Search

Background Mechanical ventilators are essential biomedical devices for the respiratory support of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. These devices can be transmitters of bacterial pathogens. Therefore, it is necessary to implement effective disinfection procedures. The aim of this work was to show the impact of the modification of a cleaning and disinfection method of mechanical ventilators of patients with SARS-CoV-2 and ventilator-associated pneumonia. Methods A total of 338 mechanical ventilators of patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 and ESKAPE bacteria were divided in two groups. Group A and B were subjected to cleaning and disinfection with superoxidation solution-Cl/enzymatic detergent and isopropyl alcohol, respectively. Both groups were cultured for the detection of ESKAPE bacteria. The isolates were subjected to tests for identification, resistance, adherence, and genomic typing. Results Contamination rates of 21.6% (n = 36) were identified in group A. The inspiratory limb was the circuit involved in most cases of postdisinfection contamination. Acinetobacter baumanni, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and multi-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae were the pathogens involved in the contamination cases. The pathogens were highly adherent and in the case of A. baumanni, clonal dispersion was detected in 14 ventilators. Disinfection with enzymatic detergents allows a 100% reduction in contamination rates. Conclusions The implementation of cleaning and disinfection with enzymatic detergents/isopropyl alcohol of mechanical ventilators of patients with SARS-CoV-2 and ESKAPE bacteria had a positive impact on postdisinfection microbial contamination rates.

Asthma continues to be one of the most frequent chronic respiratory diseases in our country. New methods for diagnosis and treatment have been described; accordingly, the international guidelines were renewed.To create a national platform for the development of updated guidelines, solidly based on evidence: Comprehensive Asthma Management (Spanish acronym: MIA).MIA uses the ADAPTE method. The MIA development group consists of experts in pulmonology-allergology-methodology and representatives of 13 institutions and societies of specialties that manage asthma. The international reference guidelines (selected with AGREE-II): GINA 2020, GEMA 5.0, BTS/SIGN 2019 and ATS/ERS consensus document 2014-2019 on severe asthma. MIA covers suspected asthma, diagnosis, treatment, and special groups. Key clinical questions were formulated on treatment steps 1-3, biomarkers and severe asthma.Based on evidence, safety, cost and local reality, the core group developed responses. Through a Delphi process the broad MIA development group suggested adjustments until consensus was reached.A document was generated with multiple figures and algorithms, solidly based on evidence about asthma management, adjusted for Mexico with a broad base among different societies that participated in its development. It does not include guidelines for acute asthma.Antecedentes: El asma sigue siendo una patología respiratoria crónica frecuente en México. Se han descrito nuevos métodos para el diagnóstico y tratamiento conforme se renuevan las guías internacionales. Objetivo: Crear la plataforma nacional Manejo Integral del Asma (MIA), para el desarrollo de lineamientos actualizados con base en evidencia. Métodos: Se utilizó el método ADAPTE. El grupo de desarrollo de MIA estuvo integrado por expertos en neumología, alergología y metodología y representantes de 13 instituciones y sociedades de especialidades que manejan asma. Las guías internacionales de referencia (seleccionadas con AGREE-II) fueron GINA 2020, GEMA 5.0, BTS/SIGN 2019 y consenso ATS/ERS 2014-2019. En MIA se aborda sospecha de asma, diagnóstico, tratamiento y grupos especiales. Se formularon preguntas clínicas clave sobre tratamiento en los pasos 1 a 3, biomarcadores y asma grave. Resultados: Con base en evidencia, seguridad, costo y realidad local, el grupo nuclear desarrolló respuestas. Mediante proceso Delphi, el grupo amplio de desarrollo sugirió ajustes hasta que se logró el consenso. Conclusión: El documento generado contiene múltiples figuras y algoritmos, está sólidamente basado en evidencia acerca del manejo del asma y fue ajustado para México con participación de diferentes sociedades para su desarrollo; no se incluyeron lineamientos para la crisis asmática.

Background: Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) has a longstanding history and still remains the only disease-changing treatment for allergic rhinitis and asthma. Over the years 2 different schools have developed their strategies: the United States (US) and the European. Allergen extracts available in these regions are adapted to local practice. In other parts of the world, extracts from both regions and local ones are commercialized, as in Mexico. Here, local experts developed a national AIT guideline (GUIMIT 2019) searching for compromises between both schools. Methods: Using ADAPTE methodology for transculturizing guidelines and AGREE-II for evaluating guideline quality, GUIMIT selected 3 high-quality Main Reference Guidelines (MRGs): the European Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology (EAACI) guideines, the S2k guideline of various German-speaking medical societies (2014), and the US Practice Parameters on Allergen Immunotherapy 2011. We formulated clinical questions and based responses on the fused evidence available in the MRGs, combined with local possibilities, patient's preference, and costs. We came across several issues on which the MRGs disagreed. These are presented here along with arguments of GUIMIT members to resolve them. GUIMIT (for a complete English version, see Supplementary data) concluded the following: Results: Related to the diagnosis of IgE-mediated respiratory allergy, apart from skin prick testing complementary tests (challenges, in vitro testing and molecular such as species-specific allergens) might be useful in selected cases to inform AIT composition. AIT is indicated in allergic rhinitis and suggested in allergic asthma (once controlled) and IgE-mediated atopic dermatitis. Concerning the correct subcutaneous AIT dose for compounding vials according to the US school: dosing tables and formula are given; up to 4 non-related allergens can be mixed, refraining from mixing high with low protease extracts. When using European extracts: the manufacturer's indications should be followed; in multi-allergic patients 2 simultaneous injections can be given (100% consensus); mixing is discouraged. In Mexico only allergoid tablets are available; based on doses used in all sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) publications referenced in MRGs, GUIMIT suggests a probable effective dose related to subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) might be: 50–200% of the monthly SCIT dose given daily, maximum mixing 4 allergens. Also, a table with practical suggestions on non-evidence-existing issues, developed with a simplified Delphi method, is added. Finally, dissemination and implementation of guidelines is briefly discussed, explaining how we used online tools for this in Mexico. Conclusions: Countries where European and American AIT extracts are available should adjust AIT according to which school is followed.

Background Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) has a longstanding history and still remains the only disease-changing treatment for allergic rhinitis and asthma. Over the years 2 different schools have developed their strategies: the United States (US) and the European. Allergen extracts available in these regions are adapted to local practice. In other parts of the world, extracts from both regions and local ones are commercialized, as in Mexico. Here, local experts developed a national AIT guideline (GUIMIT 2019) searching for compromises between both schools. Methods Using ADAPTE methodology for transculturizing guidelines and AGREE-II for evaluating guideline quality, GUIMIT selected 3 high-quality Main Reference Guidelines (MRGs): the European Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology (EAACI) guideines, the S2k guideline of various German-speaking medical societies (2014), and the US Practice Parameters on Allergen Immunotherapy 2011. We formulated clinical questions and based responses on the fused evidence available in the MRGs, combined with local possibilities, patient's preference, and costs. We came across several issues on which the MRGs disagreed. These are presented here along with arguments of GUIMIT members to resolve them. GUIMIT (for a complete English version, see Supplementary data) concluded the following: Results Related to the diagnosis of IgE-mediated respiratory allergy, apart from skin prick testing complementary tests (challenges, in vitro testing and molecular such as species-specific allergens) might be useful in selected cases to inform AIT composition. AIT is indicated in allergic rhinitis and suggested in allergic asthma (once controlled) and IgE-mediated atopic dermatitis. Concerning the correct subcutaneous AIT dose for compounding vials according to the US school: dosing tables and formula are given; up to 4 non-related allergens can be mixed, refraining from mixing high with low protease extracts. When using European extracts: the manufacturer's indications should be followed; in multi-allergic patients 2 simultaneous injections can be given (100% consensus); mixing is discouraged. In Mexico only allergoid tablets are available; based on doses used in all sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) publications referenced in MRGs, GUIMIT suggests a probable effective dose related to subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) might be: 50–200% of the monthly SCIT dose given daily, maximum mixing 4 allergens. Also, a table with practical suggestions on non-evidence-existing issues, developed with a simplified Delphi method, is added. Finally, dissemination and implementation of guidelines is briefly discussed, explaining how we used online tools for this in Mexico. Conclusions Countries where European and American AIT extracts are available should adjust AIT according to which school is followed.

Rhinitis is the most frequent allergic disease in children. Symptoms may affect importantly life quality. Measures to avoid allergens when possible and the use of drugs are an important part of the treatment; however, specific immunotherapy is the only treatment altering the natural course of the disease.To assess if specific immunotherapy improves life quality in children with allergic rhinitis.Patients who attended to the allergy department during August and September 2002, and who fulfilled the inclusion criteria, were included. Two groups of treatment were formed: group A received specific immunotherapy with standardized allergenic extracts, from IPI ASAC Mexico. They started with a concentration of 0.07 bioequivalent units (BEU), with twice-a-week-application with increases of 10 (0.7, 7 and 80 BEU) each seven weeks up to maintenance dose of 700 BEU at six months. Group B only was given pharmacological treatment. Paediatric Rhinoconjunctivitis Quality of Life Questionnaires, specific to children with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, validated for its use in Spanish in Mexican children by the department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics of Mc Master University, were applied to all patients.Twenty-seven patients were included in each group, 14 males, adjusted for age with a correlation coefficient (r2) = 0.9799. In both groups, mean age was of 11 years 6 months (group A: 7 to 16 years, group B: 7 to 17 years). Eighteen (44.4%) and fifteen patients (33.3%), of groups A and B respectively, had persistent mild rhinitis, and 9 (55.6%) and 12 cases (66.7%) of groups A and B, respectively, had moderate persistent rhinitis. All of them were sensitized to domiciliary allergens. As to life quality a high odds ratio (OR) was found when assessing patients six months after treatment, especially in nasal symptoms such as pruritus (OR = 6.8) and obstruction (OR = 5.9). Also for practical symptoms the OR was high: carving eyes and nose (OR = 7), blowing the nose (OR = 4.8) and carrying disposable tissues (OR = 4.7). OR for other symptoms was as follows: thirst and throatitch, OR = 4; irritability, OR = 6.2, and ocular pruritus, OR = 3.1. Patients without immunotherapy were likely to use more drugs (OR = 6.4) than those receiving immunotherapy.We did not find controlled studies on life quality with the use of immunotherapy in children. In this study, specific immunotherapy was found to improve life quality in children with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis, especially in nasal symptoms, such as pruritus and obstruction, as well as in practical symptoms. These results are similar to those by Fell, who found that 92% patients referred an improvement of nasal symptoms, a better labor performance and a lesser use of drugs after four months of using immunotherapy.