-
Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) May 2021: The aim of this systematic review is to summarize the current data about the presence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and its entry... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
: The aim of this systematic review is to summarize the current data about the presence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and its entry factors in oral tissues and cells. : This systematic review was carried out based on the Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA). Three databases were analyzed (Pubmed, Web of science and Scopus) by three independent researchers. From the 18 identified studies, 10 of them met the inclusion criteria. The presence of SARS-CoV-2 or its entry factors (angiotensin-converting enzyme II (ACE2), transmembrane serine proteases (TMPRSS), and furin) was analyzed in these 10 studies during the pandemic. ACE2 expression was analyzed in 9 of the 10 studies. ACE2 is expressed mainly in the tongue, oral mucosa, salivary glands and epithelial cells. The expression of the TMPRSS2 gene or protein was analyzed in 6 studies. These studies reported that the expression of TMPRSS2 was mainly in the salivary glands, tongue, sulcular epithelium and oral mucosa; as well as in cells of the salivary glands (ductal, acinar and myoepithelial cells) and the tongue (the spinous-based cell layer, horny layer and the epithelial surface). Other TMPRSS were also reported. The expression of TMPRSS3, TMPRSS4, TMPRSS5, TMPRSS7 and TMPRSS11D was reported mainly in salivary glands and in epithelial-type cells. Furan expression was analyzed in three studies. The expression of furin was detected mainly in epithelial cells of the tongue. A variety of methods were used to carry out the detection of SARS-CoV-2 or its input molecules. : These results show that SARS-CoV-2 can infect a wide variety of oral tissues and cells, and that together with the theories dedicated to explaining the oral symptoms present in SARS-CoV-2 positive patients, it provides us with a good scientific basis for understanding the virus infection in the oral cavity and its consequences.
Topics: COVID-19; Furin; Humans; Membrane Proteins; Mouth Mucosa; Neoplasm Proteins; Pandemics; SARS-CoV-2; Serine Endopeptidases
PubMed: 34070998
DOI: 10.3390/medicina57060523 -
Frontiers in Immunology 2021Current vaccination strategies against pertussis are sub-optimal. Optimal protection against , the causative agent of pertussis, likely requires mucosal immunity....
BACKGROUND
Current vaccination strategies against pertussis are sub-optimal. Optimal protection against , the causative agent of pertussis, likely requires mucosal immunity. Current pertussis vaccines consist of inactivated whole cells or purified antigens thereof, combined with diphtheria and tetanus toxoids. Although they are highly protective against severe pertussis disease, they fail to elicit mucosal immunity. Compared to natural infection, immune responses following immunization are short-lived and fail to prevent bacterial colonization of the upper respiratory tract. To overcome these shortcomings, efforts have been made for decades, and continue to be made, toward the development of mucosal vaccines against pertussis.
OBJECTIVES
In this review we systematically analyzed published literature on protection conferred by mucosal immunization against pertussis. Immune responses mounted by these vaccines are summarized.
METHOD
The PubMed Library database was searched for published studies on mucosal pertussis vaccines. Eligibility criteria included mucosal administration and the evaluation of at least one outcome related to efficacy, immunogenicity and safety.
RESULTS
While over 349 publications were identified by the search, only 63 studies met the eligibility criteria. All eligible studies are included here. Initial attempts of mucosal whole-cell vaccine administration in humans provided promising results, but were not followed up. More recently, diverse vaccination strategies have been tested, including non-replicating and replicating vaccine candidates given by three different mucosal routes: orally, nasally or rectally. Several adjuvants and particulate formulations were tested to enhance the efficacy of non-replicating vaccines administered mucosally. Most novel vaccine candidates were only tested in animal models, mainly mice. Only one novel mucosal vaccine candidate was tested in baboons and in human trials.
CONCLUSION
Three vaccination strategies drew our attention, as they provided protective and durable immunity in the respiratory tract, including the upper respiratory tract: acellular vaccines adjuvanted with lipopeptide LP1569 and c-di-GMP, outer membrane vesicles and the live attenuated BPZE1 vaccine. Among all experimental vaccines, BPZE1 is the only one that has advanced into clinical development.
Topics: Humans; Immunity, Mucosal; Pertussis Vaccine; Whooping Cough
PubMed: 34211481
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.701285 -
The Laryngoscope Jun 2022Olfactory dysfunction (OD) is a common presenting symptom of COVID-19 infection. Radiological imaging of the olfactory structures in patients with COVID-19 and OD can... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Olfactory dysfunction (OD) is a common presenting symptom of COVID-19 infection. Radiological imaging of the olfactory structures in patients with COVID-19 and OD can potentially shed light on its pathogenesis, and guide clinicians in prognostication and intervention.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, SCOPUS were searched from inception to August 1, 2021. Three reviewers selected observational studies, case series, and case reports reporting radiological changes in the olfactory structures, detected on magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography, or other imaging modalities, in patients aged ≥18 years with COVID-19 infection and OD, following preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines and a PROSPERO-registered protocol (CRD42021275211). We described the proportion of radiological outcomes, and used random-effects meta-analyses to pool the prevalence of olfactory cleft opacification, olfactory bulb signal abnormalities, and olfactory mucosa abnormalities in patients with and without COVID-19-associated OD.
RESULTS
We included 7 case-control studies (N = 353), 11 case series (N = 154), and 12 case reports (N = 12). The pooled prevalence of olfactory cleft opacification in patients with COVID-19 infection and OD (63%, 95% CI = 0.38-0.82) was significantly higher than that in controls (4%, 95% CI = 0.01-0.13). Conversely, similar proportions of cases and controls demonstrated olfactory bulb signal abnormalities (88% and 94%) and olfactory mucosa abnormalities (2% and 0%). Descriptive analysis found that 55.6% and 43.5% of patients with COVID-19 infection and OD had morphological abnormalities of the olfactory bulb and olfactory nerve, respectively, while 60.0% had abnormal olfactory bulb volumes.
CONCLUSION
Our findings implicate a conductive mechanism of OD, localized to the olfactory cleft, in approximately half of the affected COVID-19 patients. Laryngoscope, 132:1260-1274, 2022.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; COVID-19; Humans; Olfaction Disorders; Olfactory Bulb; Olfactory Mucosa; Smell
PubMed: 35318656
DOI: 10.1002/lary.30078 -
Frontiers in Immunology 2020Camels are domesticated animals that are highly adapted to the extreme desert ecosystem with relatively higher resistance to a wide range of pathogens compared to many...
Camels are domesticated animals that are highly adapted to the extreme desert ecosystem with relatively higher resistance to a wide range of pathogens compared to many other species from the same geographical region. Recently, there has been increased interest in the field of camel immunology. As the progress in the analysis of camel immunoglobulins has previously been covered in many recent reviews, this review intends to summarize published findings related to camel cellular immunology with a focus on the phenotype and functionality of camel leukocyte subpopulations. The review also describes the impact of different physiological (age and pregnancy) and pathological (e.g. infection) conditions on camel immune cells. Despite the progress achieved in the field of camel immunology, there are gaps in our complete understanding of the camel immune system. Questions remain regarding innate recognition mechanisms, the functional characterization of antigen-presenting cells, and the characterization of camel NK and cytotoxic T cells.
Topics: Aging; Animals; Animals, Newborn; Camelus; Communicable Diseases; Female; Immunity, Mucosal; Leukocytes; Monocytes; Neutrophils; Pregnancy
PubMed: 33569060
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2020.614150 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2014One to eight per cent of women suffer third-degree perineal tear (anal sphincter injury) and fourth-degree perineal tear (rectal mucosa injury) during vaginal birth, and... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
One to eight per cent of women suffer third-degree perineal tear (anal sphincter injury) and fourth-degree perineal tear (rectal mucosa injury) during vaginal birth, and these tears are more common after forceps delivery (28%) and midline episiotomies. Third- and fourth-degree tears can become contaminated with bacteria from the rectum and this significantly increases in the chance of perineal wound infection. Prophylactic antibiotics might have a role in preventing this infection.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis for reducing maternal morbidity and side effects in third- and fourth-degree perineal tear during vaginal birth.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 August 2014) and the reference lists of retrieved articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials comparing outcomes of prophylactic antibiotics versus placebo or no antibiotics in third- and fourth-degree perineal tear during vaginal birth.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed the trial reports for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified and included one trial (147 women from a pre-planned sample size of 310 women) that compared the effect of prophylactic antibiotic (single-dose, second-generation cephalosporin - cefotetan or cefoxitin, 1 g intravenously) on postpartum perineal wound complications in third- or fourth-degree perineal tears compared with placebo. Perineal wound complications (wound disruption and purulent discharge) at the two-week postpartum check up were 8.20% and 24.10% in the treatment and the control groups respectively (risk ratio (RR) 0.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.12 to 0.96). However, the high failed-appointment rate may limit the generalisability of the results. The overall risk of bias was low except for incomplete outcome data. The quality of the evidence using GRADE was moderate for infection rate at two weeks' postpartum, and low for infection rate at six weeks' postpartum.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Although the data suggest that prophylactic antibiotics help to prevent perineal wound complications following third- or fourth-degree perineal tear, loss to follow-up was very high. The results should be interpreted with caution as they are based on one small trial.
Topics: Anal Canal; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Cefotetan; Cefoxitin; Cephalosporins; Delivery, Obstetric; Female; Humans; Intestinal Mucosa; Perineum; Pregnancy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rectum; Rupture; Wound Infection
PubMed: 25289960
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005125.pub4 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2015There are many forms of rhinitis. Patients are diagnosed with non-allergic rhinitis when anatomic, infectious and allergic aetiologies have been excluded. The symptoms,... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
There are many forms of rhinitis. Patients are diagnosed with non-allergic rhinitis when anatomic, infectious and allergic aetiologies have been excluded. The symptoms, including nasal congestion, blockage or obstruction, clear rhinorrhoea, sneezing and, less frequently, nasal itching, can range from mild to debilitating. It affects between 25% and 50% of patients with rhinitis. Several medications are widely used in the treatment of non-allergic rhinitis, including oral and topical nasal antihistamines, intranasal and (rarely) systemic corticosteroids, and anticholinergics. Capsaicin, the active component of chili peppers, delivered intranasally, is considered a treatment option for non-allergic rhinitis.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness of capsaicin in the management of non-allergic rhinitis compared with no therapy, placebo or other topical or systemic medications, or two or more of the above therapies in combination, or different capsaicin regimens.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Ear, Nose and Throat Disorders Group Trials Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2015, Issue 5); PubMed; EMBASE; CINAHL; Web of Science; Cambridge Scientific Abstracts; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 24 June 2015.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials in adult patients with non-allergic rhinitis comparing intranasal capsaicin with no therapy, placebo or other topical or systemic medications, or their combinations.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used the standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.
MAIN RESULTS
We included four studies (five publications) involving 302 participants with idiopathic non-allergic rhinitis. All the included studies described patients with moderately severe, idiopathic non-allergic rhinitis who were between the ages of 16 and 65. Studies had follow-up periods ranging from four to 38 weeks. The overall risk of bias in the studies was either high or unclear (two studies had overall high risk of bias, while two others had low to unclear risk of bias). Using the GRADE system we assessed the evidence as being of low to moderate quality. A meta-analysis was not possible, given lack of similarity of the reported outcomes.Two studies compared capsaicin with placebo. One study reported that capsaicin resulted in an improvement of overall nasal symptoms (a primary outcome) measured on a visual analogue scale (VAS) of 0 to 10. There was a mean difference (MD) of -3.34 (95% confidence interval (CI) -5.24 to -1.44), MD -3.73 (95% CI -5.45 to -2.01) and MD -3.52 (95% CI -5.55 to -1.48) at two, 12 and 36 weeks post-treatment, respectively. Another study reported that, compared to placebo, capsaicin (at 4 µg/puff) was more likely to produce overall symptom resolution (reduction in nasal blockage, sneezing/itching/coughing and nasal secretion measured with a daily record chart) at four weeks post-treatment (a primary outcome). The risk ratio (RR) was 3.17 (95% CI 1.38 to 7.29).One study compared capsaicin to budesonide (an intranasal corticosteroid). This study found that patients treated with capsaicin had a better overall symptom score compared to those treated with budesonide (MD 2.50, 95% CI 1.06 to 3.94, VAS of 0 to 10). However, there were no differences in the individual symptom scores for headache, postnasal drip, rhinorrhoea, nasal blockage, sneezing and sore throat assessed during the last three days of a four-week treatment.One study compared two different regimens of capsaicin administration: five treatments in one day versus five treatments given every two to three days during two weeks. Using daily record charts, the study reported significant improvement of individual symptom scores for rhinorrhoea in patients treated five times per day, however numerical data were not presented. There were no improvements in the other outcomes: rhinorrhoea, nasal obstruction, sneezing and overall nasal symptoms, measured on a VAS.Finally, one of these studies also compared three doses of capsaicin (to placebo). Patients treated with a 1 µg versus 4 µg per puff dose of capsaicin had a worse daily record chart overall symptom score resolution (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.16).Only one study attempted to measure adverse effects (a primary outcome), however due to methodological issues with the assessment we are unable to draw any conclusions.We sought to include other secondary outcomes (e.g. quality of life measures, treatment dropouts, endoscopic scores, turbinate or mucosal size, cost of therapy), but none of these were measured or reported in the included studies.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Capsaicin may be an option in the treatment of idiopathic non-allergic rhinitis. It is given in the form of brief treatments, usually during the same day. It appears to have beneficial effects on overall nasal symptoms up to 36 weeks after treatment, based on a few, small studies (low-quality evidence). Well-conducted randomised controlled trials are required to further advance our understanding of the effectiveness of capsaicin in non-allergic rhinitis, especially in patients with non-allergic rhinitis of different types and severity, and using different methods of capsaicin application.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Budesonide; Capsaicin; Humans; Middle Aged; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rhinitis
PubMed: 26171907
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010591.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2021Croup is an acute viral respiratory infection with upper airway mucosal inflammation that may cause respiratory distress. Most cases are mild. Moderate to severe croup... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Croup is an acute viral respiratory infection with upper airway mucosal inflammation that may cause respiratory distress. Most cases are mild. Moderate to severe croup may require treatment with corticosteroids (the benefits of which are often delayed) and nebulised epinephrine (adrenaline) (the benefits of which may be short-lived and which can cause dose-related adverse effects including tachycardia, arrhythmias, and hypertension). Rarely, croup results in respiratory failure necessitating emergency intubation and ventilation. A mixture of helium and oxygen (heliox) may prevent morbidity and mortality in ventilated neonates by reducing the viscosity of the inhaled air. It is currently used during emergency transport of children with severe croup. Anecdotal evidence suggests that it relieves respiratory distress. This review updates versions published in 2010, 2013, and 2018.
OBJECTIVES
To examine the effect of heliox compared to oxygen or other active interventions, placebo, or no treatment on relieving signs and symptoms in children with croup as determined by a croup score and rates of admission and intubation.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, which includes the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group Specialised Register, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and LILACS, on 15 April 2021. We also searched the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (apps.who.int/trialsearch/) and ClinicalTrials.gov (clinicaltrials.gov) on 15 April 2021. We contacted the British Oxygen Company, a leading supplier of heliox.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing the effect of heliox in comparison with placebo, no treatment, or any active intervention(s) in children with croup.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Data that could not be pooled for statistical analysis were reported descriptively.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 3 RCTs involving a total of 91 children aged between 6 months and 4 years. Study duration was from 7 to 16 months, and all studies were conducted in emergency departments. Two studies were conducted in the USA and one in Spain. Heliox was administered as a mixture of 70% heliox and 30% oxygen. Risk of bias was low in two studies and high in one study because of its open-label design. We did not identify any new trials for this 2021 update. One study of 15 children with mild croup compared heliox with 30% humidified oxygen administered for 20 minutes. There may be no difference in croup score changes between groups at 20 minutes (mean difference (MD) -0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.36 to 0.70) (Westley croup score, scale range 0 to 16). The mean croup score at 20 minutes postintervention may not differ between groups (MD -0.57, 95% CI -1.46 to 0.32). There may be no difference between groups in mean respiratory rate (MD 6.40, 95% CI -1.38 to 14.18) and mean heart rate (MD 14.50, 95% CI -8.49 to 37.49) at 20 minutes. The evidence for all outcomes in this comparison was of low certainty, downgraded for serious imprecision. All children were discharged, but information on hospitalisation, intubation, or re-presenting to emergency departments was not reported. In another study, 47 children with moderate croup received one dose of oral dexamethasone (0.3 mg/kg) with either heliox for 60 minutes or no treatment. Heliox may slightly improve Taussig croup scores (scale range 0 to 15) at 60 minutes postintervention (MD -1.10, 95% CI -1.96 to -0.24), but there may be no difference between groups at 120 minutes (MD -0.70, 95% CI -1.56 to 0.16). Children treated with heliox may have lower mean Taussig croup scores at 60 minutes (MD -1.11, 95% CI -2.05 to -0.17) but not at 120 minutes (MD -0.71, 95% CI -1.72 to 0.30). Children treated with heliox may have lower mean respiratory rates at 60 minutes (MD -4.94, 95% CI -9.66 to -0.22), but there may be no difference at 120 minutes (MD -3.17, 95% CI -7.83 to 1.49). There may be a difference in hospitalisation rates between groups (odds ratio 0.46, 95% CI 0.04 to 5.41). We assessed the evidence for all outcomes in this comparison as of low certainty, downgraded due to imprecision and high risk of bias related to an open-label design. Information on heart rate and intubation was not reported. In the third study, 29 children with moderate to severe croup all received continuous cool mist and intramuscular dexamethasone (0.6 mg/kg). They were then randomised to receive either heliox (given as a mixture of 70% helium and 30% oxygen) plus one to two doses of nebulised saline or 100% oxygen plus nebulised epinephrine (adrenaline), with gas therapy administered continuously for three hours. Heliox may slightly improve croup scores at 90 minutes postintervention, but may result in little or no difference overall using repeated-measures analysis. We assessed the evidence for all outcomes in this comparison as of low certainty, downgraded due to high risk of bias related to inadequate reporting. Information on hospitalisation or re-presenting to the emergency department was not reported. The included studies did not report on adverse events, intensive care admissions, or parental anxiety. We could not pool the available data because each comparison included data from only one study.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Given the very limited available evidence, uncertainty remains regarding the effectiveness and safety of heliox. Heliox may not be more effective than 30% humidified oxygen for children with mild croup, but may be beneficial in the short term for children with moderate croup treated with dexamethasone. The effect of heliox may be similar to 100% oxygen given with one or two doses of adrenaline. Adverse events were not reported, and it is unclear if these were monitored in the included studies. Adequately powered RCTs comparing heliox with standard treatments are needed to further assess the role of heliox in the treatment of children with moderate to severe croup.
Topics: Airway Obstruction; Airway Resistance; Child; Child, Preschool; Croup; Helium; Humans; Infant; Oxygen; Oxygen Inhalation Therapy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34397099
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006822.pub6 -
PloS One 2014We conducted a systematic review of the Medline database (U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, U.S.A) to determine if... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
We conducted a systematic review of the Medline database (U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, U.S.A) to determine if consistent molecular vaginal microbiota (VMB) composition patterns can be discerned after a decade of molecular testing, and to evaluate demographic, behavioral and clinical determinants of VMB compositions. Studies were eligible when published between 1 January 2008 and 15 November 2013, and if at least one molecular technique (sequencing, PCR, DNA fingerprinting, or DNA hybridization) was used to characterize the VMB. Sixty three eligible studies were identified. These studies have now conclusively shown that lactobacilli-dominated VMB are associated with a healthy vaginal micro-environment and that bacterial vaginosis (BV) is best described as a polybacterial dysbiosis. The extent of dysbiosis correlates well with Nugent score and vaginal pH but not with the other Amsel criteria. Lactobacillus crispatus is more beneficial than L. iners. Longitudinal studies have shown that a L. crispatus-dominated VMB is more likely to shift to a L. iners-dominated or mixed lactobacilli VMB than to full dysbiosis. Data on VMB determinants are scarce and inconsistent, but dysbiosis is consistently associated with HIV, human papillomavirus (HPV), and Trichomonas vaginalis infection. In contrast, vaginal colonization with Candida spp. is more common in women with a lactobacilli-dominated VMB than in women with dysbiosis. Cervicovaginal mucosal immune responses to molecular VMB compositions have not yet been properly characterized. Molecular techniques have now become more affordable, and we make a case for incorporating them into larger epidemiological studies to address knowledge gaps in etiology and pathogenesis of dysbiosis, associations of different dysbiotic states with clinical outcomes, and to evaluate interventions aimed at restoring and maintaining a lactobacilli-dominated VMB.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Cluster Analysis; Female; Humans; Microbial Consortia; Microbiota; Pregnancy; Vagina; Vaginosis, Bacterial
PubMed: 25148517
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0105998 -
Radiotherapy and Oncology : Journal of... Dec 2023Given the central role that radiation has in the management of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma of unknown primary origin, it is imperative to review how treatment...
PURPOSE
Given the central role that radiation has in the management of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma of unknown primary origin, it is imperative to review how treatment paradigms have been refined and continue to evolve in the modern era.
METHODS AND MATERIALS
This study was designed based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) statement. A literature search of peer-reviewed publications was undertaken to identify works pertaining to the use of radiation for squamous cell carcinoma of unknown primary origin presenting as cervical lymph node metastases. Articles published from January 2002 to January 2023 with full text available on PubMed and restricted to the English language and human subjects were included. The full bibliographies of identified articles were reviewed and irrelevant studies were removed.
RESULTS
While such breakthroughs as intensity-modulated radiotherapy, positron emission tomography, biomarker testing with immune-histochemistry, and minimally invasive surgical techniques such as transoral robotic surgery have fundamentally changed the approach to this disease in recent decades, controversies still exist with respect to the manner in which radiation is delivered. Although the incidence of head and neck unknown primary cancer is relatively low, questions regarding the necessity of comprehensive radiation using the age-old standard method of targeting the bilateral necks and entire pharyngeal axis to encompass all putative sites of mucosal disease persist.
CONCLUSIONS
Prospective evidence is lacking, and the available studies have been complicated by such factors as the relatively limited sample sizes, as well as the variability in work-up, treatment, inclusion criteria, and follow-up. Regardless, advances in science and technology have ushered in more precise approaches with a high degree of customization, particularly given the increased proportion of patients presenting with human papillomavirus-related disease.
Topics: Humans; Head and Neck Neoplasms; Human Papillomavirus Viruses; Meta-Analysis as Topic; Neoplasms, Unknown Primary; Papillomavirus Infections; Systematic Reviews as Topic
PubMed: 37844736
DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2023.109952 -
Cureus May 2023is a gram-negative aerobic pathogen that primarily colonizes the gastric mucosa. Peptic ulcer disease, atrophic gastritis, gastric cancer, and mucosal-associated... (Review)
Review
is a gram-negative aerobic pathogen that primarily colonizes the gastric mucosa. Peptic ulcer disease, atrophic gastritis, gastric cancer, and mucosal-associated lymphoid tissue lymphoma have all been linked to chronic infection. Hence, it is critical to diagnose and treat it as early as possible. There are both invasive and noninvasive tests available to detect it. In this review, the diagnostic abilities of two invasive tests - histology and the rapid urease test (RUT) - are compared in a variety of clinical situations. This systematic review was carried out using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) 2020 checklist. We performed a literature search using the PubMed and Google Scholar databases in accordance with the eligibility criteria and ultimately selected eight articles for final analysis. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale adapted for cross-sectional studies, the Scale for the Assessment of Narrative Review Articles (SANRA), and the PRISMA 2020 checklist were used to assess the quality of selected articles for cross-sectional studies, traditional literature reviews, and systematic reviews, respectively. According to the findings of the review, both histology and the RUT have high sensitivity and specificity in diagnosing though this varies depending on the clinical situation, making one test superior to the other. Neither of these tests can be considered the gold standard method on its own. Hence, using at least two diagnostic tests at the same time is critical for ensuring high sensitivity and specificity while accurately diagnosing the pathogen.
PubMed: 37362532
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.39360