Antibody levels against GLURP R2, MSP1 block 2 hybrid and AS202.11 and the risk of malaria in children living in hyperendemic (Burkina Faso) and hypo-endemic (Ghana) areas.

Differences in parasite transmission intensity influence the process of acquisition of host immunity to Plasmodium falciparum malaria and ultimately, the rate of malaria related morbidity and mortality. Potential vaccines being designed to complement current intervention efforts therefore need to be evaluated against different malaria endemicity backgrounds. The associations between antibody responses to the chimeric merozoite surface protein 1 block 2 hybrid (MSP1 hybrid), glutamate-rich protein region 2 (GLURP R2) and the peptide AS202.11, and the risk of malaria were assessed in children living in malaria hyperendemic (Burkina Faso, n = 354) and hypo-endemic (Ghana, n = 209) areas. Using the same reagent lots and standardized protocols for both study sites, immunoglobulin (Ig) M, IgG and IgG sub-class levels to each antigen were measured by ELISA in plasma from the children (aged 6-72 months). Associations between antibody levels and risk of malaria were assessed using Cox regression models adjusting for covariates. There was a significant association between GLURP R2 IgG3 and reduced risk of malaria after adjusting age of children in both the Burkinabe (hazard ratio 0.82; 95 % CI 0.74-0.91, p < 0.0001) and the Ghanaian (HR 0.48; 95 % CI 0.25-0.91, p = 0.02) cohorts. MSP1 hybrid IgM was associated (HR 0.85; 95 % CI 0.73-0.98, p = 0.02) with reduced risk of malaria in Burkina Faso cohort while IgG against AS202.11 in the Ghanaian children was associated with increased risk of malaria (HR 1.29; 95 % CI 1.01-1.65, p = 0.04). These findings support further development of GLURP R2 and MSP1 block 2 hybrid, perhaps as a fusion vaccine antigen targeting malaria blood stage that can be deployed in areas of varying transmission intensity.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008.

OBJECTIVE: To provide an update to the original Surviving Sepsis Campaign clinical management guidelines, "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock," published in 2004. DESIGN: Modified Delphi method with a consensus conference of 55 international experts, several subsequent meetings of subgroups and key individuals, teleconferences, and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee. This process was conducted independently of any industry funding. METHODS: We used the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations. A strong recommendation (1) indicates that an intervention's desirable effects clearly outweigh its undesirable effects (risk, burden, cost) or clearly do not. Weak recommendations (2) indicate that the tradeoff between desirable and undesirable effects is less clear. The grade of strong or weak is considered of greater clinical importance than a difference in letter level of quality of evidence. In areas without complete agreement, a formal process of resolution was developed and applied. Recommendations are grouped into those directly targeting severe sepsis, recommendations targeting general care of the critically ill patient that are considered high priority in severe sepsis, and pediatric considerations. RESULTS: Key recommendations, listed by category, include early goal-directed resuscitation of the septic patient during the first 6 hrs after recognition (1C); blood cultures before antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging studies performed promptly to confirm potential source of infection (1C); administration of broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy within 1 hr of diagnosis of septic shock (1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (1D); reassessment of antibiotic therapy with microbiology and clinical data to narrow coverage, when appropriate (1C); a usual 7-10 days of antibiotic therapy guided by clinical response (1D); source control with attention to the balance of risks and benefits of the chosen method (1C); administration of either crystalloid or colloid fluid resuscitation (1B); fluid challenge to restore mean circulating filling pressure (1C); reduction in rate of fluid administration with rising filing pressures and no improvement in tissue perfusion (1D); vasopressor preference for norepinephrine or dopamine to maintain an initial target of mean arterial pressure > or = 65 mm Hg (1C); dobutamine inotropic therapy when cardiac output remains low despite fluid resuscitation and combined inotropic/vasopressor therapy (1C); stress-dose steroid therapy given only in septic shock after blood pressure is identified to be poorly responsive to fluid and vasopressor therapy (2C); recombinant activated protein C in patients with severe sepsis and clinical assessment of high risk for death (2B except 2C for postoperative patients). In the absence of tissue hypoperfusion, coronary artery disease, or acute hemorrhage, target a hemoglobin of 7-9 g/dL (1B); a low tidal volume (1B) and limitation of inspiratory plateau pressure strategy (1C) for acute lung injury (ALI)/acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); application of at least a minimal amount of positive end-expiratory pressure in acute lung injury (1C); head of bed elevation in mechanically ventilated patients unless contraindicated (1B); avoiding routine use of pulmonary artery catheters in ALI/ARDS (1A); to decrease days of mechanical ventilation and ICU length of stay, a conservative fluid strategy for patients with established ALI/ARDS who are not in shock (1C); protocols for weaning and sedation/analgesia (1B); using either intermittent bolus sedation or continuous infusion sedation with daily interruptions or lightening (1B); avoidance of neuromuscular blockers, if at all possible (1B); institution of glycemic control (1B), targeting a blood glucose < 150 mg/dL after initial stabilization (2C); equivalency of continuous veno-veno hemofiltration or intermittent hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis (1A); use of stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding using H2 blockers (1A) or proton pump inhibitors (1B); and consideration of limitation of support where appropriate (1D). Recommendations specific to pediatric severe sepsis include greater use of physical examination therapeutic end points (2C); dopamine as the first drug of choice for hypotension (2C); steroids only in children with suspected or proven adrenal insufficiency (2C); and a recommendation against the use of recombinant activated protein C in children (1B). CONCLUSIONS: There was strong agreement among a large cohort of international experts regarding many level 1 recommendations for the best current care of patients with severe sepsis. Evidenced-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the first step toward improved outcomes for this important group of critically ill patients.

A comparison of injuries among children and adult football (soccer) players

Football is a universal and an affordable game but we need to minimize the incidence of accidents among the increasing number of young football players. Our 11 year retrospective epidemiological study (1990-2000) of football injuries in children (N= 1000) was compared with those of adult players in the 2006 European Championship. This comparative study confirmed that the anatomical, biomechanical and biological conditions differ between adults and children and that they warrant particular attention to protect the latter vulnerable group against bone avulsions, overuse pathologies and fatigue-fractures. Injuries were shown to increase significantly with age up to 16 years (P=0.005). Children suffer mainly from contusions, fractures and sprain injuries. Head injuries were more common in boys (P=0.070), while girls were more prone to sprains. The types of injuries differ between adults and children (sprain versus fractures), the anatomical location of injuries is different (lower limbs in adults, lower and upper limbs in children), the circumstances of the injuries are different (contact in adults versus non-contact in children), and teenage girls have different types of injuries than teenage boys. An increased incidence of injuries is due to changes in the position of the center of gravity and in the morphotype during rapid growth. For these reasons it is mandatory to adapt the training to the age and sex of the players. It is unsafe to train children the same way as adults. The height, the weight and the speed of growth must be taken into account by the multidisciplinary team when organising the training programmes. -- Le football fait partie des sports les plus pratiqués au monde en raison de sa popularité et de son accessibilité économ ique. L'incidence des blessures liées à cette pratique doit être diminuée surtout chez les jeunes joueurs en raison de la croissance exponentielle du nombre de joueurs féminins et masculins. Une étude épidémiologique rétrospective sur 11 ans (1990-2000) a été réalisée chez les enfants victimes de blessures liées au football (N==1000), puis a été comparée aux données recueillies de l'UEFA lors d'un Championnat Européen en 2006 sur les lésions des joueurs adultes. Cette étude comparative confirme que les structures anatomiques, biologiques et les tensions biomécaniques chez l'enfant diffèrent de celles de l'adulte. Les enfants ont un risque plus élevé de souffrir d'avulsion osseuse et de fractures de fatigue que les adultes. Les blessures augmentent significativement avec l'âge jusqu'à 16 ans (P==0,005). Les traumatismes crâniens sont plus fréquents chez les garçons tandis que les entorses sont plus à risque chez les filles. Les adultes font plus souvent des entorses tandis que les enfants font plus de fractures. La localisation anatomique diffère également entre ces deux groupes (les membres inférieurs chez l'adulte et les membres inférieurs et supérieurs chez l'enfant). La circonstance des blessures diffère également (choc avec un autre joueur chez l'adulte et des blessures sans contact chez l'enfant). Chez les adolescents, les blessures des filles diffèrent de celles des garçons. L'augmentation chez les enfants de cette incidence est liée au déplacement lors de la croissance du centre de gravité, avec une maladresse accrue lors des phases de croissance. Pour toutes ces raisons, il est justifié d'adapter les entraînements de football en fonction de l'âge, du sexe et du morphotype. L'entrainement des enfants doit être différent de celui des adultes. Le poids, la taille et la vitesse de croissance doit être prise en compte dans des structures multidisciplinaires afin de permettre une meilleure longévité sportive des jeunes joueurs de football.