RESUMO

COVID-19, a respiratory illness with a global impact on millions, has recently been linked to manifestations affecting various bodily systems, including the oral cavity. Studies highlight oral issues, like ulcers, blisters, and white patches, alongside olfactory and gustatory dysfunction, influencing an individual's quality of life. In this context, our study aimed to assess the frequency of oral lesions, olfactory and gustatory disorders, and xerostomia resulting from COVID-19. An observational study was conducted with 414 patients to evaluate the frequency of oral symptoms resulting from COVID-19. Patients were diagnosed with mild symptoms and evaluated through clinical examination of the oral cavity and a questionnaire to assess functional alterations. The findings showed that 139 out of 414 patients presented clinical manifestations, with oral lesions being the most prevalent (19.1%), followed by gustatory disorders (18.1%), xerostomia (14.2%), and olfactory dysfunction (14%). The most prevalent oral lesions were ulcerations (n = 51), candidiasis (n = 8), and erythema or red plaques (n = 7). Unfortunately, 50 (12.1%) patients died during this study. Therefore, oral lesions, olfactory and gustatory dysfunctions, and xerostomia are common symptoms associated with COVID-19.

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To report the case of a girl presenting a severe phenotype of mandibuloacral dysplasia type A (MADA) characterized by prominent osteolytic changes and ectodermal defects, associated with a rare homozygous LMNA missense mutation (c.1579C>T). CASE DESCRIPTION: A 6-year-old girl was evaluated during hospitalization exhibiting the following dysmorphic signs: subtotal alopecia, dysmorphic facies with prominent eyes, marked micrognathia and retrognathia, small beaked nose, teeth crowding and thin lips, generalized lipodystrophy, narrow and sloping shoulders, generalized joint stiffness and bone reabsorption in the terminal phalanges. In dermatological examination, atrophic skin, loss of cutaneous elasticity, hyperkeratosis, dermal calcinosis, and hyperpigmented and hypochromic patches were observed. Radiology exams performed showed bilateral absence of the mandibular condyles, clavicle resorption with local amorphous bone mass confluence with the scapulae, shoulder joints with subluxation and severe bone dysplasia, hip dysplasia, osteopenia and subcutaneous calcifications. COMMENTS: MADA is a rare autosomal recessive disease caused by mutations in LMNA gene. It is characterized by craniofacial deformities, skeletal anomalies, skin alterations, lipodystrophy in certain regions of the body and premature ageing. Typical MADA is caused by the p.R527H mutation in the LMNA gene. However, molecular analysis performed from oral epithelial cells obtained from the patient showed the rare mutation c.1579C>T, p. R527C in the exon 9 of LMNA. This is the sixth family identified with this mutation described in the literature.

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic has had a profound impact on the circulation of seasonal respiratory viruses. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 and seasonal viruses in adults hospitalized with severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This population-based cohort study included patients aged > 18 years hospitalized for SARI in Brazil between February 2020 and February 2023. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. A competing risk analysis was used to account for competing events. RESULTS: In total, 2,159,171 patients were included in the study. SARS-CoV-2 was the predominant virus (98.7%). The cumulative incidence of in-hospital mortality was 33.1%, 31.5%, 21.0%, 18.7%, and 18.6%, for patients positive for SARS-CoV-2, adenovirus, RSV, influenza, and other viruses, respectively. SARS-CoV-2 accounted for 99.3% of the deaths. Older age, male sex, comorbidities, hospitalization in the northern region, and oxygen saturation <95% were the common risk factors for death among all viruses. CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort study, individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2 or adenovirus had the highest risk of mortality. Irrespective of the virus type, older age, male sex, comorbidities, hospitalization in vulnerable regions, and low oxygen saturation were associated with an increased risk of fatality.

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Current evidence suggests the potential heightened vulnerability of smokers to severe coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outcomes. AIMS: This study aimed to analyze the clinical outcomes and mortality related to tobacco use in a cohort of hospitalized Brazilian COVID-19 patients. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study analyzed adults hospitalized for COVID-19 in Brazil using the SIVEP-Gripe database (official data reported by public and private healthcare facilities for monitoring severe acute respiratory syndrome cases in Brazil). The inclusion criteria were patients over 18 years of age with a positive RT-qPCR test for SARS-CoV-2. The analysis focused on in-hospital mortality, considering smoking as an exposure variable, and included covariates such as age, gender, and comorbidities. Smoking history was collected from the self-reported field in the database. Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics, crude Odds Ratios, and multivariable binary logistic regression. RESULTS: This study included 2,124,285 COVID-19 patients, among whom 44,774 (2.1 %) were smokers. The average age of the smokers was higher than that of the never-smokers (65.3 years vs. 59.7 years). The clinical outcomes revealed that smokers had higher rates of intensive care unit admission (51.6 % vs. 37.2 % for never-smokers), invasive ventilatory support (31.5 % vs. 20.2 % for never-smokers), and higher mortality (42.7 % vs. 31.8 % for never smokers). In the multivariable analysis, smokers demonstrated a heightened risk of death (aOR 1.23; 95 % CI 1.19-1.25). CONCLUSIONS: This large populational-based cohort study confirms the current evidence and underscore the critical importance of recognizing smoking as a substantial risk factor for adverse outcomes in COVID-19 patients.

Assuntos

RESUMO

The aim was to analyze the perception of Brazilian federal judges on the implications of COVID-19 vaccination. A study was carried out with Brazilian federal judges, who received a survey designed with multiple-choice questions on COVID-19 vaccination, covering topics such as its mandatory aspect, the application of coercive measures, hesitation to vaccinate, priority groups, the duties of Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency (Anvisa, acronym in Portuguese), the role of the Judiciary branch, and immunity passports. A total of 254 out of 1,300 federal judges from all states responded to the survey. Most respondents have a Bachelor's degree or a specialization (59.1%) and have been judges for more than 10 years (63.8%). A great majority of the judges (87.7%) agree with vaccine mandates for adults and for children and adolescents (66.1%). Over 75% of judges believe that all levels of government can impose sanctions on those who refuse to get vaccinated. The judges trust vaccination 93% of the time, 56.1% reject anti-vaccination movements, and 75.2% believe that Anvisa duties should be respected. The Judiciary branch actions concerning the COVID-19 pandemic are approved by 62.6% of judges, and 88.2% support immunity passports. There is a direct connection among mandatory vaccination, trust in the vaccine, and the adoption of immunity passports. Most federal judges agree with vaccine mandates for children and adults, support the application of sanctions for vaccination refusal, disapprove of anti-vaccination movements, agree with Anvisa's duties, and support judicial intervention in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Associations between the WNT5A rs566926 variant and non-syndromic orofacial cleft (NSOC) have been reported in different populations. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the role of the rs566926 single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) in WNT5A and its interactions with SNPs in BMP4, FGFR1, GREM1, MMP2, and WNT3 in the occurrence of NSOC in a Brazilian population. METHODOLOGY: A case-control genetic association study was carried out involving participants from four regions of Brazil, totaling 801 patients with non-syndromic cleft lip with or without cleft palate (NSCL±P), 273 patients with cleft palate only (NSCPO), and 881 health volunteers without any congenital condition (control). Applying TaqMan allelic discrimination assays, we evaluated WNT5A rs566926 in an ancestry-structured multiple logistic regression analysis, considering sex and genomic ancestry as covariates. Interactions between rs566926 and variants in genes involved in the WNT5A signaling pathway (BMP4, FGFR1, GREM1, MMP2, and WNT3) were also explored. RESULTS: WNT5A rs566926 was significantly associated with an increased risk of NSCL±P, particularly due to a strong association with non-syndromic cleft lip only (NSCLO), in which the C allele increased the risk by 32% (OR: 1.32, 95% CI: 1.04-1.67, p=0.01). According to the proportions of European and African genomic ancestry, the association of rs566926 reached significant levels only in patients with European ancestry. Multiple interactions were detected between WNT5A rs566926 and BMP4 rs2071047, GREM1 rs16969681 and rs16969862, and FGFR1 rs7829058. CONCLUSION: The WNT5A rs566926 polymorphism was associated with NSCL±P, particularly in individuals with NSCLO and high European ancestry. Epistatic interactions involving WNT5A rs566926 and variants in BMP4, GREM1, and FGFR1 may contribute to the risk of NSCL±P in the Brazilian population.

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Understanding how severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) interacts with other respiratory viruses is crucial for developing effective public health strategies in the postpandemic era. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 and seasonal viruses in children and adolescents hospitalized with severe acute respiratory infection (SARI). METHODS: This population-based, retrospective cohort study included children and adolescents hospitalized with SARI from February 2020 to February 2023 in Brazil. The main exposure of interest was viral etiology. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Competing risk analysis was used to account for time dependency and competing events. RESULTS: A total of 235 829 patients had available results of the viral tests, with SARS-CoV-2 predominance. According to the competing-risk survival analysis, the estimated probability of a fatal outcome at 30 days of hospitalization according to the viral strain was 6.5%, 3.4%, 2.9%, 2.3%, 2.1%, and 1.8%, for SARS-CoV-2, coinfection, adenovirus, influenza, other viruses, and respiratory syncytial virus, respectively. Individuals with a positive test for SARS-CoV-2 had hazard of death 3 times higher than subjects with a negative test (hazard ratio, 3.3; 95% confidence interval, 3.1-3.5). After adjustment by the competing-risk multivariable analysis, admission in Northeast and North regions, oxygen saturation <95%, and the presence of comorbidities were risk factors for death in all viral strains. CONCLUSIONS: SARS-CoV-2 infection had the highest hazard of in-hospital mortality in this pediatric cohort hospitalized with SARI. Regardless of viral etiology, the presence of underlying medical conditions was a risk factor for death.

Assuntos

Assuntos

RESUMO

Abstract: The aim was to analyze the perception of Brazilian federal judges on the implications of COVID-19 vaccination. A study was carried out with Brazilian federal judges, who received a survey designed with multiple-choice questions on COVID-19 vaccination, covering topics such as its mandatory aspect, the application of coercive measures, hesitation to vaccinate, priority groups, the duties of Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency (Anvisa, acronym in Portuguese), the role of the Judiciary branch, and immunity passports. A total of 254 out of 1,300 federal judges from all states responded to the survey. Most respondents have a Bachelor's degree or a specialization (59.1%) and have been judges for more than 10 years (63.8%). A great majority of the judges (87.7%) agree with vaccine mandates for adults and for children and adolescents (66.1%). Over 75% of judges believe that all levels of government can impose sanctions on those who refuse to get vaccinated. The judges trust vaccination 93% of the time, 56.1% reject anti-vaccination movements, and 75.2% believe that Anvisa duties should be respected. The Judiciary branch actions concerning the COVID-19 pandemic are approved by 62.6% of judges, and 88.2% support immunity passports. There is a direct connection among mandatory vaccination, trust in the vaccine, and the adoption of immunity passports. Most federal judges agree with vaccine mandates for children and adults, support the application of sanctions for vaccination refusal, disapprove of anti-vaccination movements, agree with Anvisa's duties, and support judicial intervention in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Resumo: O objetivo foi analisar a visão de juízes federais brasileiros sobre as implicações da vacinação contra a COVID-19. Foi realizado um estudo com juízes federais brasileiros, que receberam uma pesquisa elaborada com questões de múltipla escolha sobre a vacinação contra a COVID-19, abordando temas como sua obrigatoriedade, aplicação de medidas coercitivas, hesitação vacinal, grupos prioritários, ações da Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária (Anvisa), o papel do Poder Judiciário e os passaportes de imunidade. Responderam à pesquisa 254 dos 1.300 juízes federais atuantes em todos os estados. A maioria dos entrevistados possui bacharelado ou especialização (59,1%) e atua como juiz há mais de 10 anos (63,8%). Grande parte dos juízes (87,7%) concorda com a obrigatoriedade da vacina para adultos e crianças e adolescentes (66,1%). Mais de 75% dos juízes acreditam que todos os níveis de governo podem impor sanções para aqueles que se recusam a ser vacinados. 93% dos juízes confiam na vacinação, 56,1% rejeitam movimentos antivacinação e 75,2% acreditam que as ações da Anvisa devem ser respeitadas. As ações do Judiciário referentes à pandemia da COVID-19 são aprovadas por 62,6% dos juízes e 88,2% apoiam passaportes de imunidade. Existe uma ligação direta entre a vacinação obrigatória, a confiança na vacina e a adoção de passaportes de imunidade. A maioria dos juízes federais concorda com a obrigatoriedade da vacina para crianças e adultos, apoia a aplicação de sanções no caso de recusa de vacinação, desaprova movimentos antivacinação, concorda com as ações da Anvisa e apoia a intervenção do Judiciário em relação à pandemia da COVID-19.

Resumen: El objetivo fue analizar la visión de los jueces federales brasileños sobre las implicaciones de la vacunación contra la COVID-19. Se realizó un estudio con jueces federales brasileños, quienes recibieron una encuesta elaborada con preguntas de opción múltiple sobre la vacunación contra la COVID-19, abordando temas como su obligatoriedad, aplicación de medidas coercitivas, reticencia a vacunarse, grupos prioritarios, acciones de Agência Nacional de Vigilancia Sanitaria (Anvisa), el papel del Poder Judicial y los pasaportes de inmunidad. Respondieron a la encuesta 254 de los 1.300 jueces federales que actúan en todos los estados. La mayoría de los encuestados tiene título de licenciatura o especialización (59,1%) y actúa como juez desde hace más de 10 años (63,8%). Gran parte de los jueces (87,7%) está de acuerdo con la obligatoriedad de la vacuna para adultos y niños y adolescentes (66,1%). Más del 75% de los jueces cree que todos los niveles de gobierno pueden imponer sanciones a quienes se nieguen a vacunarse. El 93% de los jueces confía en la vacunación, el 56,1% rechaza los movimientos antivacunas y el 75,2% cree que las acciones de Anvisa deben ser respetadas. Las acciones del Poder Judicial con relación a la pandemia de COVID-19 son aprobadas por el 62,6% de los jueces, y el 88,2% apoya los pasaportes de inmunidad. Existe un vínculo directo entre la vacunación obligatoria, la confianza en la vacuna y la adopción de pasaportes de inmunidad. La mayoría de los jueces federales está de acuerdo con la vacunación obligatoria para niños y adultos, apoya la aplicación de sanciones en caso de rechazo de la vacunación, desaprueba los movimientos antivacunas, está de acuerdo con las acciones de Anvisa y apoya la intervención del Poder Judicial con relación a la pandemia de COVID-19.

RESUMO

Aim: This present study aims to compare the data from the Brazilian Unified Health System on the number of clinical consultations of Oral Medicine from the first 6 months (March-August 2020) of the COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil with the last 6 months (September-February 2020/2021) to update the data, verify the measures' effectiveness to return clinical activities in the following months. Methods: perform a literature review of recent articles that report the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Oral Medicine. Results: There was an increase in the number of Oral Medicine clinical consultations in the second half of the pandemic throughout Brazil (+64.2%), representing over 9,235 appointments in this period. Conclusion: measures for the return of health assistance and the practice of Telemedicine proved to be effective after the second period of the pandemic. Even so, strengthening security measures against the coronavirus is essential to ward off a new wave since the Omicron variant emerged in the country and, consequently, possible new lockdowns that might affect healthcare in Brazil

Assuntos