Search

aime Soria,5 Valentina Franco-Cárdenas,6 Victor E Reviglio,7 Paulo EC Dantas,8 Claudia Palacio Pastrana,9 Juan Carlos Corbera,10 Rita Yee Chan,11 Alberto Luis Diaz,12 Milton Garcia Hernandez,13 Mauricio Maia,14 Cristian Carpentier,15 Lihteh Wu,16 Martin Sanchez,17 Marcelo Murillo Sasamoto,18 Gonzalo Murillo Azcárraga,18 Jose A Roca,19 Martin A Serrano,20 Arturo A Alezzandrini,21 Juan Gonzalo Sanchez Montoya,22 Gregorio Gabela,23 Gerardo Garcia-Aguirre,24 J Fernando Arevalo25,*1Fundación Somos Ciencia al Servicio de la Comunidad, Fundación SCISCO/Science to Serve the Community Foundation, SCISCO Foundation, Cali, Colombia; 2Ophthalmology Department, Institute for Clinical Research Education, School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA; 3Vision y Salud Ocular, VISOC, Ophthalmology Department, Universidad del Valle, Cali, Colombia; 4The Retina and Vitreous Department, Private Eyes Clinic, Mar del Plata, Argentina; 5Ophthalmology Department, Clínica Real Visión, Uniofken, CIVE y Funcrisa, Guayaquil, Ecuador; 6Ophthalmology Department, Sanatorio Oftalmológico Mérida, Mexico City, Mexico; 7Ophthalmology Department, Instituto de la Visión Cerro, Sanatorio Allende Cerro & Universidad Católica de Córdoba, Health Science Faculty, Cordoba, Argentina; 8Ophthalmology Department, Sorocaba Eye Bank Hospital, Sorocaba, Brazil; 9Department of Microsurgery of the Anterior Segment, Fundación Hospital Nuestra Señora de la Luz IAP, Mexico City, Mexico; 10Ophthalmology Department, Oftalmica Clinica de la Vision, Lima, Peru; 11Ophthalmology Department, Clinica Nacional de Oftalmologia, Panama City, Panama; 12Ophthalmology Department, Complejo Medico FOSCAL Internacional, Floridablanca, Santander, Colombia; 13Ophthalmology Department, Private Practice, El Salvador, El Salvador; 14Ophthalmology Department, Federal University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil; 15Ophthalmology Department, Fundación Oftalmológica Los Andes, Santiago, Chile; 16Retina Department, Asociados de Macula Vitreo y Retina de Costa Rica, San Jose, Costa Rica; 17Ophthalmology Department, Hospital de Minas, Montevideo, Uruguay; 18Ophthalmology Department, Instituto Privado de Oftalmología, La Paz, Bolivia; 19Ophthalmology Department, Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia, Lima, Peru; 20Retina Department, Centro Médico Docente La Trinidad, Caracas, Venezuela; 21Ophthalmology Department, OFTALMOS, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Facultad de Medicina, Buenos Aires, Argentina; 22Ophthalmology Department, Instituto Nacional de Investigacion en Oftalmologia –INIO and Clinica Oftalmologica de Antioquia, Medellin, Colombia; 23Ophthalmology Department, Hospital Metropolitano, Quito, Ecuador; 24Retina Department, School of Medicine, Tecnológico de Monterrey Asociación Para Evitar la Ceguera en México, Mexico City, Mexico; 25Ophthalmology Department, Johns Hopkins University, Wilmer Eye Institute, Baltimore, MD, USA*These authors contributed equally to this workCorrespondence: J Fernando Arevalo, Wilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 600 N. Wolfe Street, Maumenee 713, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA, Email [email protected] Purpose: The COVID-19 pandemic affected medical practice worldwide due to interventions to prevent spreading. Its effect on ophthalmology practices in Latin America has not yet been explored. We aimed to assess the perceptions about the pandemic from countries' ophthalmological national and subspecialty retina societies affiliated to the Pan-American Association of Ophthalmology (PAAO).Patients and Methods: A survey-based study of leaders of national ophthalmological and retinal societies was conducted. The survey was sent by email to 30 societies, from which 20 responded (12 countries, 66.6% response rate). It included closed- and open-ended questions about (1) operational capacity and precautions, (2) telemedicine and virtual care, (3) procedures, and (4) post-pandemic considerations.Results: There was a marked decline in ophthalmology patient visits (80– 95%) and elective surgeries (90%) during 2020 compared to before the pandemic. Precautions like temperature checks, mask usage, and social distancing were widely implemented while personal protective equipment (PPE) availability varied. Telemedicine use was limited due to lack of experience with it. Reopening plans focused on maintaining precautions and gradually resuming activities. Economic and security concerns were raised, and adherence to guidelines was emphasized. Respondents acknowledged the need to adapt to a "new normal". Long duration drugs, fewer imaging studies, and shorter wait times were preferred; however, availability of long duration drugs was limited.Conclusion: The pandemic impacted ophthalmology in Latin America, with reduced patient visits, procedures, and surgeries. Delayed treatment and complications were likely the result of the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Blastomycosis is an endemic fungal infection that causes pulmonary and systemic disease. It can occur irrespective of the patient's immune status. The risk factors associated with the severity of the disease are not well studied. Methods: This is a retrospective study of patients admitted with blastomycosis at the University of Kentucky Hospital from 2004 to 2019. Logistic regression was used to identify variables associated with severe blastomycosis. Results: A total of 76 patients were identified; 22 (28.9%) had at least one immunosuppressive condition. Pulmonary blastomycosis was reported in 49/76 (65%) of the patients and disseminated infection in 27/76 (35.5%). All diagnostic tests were not significantly different in diagnostic results in immunocompromised vs immunocompetent patients. Cultures and histopathology were positive in 56/61 (91.8%) and 54/63 (85.7%) respectively. Blastomyces or Histoplasma antigen test was positive in 13/17 (76.4%) in immunocompromised patients compared to 26/42 (61.9%) in immunocompetent patients. Immunocompromised patients were more likely to be admitted to the hospital and ICU compared to immunocompetent patients. In the multivariate analysis, pulmonary multilobar disease (RR 5.68; 95% CI 2.13–15.15), obesity (RR 2.39; 95% CI 1.26‐4.51), diabetes mellitus (RR 3.50; 95% CI 1.38‐8.90) and immunosuppression (RR 2.28; 95% CI 1.14‐4.56) were significant independent risk factors for severe blastomycosis. Inpatient mortality proportion was higher in immunocompromised patients but not statistically significant. Conclusion: Pulmonary multilobar disease, obesity, diabetes mellitus and immunosuppression were risk factors associated with severe blastomycosis. Immunocompromised patients required more frequent hospitalisations compared to immunocompetent patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia is the property of Arquivos Brasileiros de Oftalmologia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

There is little information on the presence of the Mycobacterium avium-Intracellulare (MAC) complex in Peru. Five cases of MAC infection are described in patients with HIV/AIDS at the National Hospital Dos de Mayo, Lima-Peru. The patients presented, mainly, persistent fever, chronic diarrhea, consumptive syndrome, pancytopenia and citofagocitosis. In all of them, resistant acid-alcohol bacilli were identified in feces, so they received antituberculous treatment. The culture of feces was negative for Mycobacterium tuberculosis and later, in all cases MAC was identified using a molecular test (genotype) in the culture of feces. Three patients received treatment for MAC right after identification; however, they all died. Before presentations similar to the reported, we suggest the use of higher performance methods (blood culture, myeloculture, molecular tests), as well as early associating drugs with activity for MAC to antitubercular scheme with the intention of improving the prognosis of this group of patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The BioFire FilmArray meningitis/encephalitis panel (MEP) was brought to the University of Kentucky in 2016 to aid in the identification of community-acquired meningitis and encephalitis (ME). This panel has shown variable performance with some institutions showing high sensitivity and specificity for many pathogens but others seeing false positives during clinical use. We evaluated the panel's performance using retrospective chart review of patients at the University of Kentucky from October 2016 to September 2022, including 7,551 MEP results. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples with positive results for bacterial and fungal pathogens were compared with CSF and blood cultures, other laboratory parameters, and clinical presentations, to classify MEP results as true positive (TP), likely TP, or false positive (FP). Of 132 patients with positive bacterial or fungal MEP results, 48.9% of bacterial and 88.9% of cryptococcal analytes were classified as TP. The positive predictive value (PPV) varied by organism, with the highest being Listeria monocytogenes and Neisseria meningitidis . One-third of the FP results were Streptococcus agalactiae . Among patients with likely TP, 75.7% (28 out of 37) received oral or IV antibiotics before blood or CSF culture. MEP was 100% specific compared to culture. The PPV based on pathogen ranged from 78.6% to 100%. Interestingly, 27.4% (29 out of 106) cases (excluding FPs) would have no pathogen definitively identified if MEP had not been used. This study highlights the utility of MEP in rapidly diagnosing ME, particularly in patients pretreated with antibiotics. It also emphasizes the importance of correlating MEP results with clinical assessments and other diagnostic tests to assure accuracy., Importance: This study compares the performance of the meningitis/encephalitis panel (MEP) in detecting bacterial and fungal pathogens with cerebrospinal fluid cultures and other parameters. Almost half of bacterial analytes of MEP had positive cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) or blood cultures; the remaining 42% of bacterial analytes were correlated with clinical presentation and other CSF parameters. 27.4% (29 out of 106) cases would not have had a pathogen definitively identified if the MEP had not been used. This study highlights the importance of using MEP as a diagnostic tool, especially in patients who have already received antibiotics, where traditional culture-based methods may not be diagnostic. This research underscores the use of MEP in improving the speed of diagnosing meningitis. However, it emphasizes that MEP can produce false positive results in some patients. It is therefore necessary to interpret MEP results together with clinical assessments and other diagnostic tests to ensure the most accurate diagnosis.

We identified and characterized seven anellovirus genome sequences in the female genital tract through virome metagenomic sequencing of cervicovaginal lavage specimens from women living with HIV in Peru. Phylogenetic and genomic analyses indicate that they belong to three newly proposed Lamedtorquevirus , Memtorquevirus , and Samektorquevirus genera in the Anelloviridae family., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

To identify and classify available information regarding COVID-19 and eye care according to the level of evidence, within four main topics of interest: evidence of the virus in tears and the ocular surface, infection via the conjunctival route, ocular manifestations, and best practice recommendations. A structured review was conducted in PubMed, ScienceDirect, LILACS, SciELO, the Cochrane Library and Google Scholar on COVID-19 and ophthalmology. The Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine 2011 Levels of Evidence worksheet was used for quality assessments. 1018 items were identified in the search; 26 records were included in the qualitative synthesis, which encompassed 6 literature reviews, 10 case series or cross-sectional studies, 4 case reports, and 6 intervention descriptions. Seventeen out of 26 records (65%) were categorized as level 5 within the Oxford CBME methodology grading system, the rest were level 4. The evidence generated on COVID-19 and ophthalmology to date is limited, although this is understandable given the circumstances. Both the possible presence of viral particles in tears and conjunctiva, and the potential for conjunctival transmission remain controversial. Ocular manifestations are not frequent and could resemble viral infection of the ocular surface. Most recommendations are based on the strategies implemented by Asian countries during previous coronavirus outbreaks. There is a need for substantive studies evaluating these strategies in the setting of SARS-CoV-2. In the meantime, plans for applying these measures must be implemented with caution, taking into account the context of each individual country, and undergo regular evaluation.