1. Home
  2. female

female

Extended follow-up of local steroid injection for carpal tunnel syndrome: A randomized clinical trial

Author/s: 
Hofer, M., Ranstam, J., Atroshi, I.

Importance Local steroid injection is commonly used in treating patients with idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome, but evidence regarding long-term efficacy is lacking.

Objective To assess the long-term treatment effects of local steroid injection for carpal tunnel syndrome.

Design, Setting, and Participants This exploratory 5-year extended follow-up of a double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial was conducted from November 2008 to March 2012 at a university hospital orthopedic department. Participants included patients aged 22 to 69 years with primary idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome and no prior treatment with local steroid injections. Data were analyzed from May 2018 to August 2018.

Interventions Patients were randomized to injection of 80 mg methylprednisolone, 40 mg methylprednisolone, or saline.

Main Outcomes and Measures The coprimary outcomes were the symptom severity score and rate of subsequent carpal tunnel release surgery on the study hand at 5 years. Secondary outcomes were time from injection to surgical treatment, SF-36 bodily pain score, and score on the 11-item disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand scale.

Results A total of 111 participants (mean [SD] age at follow-up, 52.9 [11.6] years; 81 [73.0%] women and 30 [27.0%] men) were randomized, with 37 in the 80 mg methylprednisolone group, 37 in the 40 mg methylprednisolone group, and 37 in the saline placebo group. Complete 5-year follow-up data were obtained from all 111 participants with no dropouts (100% follow-up). At baseline, mean (SD) symptom severity scores were 2.93 (0.85) in the 80 mg methylprednisolone group, 3.13 (0.70) in the 40 mg methylprednisolone group, and 3.18 (0.75) in the placebo group, and at the 5-year follow up, mean (SD) symptom severity scores were 1.51 (0.66) in the 80 mg methylprednisolone group, 1.59 (0.63) in the 40 mg methylprednisolone group, and 1.67 (0.74) in the placebo group. Compared with placebo, there was no significant difference in mean change in symptom severity score from baseline to 5 years for the 80 mg methylprednisolone group (0.14 [95%CI, −0.17 to 0.45]) or the 40 mg methylprednisolone group (0.12 [95%CI, −0.19 to 0.43]). After injection, subsequent surgical treatment on the study hand was performed in 31 participants (83.8%) in the 80 mg methylprednisolone group, 34 participants (91.9%) in the 40 mg methylprednisolone group, and 36 participants (97.3%) in the placebo group; the number of participants who underwent surgical treatment between the 1-year and 5-year follow-ups was 4 participants (10.8%) in the 80 mg methylprednisolone group, 4 participants (10.8%) in the 40 mg methylprednisolone group, and 2 participants (5.4%) in the placebo group. All surgical procedures were conducted while participants and investigators were blinded to type of injection received. The mean (SD) time from injection to surgery was 180 (121) days in the 80 mg methylprednisolone group, 185 (125) days in the 40 mg methylprednisolone group, and 121 (88) days in the placebo group. Kaplan-Meier survival curves showed statistically significant difference in time to surgical treatment (log-rank test: 80 mg methylprednisolone vs placebo, P = .002 ; 40 mg methylprednisolone vs placebo, P = .02; methylprednisolone 80 mg vs 40 mg, P = .37).

Conclusions and Relevance These findings suggest that in idiopathic carpal tunnel syndrome, local methylprednisolone injection resulted in statistically significant reduction in surgery rates and delay in need for surgery.

Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT00806871 and NCT02652390

Vulvar lichen sclerosus

Author/s: 
Cleminson, K., Baxter, M. L.

An otherwise healthy 71-year-old woman presented to our clinic with a history of pruritus and burning of the vulva. On examination, we observed an atrophic, white, shiny plaque involving the vulva, perineum and perianal areas. The clitoral hood and labia minora were completely scarred and the introitus was narrow (Figure 1). We diagnosed vulvar lichen sclerosus, a chronic inflammatory disease affecting the anogenital area that can present in any age group, though it is most common before puberty and after menopause. We noted no areas of concern for malignant disease, so we did not take a biopsy. We treated the patient with high-potency steroids (clobetasol ointment twice daily for 6 wk, then weekly). She responded well to treatment, and once her disease settled, we switched her to mid-potency steroids (betamethasone valerate 0.1% ointment daily).

Incidence, co-occurrence, and evolution of long-COVID features: A 6-month retrospective cohort study of 273,618 survivors of COVID-19

Author/s: 
Taquet, M., Dercon, Q., Luciano, S., Geddes, J. R., Husain, M., Harrison, P. J.

Background
Long-COVID refers to a variety of symptoms affecting different organs reported by people following Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. To date, there have been no robust estimates of the incidence and co-occurrence of long-COVID features, their relationship to age, sex, or severity of infection, and the extent to which they are specific to COVID-19. The aim of this study is to address these issues.

Methods and findings
We conducted a retrospective cohort study based on linked electronic health records (EHRs) data from 81 million patients including 273,618 COVID-19 survivors. The incidence and co-occurrence within 6 months and in the 3 to 6 months after COVID-19 diagnosis were calculated for 9 core features of long-COVID (breathing difficulties/breathlessness, fatigue/malaise, chest/throat pain, headache, abdominal symptoms, myalgia, other pain, cognitive symptoms, and anxiety/depression). Their co-occurrence network was also analyzed. Comparison with a propensity score–matched cohort of patients diagnosed with influenza during the same time period was achieved using Kaplan–Meier analysis and the Cox proportional hazard model. The incidence of atopic dermatitis was used as a negative control.

Among COVID-19 survivors (mean [SD] age: 46.3 [19.8], 55.6% female), 57.00% had one or more long-COVID feature recorded during the whole 6-month period (i.e., including the acute phase), and 36.55% between 3 and 6 months. The incidence of each feature was: abnormal breathing (18.71% in the 1- to 180-day period; 7.94% in the 90- to180-day period), fatigue/malaise (12.82%; 5.87%), chest/throat pain (12.60%; 5.71%), headache (8.67%; 4.63%), other pain (11.60%; 7.19%), abdominal symptoms (15.58%; 8.29%), myalgia (3.24%; 1.54%), cognitive symptoms (7.88%; 3.95%), and anxiety/depression (22.82%; 15.49%). All 9 features were more frequently reported after COVID-19 than after influenza (with an overall excess incidence of 16.60% and hazard ratios between 1.44 and 2.04, all p < 0.001), co-occurred more commonly, and formed a more interconnected network. Significant differences in incidence and co-occurrence were associated with sex, age, and illness severity. Besides the limitations inherent to EHR data, limitations of this study include that (i) the findings do not generalize to patients who have had COVID-19 but were not diagnosed, nor to patients who do not seek or receive medical attention when experiencing symptoms of long-COVID; (ii) the findings say nothing about the persistence of the clinical features; and (iii) the difference between cohorts might be affected by one cohort seeking or receiving more medical attention for their symptoms.

Conclusions
Long-COVID clinical features occurred and co-occurred frequently and showed some specificity to COVID-19, though they were also observed after influenza. Different long-COVID clinical profiles were observed based on demographics and illness severity.

Author summary
Why was this study done?
Long-COVID has been described in recent studies. But we do not know the risk of developing features of this condition and how it is affected by factors such as age, sex, or severity of infection.
We do not know if the risk of having features of long-COVID is more likely after Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) than after influenza.
We do not know about the extent to which different features of long-COVID co-occur.
What did the researchers do and find?
This research used data from electronic health records of 273,618 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and estimated the risk of having long-COVID features in the 6 months after a diagnosis of COVID-19. It compared the risk of long-COVID features in different groups within the population and also compared the risk to that after influenza.
The research found that over 1 in 3 patients had one or more features of long-COVID recorded between 3 and 6 months after a diagnosis of COVID-19. This was significantly higher than after influenza.
For 2 in 5 of the patients who had long-COVID features in the 3- to 6-month period, they had no record of any such feature in the previous 3 months.
The risk of long-COVID features was higher in patients who had more severe COVID-19 illness, and slightly higher among females and young adults. White and non-white patients were equally affected.
What do these findings mean?
Knowing the risk of long-COVID features helps in planning the relevant healthcare service provision.
The fact that the risk is higher after COVID-19 than after influenza suggests that their origin might, in part, directly involve infection with SARS-CoV-2 and is not just a general consequence of viral infection. This might help in developing effective treatments against long-COVID.
The findings in the subgroups, and the fact that the majority of patients who have features of long-COVID in the 3- to 6-month period already had symptoms in the first 3 months, may help in identifying those at greatest risk.

Maintenance or Discontinuation of Antidepressants in Primary Care

Author/s: 
Lewis, G., Marston, L., Duffy, L., Freemantle, N., Gilbody, S., Hunter, R., Kendrick, T., Kessler, D., Mangin, D., King, M., Lanham, P., Moore, M.

BACKGROUND
Patients with depression who are treated in primary care practices may receive antidepressants for prolonged periods. Data are limited on the effects of maintaining or discontinuing antidepressant therapy in this setting.

METHODS
We conducted a randomized, double-blind trial involving adults who were being treated in 150 general practices in the United Kingdom. All the patients had a history of at least two depressive episodes or had been taking antidepressants for 2 years or longer and felt well enough to consider stopping antidepressants. Patients who had received citalopram, fluoxetine, sertraline, or mirtazapine were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to maintain their current antidepressant therapy (maintenance group) or to taper and discontinue such therapy with the use of matching placebo (discontinuation group). The primary outcome was the first relapse of depression during the 52-week trial period, as evaluated in a time-to-event analysis. Secondary outcomes were depressive and anxiety symptoms, physical and withdrawal symptoms, quality of life, time to stopping an antidepressant or placebo, and global mood ratings.

RESULTS
A total of 1466 patients underwent screening. Of these patients, 478 were enrolled in the trial (238 in the maintenance group and 240 in the discontinuation group). The average age of the patients was 54 years; 73% were women. Adherence to the trial assignment was 70% in the maintenance group and 52% in the discontinuation group. By 52 weeks, relapse occurred in 92 of 238 patients (39%) in the maintenance group and in 135 of 240 (56%) in the discontinuation group (hazard ratio, 2.06; 95% confidence interval, 1.56 to 2.70; P<0.001). Secondary outcomes were generally in the same direction as the primary outcome. Patients in the discontinuation group had more symptoms of depression, anxiety, and withdrawal than those in the maintenance group.

CONCLUSIONS
Among patients in primary care practices who felt well enough to discontinue antidepressant therapy, those who were assigned to stop their medication had a higher risk of relapse of depression by 52 weeks than those who were assigned to maintain their current therapy. (Funded by the National Institute for Health Research; ANTLER ISRCTN number, ISRCTN15969819.)

Screening for Chlamydia and Gonorrhea: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

Author/s: 
M. J., Mangione, C. M., Cabana, M., Caughey, A. B., Davis, E. M., Donahue, K. E., Doubeni, C. A., Krist, A. H., Kubik, Li, L., Ogedegbe, G., Pbert, Silverstein, Simon, M. A., Stevermer, J., Tseng, C., Wong, J. B.

Importance: Chlamydia and gonorrhea are among the most common sexually transmitted infections in the US. Infection rates are highest among adolescents and young adults of both sexes. Chlamydial and gonococcal infections in women are usually asymptomatic and may lead to pelvic inflammatory disease and its associated complications. Newborns of pregnant persons with untreated infection may develop neonatal chlamydial pneumonia or gonococcal or chlamydial ophthalmia. Infection in men may lead to urethritis and epididymitis. Both types of infection can increase risk of acquiring or transmitting HIV.

Objective: To update its 2014 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for chlamydia and gonorrhea in sexually active adolescents and adults, including pregnant persons.

Population: Asymptomatic, sexually active adolescents and adults, including pregnant persons.

Evidence assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for chlamydia in all sexually active women 24 years or younger and in women 25 years or older who are at increased risk for infection has moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for gonorrhea in all sexually active women 24 years or younger and in women 25 years or older who are at increased risk for infection has moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for chlamydia and gonorrhea in men.

Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends screening for chlamydia in all sexually active women 24 years or younger and in women 25 years or older who are at increased risk for infection. (B recommendation) The USPSTF recommends screening for gonorrhea in all sexually active women 24 years or younger and in women 25 years or older who are at increased risk for infection. (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for chlamydia and gonorrhea in men. (I statement).

Keywords 
Chlamydia gonorrhea Recommendation Statement Sexually Transmitted Infection Young Adults US

Geographic Tongue

Author/s: 
Prasanth, V. J., Singh, A.

A 37-year-old woman presented to the outpatient ear, nose and throat department with a 1-year history of intermittent burning and changes in appearance of her tongue. The patient had no history of bleeding, pain or concurrent skin or genital lesions, and she had no dermatologic history. A course of clotrimazole and vitamin B supplementation had been ineffective. On examination, she had well-defined annular lesions with central erythema and a raised white serpentine border involving the dorsal anterior two-thirds of her tongue (Figure 1). There was no fissuring. Based on her history, the appearance of her tongue and an otherwise normal physical examination, we diagnosed geographic tongue. We prescribed topical benzydamine, as required, for symptomatic relief of burning. At 6-month follow-up, she was free of symptoms, with patchy tongue changes.

Prevalence of Allergic Reactions After Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccination Among Adults With High Allergy Risk

Author/s: 
Shavit, R., Maoz-Segal, R., Iancovici-Kidon, M.

Importance
Allergic reactions among some individuals who received the Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) COVID-19 vaccine discourage patients with allergic conditions from receiving this vaccine and physicians from recommending the vaccine.

Objective
To describe the assessment and immunization of highly allergic individuals with the BNT162b2 vaccine.

Design, Setting, and Participants
In a prospective cohort study from December 27, 2020, to February 22, 2021, 8102 patients with allergies who applied to the COVID 19 vaccine referral center at the Sheba Medical Center underwent risk assessment using an algorithm that included a detailed questionnaire. High-risk patients (n = 429) were considered “highly allergic” and were immunized under medical supervision.

Exposures
Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) COVID-19 vaccine.

Main Outcomes and Measures
Allergic and anaphylactic reactions after the first and second doses of BNT162b2 vaccine among highly allergic patients.

Results
Of the 429 individuals who applied to the COVID-19 referral center and were defined as highly allergic, 304 (70.9%) were women and the mean (SD) age was 52 (16) years. This highly allergic group was referred to receive immunization under medical supervision. After the first dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine, 420 patients (97.9%) had no immediate allergic event, 6 (1.4%) developed minor allergic responses, and 3 (0.7%) had anaphylactic reactions. During the study period, 218 highly allergic patients (50.8%) received the second BNT162b2 vaccine dose, of which 214 (98.2%) had no allergic reactions and 4 patients (1.8%) had minor allergic reactions. Other immediate and late reactions were comparable with those seen in the general population, except for delayed itch and skin eruption, which were more common among allergic patients.

Conclusions and Relevance
The rate of allergic reactions to BNT162b2 vaccine, is higher among patients with allergies, particularly among a subgroup with a history of high-risk allergies. This study suggests that most patients with a history of allergic diseases and, particularly, highly allergic patients can be safely immunized by using an algorithm that can be implemented in different medical facilities and includes a referral center, a risk assessment questionnaire, and a setting for immunization under medical supervision of highly allergic patients. Further studies are required to define more specific risk factors for allergic reactions to the BNT162b2 vaccine.

The effect of high-dose vitamin D supplementation on serum vitamin D levels and milk calcium concentration in lactating women and their infants

Author/s: 
Basile, L. A., Taylor, S. N., Wagner, C. L., Horst, R. L., Hollis, B. W.

Objective: Improve vitamin D status in lactating women and their recipient infants, and measure breast milk calcium concentration [Ca] as a function of vitamin D regimen.

Design/methods: Fully breastfeeding mothers were randomized at 1 month postpartum to 2000 (n = 12) or 4000 (n = 13) IU/day vitamin D for 3 months to achieve optimal vitamin D status [serum 25(OH)D > or =32 ng/mL (80 nmol/L)]. Breast milk [Ca], maternal and infant serum 25(OH)D and serum Ca, and maternal urinary Ca/Cr ratio were measured monthly.

Results: Mothers were similar between groups for age, race, gestation, and birth weight. 25(OH)D increased from 1 to 4 months in both groups (mean +/- SD): +11.5 +/- 2.3 ng/mL for group 2000 (p = 0.002) and +14.4 +/- 3.0 ng/mL for group 4000 (p = 0.0008). The 4000 IU/day regimen was more effective in raising both maternal and infant serum levels and breast milk antirachitic activity than the 2000 IU/day regimen. Breast milk [Ca] fell with continued lactation through 4 months in the 2000 and 4000 IU groups. Decline in breast milk [Ca] was not associated with vitamin D dose (p = 0.73) or maternal 25(OH)D (p = 0.94). No mother or infant experienced vitamin D-related adverse events, and all laboratory parameters remained in the normal range.

Conclusion: High-dose vitamin D was effective in increasing 25(OH)D levels in fully breastfeeding mothers to optimal levels without evidence of toxicity. Breast milk [Ca] and its decline in both groups during 1 to 4 months were independent of maternal vitamin D status and regimen. Both the mother and her infant attained improved vitamin D status and maintained normal [Ca].

A predictive equation to guide vitamin D replacement dose in patients

Author/s: 
Singh, G., Bonham, A. J.

Background: Vitamin D is essential for bone health and probably the health of most nonskeletal tissues. Vitamin D deficiency is widespread, and recommended doses are usually inadequate to maintain healthy levels. We conducted a retrospective observational study to determine whether the recommended doses of vitamin D are adequate to correct deficiency and maintain normal levels in a population seeking health care. We also sought to develop a predictive equation for replacement doses of vitamin D.

Methods: We reviewed the response to vitamin D supplementation in 1327 patients and 3885 episodes of vitamin D replacement and attempted to discern factors affecting the response to vitamin D replacement by conducting multiple regression analyses.

Results: For the whole population, average daily dose resulting in any increase in serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D level was 4707 IU/day; corresponding values for ambulatory and nursing home patients were 4229 and 6103 IU/day, respectively. Significant factors affecting the change in serum concentrations of 25-hydroxyvitamin D, in addition to the dose administered, are (1) starting serum concentration of 25-hydroxyvitamin D, (2) body mass index (BMI), (3) age, and (f) serum albumin concentration. The following equation predicts the dose of vitamin D needed (in international units per day) to affect a given change in serum concentrations of 25-hydroxyvitamin D: Dose = [(8.52 - Desired change in serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D level) + (0.074 × Age) - (0.20 × BMI) + (1.74 × Albumin concentration) - (0.62 × Starting serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentration)]/(-0.002). Analysis of the dose responses among 3 racial groups-white, black, and others-did not reveal clinically meaningful differences between the races. The main limitation of the study is its retrospective observational nature; however, that is also its strength in that we assessed the circumstances seen in usual health care setting.

Conclusions: The recommended daily allowance for vitamin D is grossly inadequate for correcting low serum concentrations of 25-hydroxyvitamin D in many adult patients. About 5000 IU vitamin D3/day is usually needed to correct deficiency, and the maintenance dose should be ≥2000 IU/day. The required dose may be calculated from the predictive equations specific for ambulatory and nursing home patients.

Subscribe to female