trials Network Data Safety Monitoring Committee.Nineteen patients received DSFP, whereas 10 received placebo. One probiotic arm patient withdrew early. Blood CD8 activation increased 0.82 percentage points (pp) in the probiotic arm (95% confidence interval: -1.23 to 2.87;) and decreased by 2.06 pp in the placebo arm (-4.81 to 0.70; between arms P = 0.097). CD4+ T-cell activation (%HLA-DR+) decreased in the placebo arm [-3.79 pp (-7.32 to -0.26)] but increased in the probiotic arm [1.64 (-0.98 to 4.26); between arms P = 0.018]. No differences were observed in plasma or urine biomarkers of inflammation or microbial translocation.Blood immune activation markers in immunologic nonresponder individuals on effective antiretroviral treatment were not reduced by supplementation with DSFP; CD4+ T-cell activation may have been increased.

Proverbs 25.27, particularly the second verset (27b) as found in the Masoretic Text, has created problems for interpreters. This paper identifies those problems and then lists, summarizes, and evaluates the major options that interpreters have offered as well as offering a couple of new options based on recognizing a double entendre.

Background: Induction of labour is one of the most common obstetric interventions globally. Balloon catheters and vaginal prostaglandins are widely used to ripen the cervix in labour induction. We aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety profiles of these two induction methods. Methods: We did an individual participant data meta-analysis comparing balloon catheters and vaginal prostaglandins for cervical ripening before labour induction. We systematically identified published and unpublished randomised controlled trials that completed data collection between March 19, 2019, and May 1, 2021, by searching the Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and PubMed. Further trials done before March 19, 2019, were identified through a recent Cochrane review. Data relating to the combined use of the two methods were not included, only data from women with a viable, singleton pregnancy were analysed, and no exclusion was made based on parity or membrane status. We contacted authors of individuals trials and participant-level data were harmonised and recoded according to predefined definitions of variables. Risk of bias was assessed with the ROB2 tool. The primary outcomes were caesarean delivery, indication for caesarean delivery, a composite adverse perinatal outcome, and a composite adverse maternal outcome. We followed the intention-to-treat principle for the main analysis. The primary meta-analysis used two-stage random-effects models and the sensitivity analysis used one-stage mixed models. All models were adjusted for maternal age and parity. This meta-analysis is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020179924). Findings: Individual participant data were available from 12 studies with a total of 5460 participants. Balloon catheters, compared with vaginal prostaglandins, did not lead to a significantly different rate of caesarean delivery (12 trials, 5414 women; crude incidence 27·0%; adjusted OR [aOR] 1·09, 95% CI 0·95–1·24; I2=0%), caesarean delivery for failure to progress (11 trials, 4601 women; aOR 1·20, 95% CI 0·91–1·58; I2=39%), or caesarean delivery for fetal distress (10 trials, 4441 women; aOR 0·86, 95% CI 0·71–1·04; I2=0%). The composite adverse perinatal outcome was lower in women who were allocated to balloon catheters than in those allocated to vaginal prostaglandins (ten trials, 4452 neonates, crude incidence 13·6%; aOR 0·80, 95% CI 0·70–0·92; I2=0%). There was no significant difference in the composite adverse maternal outcome (ten trials, 4326 women, crude incidence 22·7%; aOR 1·02, 95% CI 0·89–1·18; I2=0%). Interpretation: In induction of labour, balloon catheters and vaginal prostaglandins have comparable caesarean delivery rates and maternal safety profiles, but balloon catheters lead to fewer adverse perinatal events. Funding: Australian National Health and Medical Research Council and Monash Health Emerging Researcher Fellowship.

The platform wound device (PWD) is a wound coverage system that is designed to decrease wound infection rates by allowing for direct delivery of topical antibiotics and antimicrobials while creating a sealed, protective barrier around the area of injury. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of the PWD as a protective dressing and a delivery system for topical antibiotics compared to the current standard of care (SoC). This was a multi-center, prospective, randomised, controlled clinical trial. The wounds were treated with the PWD with gentamicin cream or SoC dressings. The wounds were evaluated before the start of treatment and after 48-96 hours via clinical assessment, photographs, and qualitative bacterial swabs for bacterial analysis. The delivery of gentamicin via the PWD was safe and did not cause any adverse effects. The treatment decreased both inflammation and bacterial growth during the study period. No significant differences in the SoC were observed. The PWD is a transparent and impermeable polyurethane chamber that encloses and protects the injured area. The delivery of topical gentamicin via the PWD was safe and effective. Clinical assessment for infection found the PWD to be non-inferior to the current SoC treatment options.

Optimal treatment of full‐thickness skin injuries requires dermal and epidermal replacement. To spare donor dermis, dermal substitutes can be used ahead of split‐thickness skin graft (STSG) application. However, this two‐stage procedure requires an additional general anaesthetic, often prolongs hospitalisation, and increases outpatient services. Although a few case series have described successful single‐stage reconstructions, with application of both STSG and dermal substitute at the index operation, we have little understanding of how the physical characteristics of dermal substitutes affects the success of a single‐stage procedure. Here, we evaluated several dermal substitutes to optimise single‐stage skin replacement in a preclinical porcine model. A porcine full‐thickness excisional wound model was used to evaluate the following dermal substitutes: autologous dermal graft (ADG; thicknesses 0.15‐0.60 mm), Integra (0.4‐0.8 mm), Alloderm (0.9‐1.6 mm), and chitosan‐based hydrogel (0.1‐0.2 mm). After excision, each wound was treated with either a dermal substitute followed by STSG or STSG alone (control). Endpoints included graft take at postoperative days (PODs) 7 and 14, wound closure at POD 28, and wound contracture from POD 28‐120. Graft take was highest in the STSG alone and hydrogel groups at POD 14 (86.9% ± 19.5% and 81.3% ± 12.3%, respectively; P

Background: The ability to diagnose preeclampsia clinically is suboptimal. Our objective was to validate a novel multianalyte assay and characterize its performance, when intended for use as an aid to rule-out preeclampsia. Methods: Prospective, multicenter cohort study of pregnant individuals presenting between 28 0/7 and 36 6/7 weeks’ with preeclampsia-associated signs and symptoms. Individuals not diagnosed with preeclampsia after baseline evaluation were enrolled in the study cohort, with those who later developed preeclampsia, classified as cases and compared with a negative control group who did not develop preeclampsia. Individuals with assay values at time of enrollment ≥0.0325, determined using a previously developed algorithm, considered at risk. The primary analysis was the time to develop preeclampsia assessed using a multivariate Cox regression model. Results: One thousand thirty-six pregnant individuals were enrolled in the study cohort with an incidence of preeclampsia of 30.3% (27.6%–33.2%). The time to develop preeclampsia was shorter for those with an at-risk compared with negative assay result (log-rank P P Conclusions: We confirmed that a novel multianalyte assay was associated with the time to develop preeclampsia and has a moderate sensitivity and negative likelihood ratio but high negative predictive value when assessed as an aid to rule out preeclampsia within 7 days of enrollment. Registration: The study was registered on Clinicaltrials.gov (Identifier NCT02780414).

Eleven Korean supervisors were interviewed about their unsatisfactory supervisory experiences (USEs) and the interview data were analyzed using a grounded theory approach. These results were presented within a broader framework that considered the cultural context in which the supervision was occurring and its effects on relationship dynamics, as well as the supervisory context in which those supervisors were working. Supervisors reported a range of USEs, including supervisee’s failure to learn and supervisees’ negative reactions to the supervisors as well as coping strategies they employed in response (e.g., suppressing negative emotions and continuing supervision). Most USEs were unresolved and the supervisors came to provide rigorous structuring as well as screening potential supervisees who might bring USEs. The results are discussed in the context and current status of clinical supervision in Korea and implications of these findings for supervision, training and research in the world.