Institution
Faculdade de Medicina de São José do Rio Preto
Education•São José do Rio Preto, Brazil•
About: Faculdade de Medicina de São José do Rio Preto is a education organization based out in São José do Rio Preto, Brazil. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Dengue virus. The organization has 1775 authors who have published 1898 publications receiving 24784 citations. The organization is also known as: Faculty of Medicine of São José do Rio Preto.
Topics: Population, Dengue virus, Dengue fever, Intensive care, Genotype
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
University of Washington1, St George’s University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust2, McMaster University3, Agostino Gemelli University Polyclinic4, Emory University5, Federal University of São Paulo6, Ottawa Hospital7, St Thomas' Hospital8, University of Michigan9, Cooper University Hospital10, University of Kansas11, University of Amsterdam12, United Arab Emirates University13, University of Pittsburgh14, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences15, University of São Paulo16, University of Minnesota17, Population Health Research Institute18, University of Toronto19, Humanitas University20, University of Kentucky21, Ghent University Hospital22, University of Tokyo23, Peking Union Medical College Hospital24, Hebron University25, Monash University26, Copenhagen University Hospital27, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine28, Vanderbilt University29, Harvard University30, Brigham and Women's Hospital31, University of Ulsan32, University of Manitoba33, Makerere University34, Faculdade de Medicina de São José do Rio Preto35, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto36, Medanta37, University of the Witwatersrand38, New York University39, Washington University in St. Louis40, University of Alberta41, Hennepin County Medical Center42, University of Pennsylvania43, Hebrew University of Jerusalem44, Hadassah Medical Center45, Hochschule Hannover46, Brown University47
TL;DR: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations on the recognition and management of sepsis and its complications as discussed by the authors, which are either strong or weak, or in the form of best practice statements.
Abstract: Background
Sepsis poses a global threat to millions of lives. The Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations on the recognition and management of sepsis and its complications.
Methods
We formed a panel of 60 experts from 22 countries and 11 members of the public. The panel prioritized questions that are relevant to the recognition and management of sepsis and septic shock in adults. New questions and sections were addressed, relative to the previous guidelines. These questions were grouped under 6 subgroups (screening and early treatment, infection, hemodynamics, ventilation, additional therapies, and long-term outcomes and goals of care). With input from the panel and methodologists, professional medical librarians performed the search strategy tailored to either specific questions or a group of relevant questions. A dedicated systematic review team performed screening and data abstraction when indicated. For each question, the methodologists, with input from panel members, summarized the evidence assessed and graded the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. The panel generated recommendations using the evidence-to-decision framework. Recommendations were either strong or weak, or in the form of best practice statements. When evidence was insufficient to support a recommendation, the panel was surveyed to generate “in our practice” statements.
Results
The SSC panel issued 93 statements: 15 best practice statements, 15 strong recommendations, and 54 weak recommendations and no recommendation was provided for 9 questions. The recommendations address several important clinical areas related to screening tools, acute resuscitation strategies, management of fluids and vasoactive agents, antimicrobials and diagnostic tests and the use of additional therapies, ventilation management, goals of care, and post sepsis care.
Conclusion
The SSC panel issued evidence-based recommendations to help support key stakeholders caring for adults with sepsis or septic shock and their families.
893 citations
••
TL;DR: The Cas13-based SHERLOCK platform can detect Zika virus and dengue virus in patient samples at concentrations as low as 1 copy per microliter and can distinguish the four DENV serotypes, as well as region-specific strains of ZIKV from the 2015–2016 pandemic.
Abstract: Mitigating global infectious disease requires diagnostic tools that are sensitive, specific, and rapidly field deployable. In this study, we demonstrate that the Cas13-based SHERLOCK (specific high-sensitivity enzymatic reporter unlocking) platform can detect Zika virus (ZIKV) and dengue virus (DENV) in patient samples at concentrations as low as 1 copy per microliter. We developed HUDSON (heating unextracted diagnostic samples to obliterate nucleases), a protocol that pairs with SHERLOCK for viral detection directly from bodily fluids, enabling instrument-free DENV detection directly from patient samples in
877 citations
••
24 Apr 2020
TL;DR: The preliminary findings of this study suggest that the higher CQ dosage should not be recommended for critically ill patients with COVID-19 because of its potential safety hazards, especially when taken concurrently with azithromycin and oseltamivir.
Abstract: Importance There is no specific antiviral therapy recommended for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In vitro studies indicate that the antiviral effect of chloroquine diphosphate (CQ) requires a high concentration of the drug. Objective To evaluate the safety and efficacy of 2 CQ dosages in patients with severe COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants This parallel, double-masked, randomized, phase IIb clinical trial with 81 adult patients who were hospitalized with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection was conducted from March 23 to April 5, 2020, at a tertiary care facility in Manaus, Brazilian Amazon. Interventions Patients were allocated to receive high-dosage CQ (ie, 600 mg CQ twice daily for 10 days) or low-dosage CQ (ie, 450 mg twice daily on day 1 and once daily for 4 days). Main Outcomes and Measures Primary outcome was reduction in lethality by at least 50% in the high-dosage group compared with the low-dosage group. Data presented here refer primarily to safety and lethality outcomes during treatment on day 13. Secondary end points included participant clinical status, laboratory examinations, and electrocardiogram results. Outcomes will be presented to day 28. Viral respiratory secretion RNA detection was performed on days 0 and 4. Results Out of a predefined sample size of 440 patients, 81 were enrolled (41 [50.6%] to high-dosage group and 40 [49.4%] to low-dosage group). Enrolled patients had a mean (SD) age of 51.1 (13.9) years, and most (60 [75.3%]) were men. Older age (mean [SD] age, 54.7 [13.7] years vs 47.4 [13.3] years) and more heart disease (5 of 28 [17.9%] vs 0) were seen in the high-dose group. Viral RNA was detected in 31 of 40 (77.5%) and 31 of 41 (75.6%) patients in the low-dosage and high-dosage groups, respectively. Lethality until day 13 was 39.0% in the high-dosage group (16 of 41) and 15.0% in the low-dosage group (6 of 40). The high-dosage group presented more instance of QTc interval greater than 500 milliseconds (7 of 37 [18.9%]) compared with the low-dosage group (4 of 36 [11.1%]). Respiratory secretion at day 4 was negative in only 6 of 27 patients (22.2%). Conclusions and Relevance The preliminary findings of this study suggest that the higher CQ dosage should not be recommended for critically ill patients with COVID-19 because of its potential safety hazards, especially when taken concurrently with azithromycin and oseltamivir. These findings cannot be extrapolated to patients with nonsevere COVID-19. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:NCT04323527
852 citations
••
University of Washington1, St George’s University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust2, McMaster University3, Agostino Gemelli University Polyclinic4, Emory University5, Federal University of São Paulo6, Ottawa Hospital7, St Thomas' Hospital8, University of Michigan9, Cooper University Hospital10, University of Kansas11, University of Amsterdam12, United Arab Emirates University13, University of Pittsburgh14, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences15, University of São Paulo16, University of Minnesota17, Population Health Research Institute18, University of Toronto19, Humanitas University20, University of Kentucky21, Ghent University Hospital22, University of Tokyo23, Peking Union Medical College Hospital24, Hebron University25, Monash University26, Copenhagen University Hospital27, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine28, Vanderbilt University29, Brigham and Women's Hospital30, University of Ulsan31, University of Manitoba32, Makerere University33, Faculdade de Medicina de São José do Rio Preto34, National Institutes of Health35, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto36, Medanta37, University of the Witwatersrand38, New York University39, Washington University in St. Louis40, University of Alberta41, Hennepin County Medical Center42, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital43, University of Pennsylvania44, Hebrew University of Jerusalem45, Hochschule Hannover46, Brown University47
TL;DR: The Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations on the recognition and management of sepsis and its complications as mentioned in this paper, which are either strong or weak, or in the form of best practice statements.
Abstract: Background
Sepsis poses a global threat to millions of lives. The Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations on the recognition and management of sepsis and its complications.
Methods
We formed a panel of 60 experts from 22 countries and 11 members of the public. The panel prioritized questions that are relevant to the recognition and management of sepsis and septic shock in adults. New questions and sections were addressed, relative to the previous guidelines. These questions were grouped under 6 subgroups (screening and early treatment, infection, hemodynamics, ventilation, additional therapies, and long-term outcomes and goals of care). With input from the panel and methodologists, professional medical librarians performed the search strategy tailored to either specific questions or a group of relevant questions. A dedicated systematic review team performed screening and data abstraction when indicated. For each question, the methodologists, with input from panel members, summarized the evidence assessed and graded the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. The panel generated recommendations using the evidence-to-decision framework. Recommendations were either strong or weak, or in the form of best practice statements. When evidence was insufficient to support a recommendation, the panel was surveyed to generate “in our practice” statements.
Results
The SSC panel issued 93 statements: 15 best practice statements, 15 strong recommendations, and 54 weak recommendations and no recommendation was provided for 9 questions. The recommendations address several important clinical areas related to screening tools, acute resuscitation strategies, management of fluids and vasoactive agents, antimicrobials and diagnostic tests and the use of additional therapies, ventilation management, goals of care, and post sepsis care.
Conclusion
The SSC panel issued evidence-based recommendations to help support key stakeholders caring for adults with sepsis or septic shock and their families.
664 citations
••
TL;DR: Conceptual aspects of the heart rate variability, measurement devices, filtering methods, indexes used in the HRV analyses, limitations in the use and clinical applications of theHRV are reviewed.
Abstract: Autonomic nervous system (ANS) plays an important role in the regulation of the physiological processes of the human organism during normal and pathological conditions. Among the techniques used in its evaluation, the heart rate variability (HRV) has arising as a simple and non-invasive measure of the autonomic impulses, representing one of the most promising quantitative markers of the autonomic balance. The HRV describes the oscillations in the interval between consecutive heart beats (RR interval), as well as the oscillations between consecutive instantaneous heart rates. It is a measure that can be used to assess the ANS modulation under physiological conditions, such as wakefulness and sleep conditions, different body positions, physical training and also pathological conditions. Changes in the HRV patterns provide a sensible and advanced indicator of health involvements. Higher HRV is a signal of good adaptation and characterizes a health person with efficient autonomic mechanisms, while lower HRV is frequently an indicator of abnormal and insufficient adaptation of the autonomic nervous system, provoking poor patient's physiological function. Because of its importance as a marker that reflects the ANS activity on the sinus node and as a clinical instrument to assess and identify health involvements, this study reviews conceptual aspects of the HRV, measurement devices, filtering methods, indexes used in the HRV analyses, limitations in the use and clinical applications of the HRV.
624 citations
Authors
Showing all 1785 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Scott C. Weaver | 92 | 536 | 32230 |
Marcelo U. Ferreira | 55 | 281 | 9447 |
Emmanuel A. Burdmann | 49 | 210 | 13025 |
Maurício Lacerda Nogueira | 40 | 201 | 6054 |
Eloiza H. Tajara | 33 | 137 | 4168 |
Sebastião Roberto Taboga | 33 | 296 | 4370 |
Reinaldo B. Bestetti | 32 | 154 | 3212 |
Dirce Maria Trevisan Zanetta | 29 | 87 | 2827 |
José Carlos Barbosa | 28 | 298 | 3711 |
Suzana Margareth Lobo | 28 | 113 | 3444 |
Francisco Chiaravalloti Neto | 27 | 83 | 1609 |
Mônica da Silva-Nunes | 26 | 62 | 1627 |
Moacir Fernandes de Godoy | 26 | 217 | 2999 |
Carlos Marcelo Pastre | 26 | 136 | 2732 |
José Antônio Cordeiro | 25 | 118 | 2061 |