Didn’t we… already know this?
08.05.2025 00:49
👍 1
🔁 0
💬 1
📌 0
Didn’t we… already know this?
Was… was an Infectious diseases physician or an IPAC expert involved… at all?
Do… do the surgeons think SSIs are caused by pathogens that float around in the air during surgery?
I’m so confused about what infection they thought HEPA filters would prevent.
I kind of agree I would like to see that oral Tx alone for the partner doesn’t suffice, it seems like it should logically follow that simultaneous treatment topically for women would help… but that ignores the reality that oral drugs are delivered to the mucosa quite well.
Epiglottis seems impossible not to be a problem, but also so wildly uncommon that I’m surprised to see it get its own line on such a table.
There were events in all the clinical trials, which only had about 20000 participants altogether, so this is not unexpected.
In CID, Catherine Chappell, MD MSc, and colleagues compare the pharmacokinetics (PK) of sofosbuvir/velpatasvir (SOF/VEL) in pregnant versus nonpregnant people.
But they’re so good though.
This feels too complicated to be helpful.
Gisele not being Time’s Person of the Year is why I will never take anything they publish seriously ever again.
Someone spoil it for me.
Ie… if you let as many exposure events accumulate in both studies would the girls end up with a couple infections too.
Girls metabolize injectable Cabitegravir differently than boys, could this also be true for Len?
Too many differences to compare!
One group also has vaginas. The other has fewer.
Not sure they quantified the frequency of sexual activity and average number of new partners, but would be important to know if you want to compare the intervention between these groups.
The boys also seemed better about taking oral PrEP.
A population-specific difference in risk/time is also at play in comparison.
2 infections is still an incredibly low number even in a PrEP trial, we’re only looking askance at it because PURPOSE-1 got to put up a “zero” here. But we knew it wasn’t going to be zero everywhere.
It’s Caturday. This cat in rural BC needs a new home. She’s so cuddly but very timid. Was so hard to catch her rescuers named her “Ghost”.
147 is so few women. I think these results make sense, and I use bictegravir unreservedly in pregnancy despite being the only center with documented failure, but these patients should have been included in clinical trials. No more presumptive exclusion.
AKA… just don’t. You don’t need this test. And you don’t need to wait for any positive test to treat what is most likely TB. If you diagnose something else you can always stop treating (or not).
“Likely” seems too weak.
I’m stuck.
Depends on how good the source control is. If it’s perfect, 5 days. Usually the wound looks like a hot mess at day 5. So then I treat until it isn’t.
It’s definitely the E. coli in the urine, Josh. Everyone knows this.
Interesting!
Will have to try it alongside the one routinely used now that does:
www.tstin3d.com/en/calc.html
I think the whole country probably has 10-20? At least the last time I asked!
Arguably, the greatest advance in healthcare in the past 100 years was the widespread vaccination of children.
Watching the PrEP session at #HIVGlasgow2024 and wondering… is there a future where we get a tiny baby dose of lenacapravir for infants exposed to HIV through BF?
Great introduction by Dr Shahin Lockman at #HIVGlasgow2024 on including pregnant and BF participants in HIV research and the Antiretrovirals in Pregnancy Research Toolkit.
No more presumptive exclusion!
www.who.int/tools/antire...
It’s our empiric recommendation for cholangitis and cholecystitis. And we don’t check for sludge before starting it for other uses.
