97 resultados para Hpv


Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

BackgroundThis is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2008.The technique called one-lung ventilation can confine bleeding or infection to one lung, prevent rupture of a lung cyst or, more commonly, facilitate surgical exposure of the unventilated lung. During one-lung ventilation, anaesthesia is maintained either by delivering an inhalation anaesthetic to the ventilated lung or by infusing an intravenous anaesthetic. It is possible that the method chosen to maintain anaesthesia may affect patient outcomes. Inhalation anaesthetics may impair hypoxic pulmonary vasoconstriction (HPV) and increase intrapulmonary shunt and hypoxaemia.ObjectivesThe objective of this review was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of intravenous versus inhalation anaesthesia for one-lung ventilation.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); The Cochrane Library (2012, Issue 11); MEDLINE (1966 to November 2012); EMBASE (1980 to November 2012); Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe em Ciencias da Saude (LILACS, 1982 to November 2012) and ISI web of Science (1945 to November 2012), reference lists of identified trials and bibliographies of published reviews. We also contacted researchers in the field. No language restrictions were applied. The date of the most recent search was 19 November 2012. The original search was performed in June 2006.Selection criteriaWe included randomized controlled trials and quasi-randomized controlled trials of intravenous (e. g. propofol) versus inhalation (e. g. isoflurane, sevoflurane, desflurane) anaesthesia for one-lung ventilation in both surgical and intensive care participants. We excluded studies of participants who had only one lung (i.e. pneumonectomy or congenital absence of one lung).Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information.Main resultsWe included in this updated review 20 studies that enrolled 850 participants, all of which assessed surgical participants no studies investigated one-lung ventilation performed outside the operating theatre. No evidence indicated that the drug used to maintain anaesthesia during one-lung ventilation affected participant outcomes. The methodological quality of the included studies was difficult to assess as it was reported poorly, so the predominant classification of bias was 'unclear'.Authors' conclusionsVery little evidence from randomized controlled trials suggests differences in participant outcomes with anaesthesia maintained by intravenous versus inhalational anaesthesia during one-lung ventilation. If researchers believe that the type of drug used to maintain anaesthesia during one-lung ventilation is important, they should design randomized controlled trials with appropriate participant outcomes, rather than report temporary fluctuations in physiological variables.

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Background: Immunity plays an important role in controlling human papillomavirus (HPV) infection and associated lesions. Unlike infections caused by other viruses, natural HPV infection does not always result in a protective antibody response. Therefore, HPV antibodies are also considered markers of cumulative exposure. The aim of this study was to identify determinants of HPV16 seroreactivity at enrollment among women from the Ludwig-McGill cohort, a natural history study of HPV infection and risk of cervical neoplasia.Methods: HPV16 serology was assessed by ELISA for L1 and L2 capsid antigens, while HPV typing and viral load measurements were performed by PCR-based methods. The associations were analyzed by unconditional logistic regression.Results: Of 2049 subjects, 425 (20.7%) were strongly seropositive for HPV16. In multivariate analysis, seroreactivity was positively correlated with age, lifetime number of sexual partners, frequency of sex, and HPV16 viral load, and negatively associated with duration of smoking.Conclusions: HPV16 seroreactivity is determined by factors that reflect viral exposure.