ABSTRACT The varied clinical presentations of SARS-CoV-2 infection have raised concerns about long-term consequences, especially “long-COVID” or “post-COVID-19 syndrome.” In this context, the cardiorespiratory optimal point (COP) within the Cardiopulmonary Exercise Test (CPET) emerges as a crucial metric for evaluating functional capacities and detecting cardiovascular and pulmonary anomalies post-COVID-19. This study aimed to assess COP values among post-COVID-19 patients and categorized them based on the initial severity of their disease. In this cross-sectional study conducted in the Northeast Brazil, 80 patients (26 females and 54 males) previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 underwent CPET. We clinically stratified patients into mild, moderate, or severe COVID-19 categories and assessed COP values and other cardiorespiratory metrics. We found differences in the predicted COP between patients with mild and severe COVID-19 (p=0.042). Additionally, patients with moderate and severe COVID-19 record had an average COP value exceeding 22. Other parameters, including respiratory exchange ratio, heart rate, and oxygen uptake efficiency slope, did not differ across the groups. Patients with a history of severe COVID-19 showed altered COP values, suggesting potential discrepancies in cardiovascular and respiratory system integration. The outcomes emphasize the importance of continuous monitoring and assessment of the cardiorespiratory domain for post-COVID-19 patients. Further research is needed to understand the relationship between elevated COP in post-severe COVID-19 and its long-term prognostic implications. SARSCoV2 SARSCoV SARS CoV 2 SARS-CoV- longterm long term consequences longCOVID COVID “long-COVID postCOVID19 postCOVID post 19 “post-COVID-1 syndrome. syndrome context (COP CPET (CPET postCOVID19. 19. post-COVID-1 disease crosssectional cross sectional Brazil 8 26 (2 5 males COVID19 COVID-1 metrics p=0.042. p0042 p p=0.042 . 0 042 (p=0.042) Additionally 22 parameters ratio rate slope groups integration postsevere implications SARS-CoV postCOVID1 1 “post-COVID- post-COVID- ( COVID1 COVID- p004 p=0.04 04 (p=0.042 “post-COVID post-COVID p00 p=0.0 (p=0.04 p0 p=0. (p=0.0 p=0 (p=0. p= (p=0 (p= (p

ABSTRACT Post-acute COVID-19 syndrome, or long COVID, presents with persistent symptoms, including cough, dyspnea, and fatigue, extending beyond one month after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Cardiac complications such as chest pain and arrhythmias have raised concerns, with chronotropic incompetence (CI), an inadequate heart rate increase during exercise, emerging as a significant condition contributing to diminished exercise tolerance and quality of life. This study estimated the prevalence of CI and explored its association with aerobic capacity and physical activity levels in long COVID patients. A cross-sectional study was conducted at a private hospital in Sergipe, Brazil, involving 93 patients over 18 years old with persistent post-COVID-19 symptoms after confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections. Exclusion criteria included beta-blocker use, inadequate respiratory exchange ratio, and inability to complete cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET). Clinical histories, CPET results, and chronotropic index calculation were used to identify CI, with logistic regression analyzing associated factors. Of the participants (mean age 45 years; average duration since COVID-19 diagnosis 120 days), 20.4% were diagnosed with CI. Logistic regression identified a strong association between CI and sedentary behavior (OR 11.80; 95% CI 2.54 to 54.78; p=0.001). Patients with CI showed lower predicted peak heart rates and maximal oxygen uptake. The prevalence of CI among long COVID patients in this study was approximately 20%, associated with decreased aerobic capacity and increased sedentary behavior. These findings highlight the need for timely diagnosis and therapeutic interventions, including cardiopulmonary rehabilitation, to enhance the quality of life in post-COVID patients with CI. The study’s cross-sectional design and its specific context have limited causality inference and generalizability, underscoring the importance of further research in diverse settings. Postacute Post acute COVID19 19 COVID-1 syndrome cough dyspnea fatigue SARSCoV2 SARSCoV SARS CoV 2 SARS-CoV- infection concerns , (CI) crosssectional cross sectional Sergipe Brazil 9 1 postCOVID19 postCOVID post post-COVID-1 infections betablocker beta blocker use ratio CPET. . (CPET) histories results factors mean 4 12 days, days days) 204 20 20.4 OR 11.80 1180 11 80 95 254 54 2.5 54.78 5478 78 p=0.001. p0001 p p=0.001 0 001 p=0.001) uptake 20% interventions rehabilitation studys s generalizability settings COVID1 COVID- SARS-CoV (CI postCOVID1 post-COVID- (CPET 20. 11.8 118 8 25 5 2. 54.7 547 7 p000 p=0.00 00 11. 54. p00 p=0.0 p0 p=0. p=0 p=

Abstract This study evaluated the presence of oral lesions in patients with COVID-19 hospitalized in an intensive care unit (ICU). Data included demographic, clinical, and laboratory information. Clinical assessment of the oral cavity was performed on the 2 nd and 5 th days of orotracheal intubation. Thirty-eight patients were evaluated and 16 (42.1%) presented oral lesions during their ICU stay. The median age and length of stay were 75 years and 15 days, respectively. Among the patients with oral lesions, ulcerative oral lesions were reported in 14 (87.5%) patients, of which 11 (78.6%) were found on the lips. This study highlights the importance of oral examination for patients admitted to the ICU with COVID-19.

Abstract: Deleterious oral habits (DOH) have been described as a common finding in pediatric series. Studies have investigated their association with local and systemic health problems. In this study, the association between DOH and asthma was investigated. PubMed, Scopus, Lilacs, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and OpenThesis were accessed to identify observational studies that evaluated the association between DOH (thumb sucking, pacifier use, onychophagia or nail biting, bottle feeding) and asthma in children aged 2–17 years. Information on DOH was obtained from the verbal report of the children’s parents. Asthma diagnosis was performed by a physician or using the International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood (ISAAC) questionnaire. We used a random-effects model to pool the results. The odds ratio (OR) was used as measure of association between DOH and asthma. The National Institutes of Health Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies was used to assess risk of bias. The GRADE approach was used to assess the quality of evidence. Five studies were included and data from 18,733 children aged 2 to 13 years were analyzed. We found an association between bottle feeding and asthma (OR = 1.25; 95%CI 1.13–1.38; p < 0.001) with moderate level of certainty. Despite the association between pacifier use and asthma (OR = 1.11; 95%CI 1.00–1.24; p = 0.05), the quality of evidence was low. Only one study provided data on nail biting and thumb-sucking, and the individual results showed no association between these habits and asthma. This meta-analysis found an association between bottle feeding, pacifier use, and asthma in children.

RESUMO Faltam estudos de vigilância no mundo real sobre relatórios de eventos adversos associados à vacinação contra a COVID-19, bem como análises comparativas de eventos adversos decorrentes de vacinas com diferentes plataformas. Este estudo observacional, descritivo e retrospectivo baseado em dados secundários descreve os eventos adversos pós-vacinação (EAPV) relacionados com as primeiras 145 mil doses de vacinas contra a COVID-19 entregues no município de Aracaju, capital do estado de Sergipe, na região Nordeste do Brasil. Os registros de EAPV foram coletados usando o sistema e-SUS Notifica com referência ao período de 19 de janeiro a 30 de abril de 2021. Razões de chances (odds ratios, ORs) e intervalos de confiança (IC) de 95% foram calculados para os EAPV e o tipo de vacina contra a COVID-19: CoronaVac (Sinovac-Butantan) ou Oxford-AstraZeneca (Fiocruz). Um total de 474 EAPV (32,7 eventos/10 mil doses) de 254 indivíduos foram relatados e analisados, e todos foram classificados como não graves. Houve uma associação entre o uso da vacina CoronaVac e cefaleia (OR = 2,1; IC 95%: 1,4-3,2), dor no local da injeção (OR = 9,6; IC 95%: 3,9-23,8), letargia (OR = 5,2; IC 95%: 1,8-14,8), cansaço (OR = 10,1; IC 95%: 2,4-42,3), diarreia (OR = 4,4; IC 95%: 1,5-12,5 e sintomas gripais (OR = 8,0; IC 95%: 1,9-34,0). Contudo, a proporção de indivíduos que relataram febre foi superior entre os que receberam a vacina Oxford-AstraZeneca (OR = 3,1; IC 95%: 1,5-6,4). Este estudo observacional de base populacional reforça as evidências da segurança e tolerabilidade das vacinas CoronaVac e Oxford-AstraZeneca usadas contra a COVID-19.

ABSTRACT There is a lack of real-world surveillance studies on reports of adverse events associated with COVID-19 vaccination, as well as comparative analyses of adverse events from vaccines with different platforms. This observational, descriptive, retrospective study based on secondary data describes the adverse events following immunization (AEFIs) related to the first 145 000 doses of COVID-19 vaccines delivered in Aracaju municipality, Sergipe state, northeast Brazil. Records of AEFIs were collected using the e-SUS Notifica database for January 19 to April 30, 2021. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for AEFIs and the type of COVID-19 vaccine, either CoronaVac (Sinovac–Butantan) or Oxford–AstraZeneca (Fiocruz). A total of 474 AEFIs (32.7 events/10 000 doses) from 254 individuals were reported and analyzed, and all of them were classified as non-serious. There was an association between the use of the CoronaVac vaccine and headache (OR = 2.1; 95% CI: 1.4–3.2), pain at the injection site (OR = 9.6; 95% CI: 3.9–23.8), lethargy (OR = 5.2; 95% CI: 1.8–14.8), fatigue (OR = 10.1; 95% CI: 2.4–42.3), diarrhea (OR = 4.4; 95% CI: 1.5–12.5) and cold-like symptoms (OR = 8.0; 95% CI: 1.9–34.0). However, the proportion of individuals reporting fever was higher among those who received the Oxford–AstraZeneca vaccine (OR = 3.1; 95% CI 1.5–6.4). This population-based observational study strengthens the evidence for the safety and tolerability of the CoronaVac and Oxford–AstraZeneca vaccines used against COVID-19.

RESUMEN Hay una carencia de estudios de vigilancia en el mundo real sobre la notificación de eventos adversos asociados a la vacunación contra la COVID-19, así como de análisis comparativos de los eventos adversos de vacunas con diferentes plataformas. En este estudio observacional, descriptivo y retrospectivo basado en datos secundarios se describen los eventos adversos supuestamente atribuibles a la vacunación o inmunización (ESAVI) relacionados con las primeras 145 000 dosis de vacunas contra la COVID-19 administradas en el municipio de Aracaju, estado de Sergipe, en la región Noreste de Brasil. Se recopilaron registros de los ESAVI del 19 de enero al 30 de abril del 2021 con la base de datos e-SUS Notifica. Se calcularon las razones de posibilidades (OR, por su sigla en inglés) y los intervalos de confianza (IC) del 95 % para los ESAVI y el tipo de vacuna contra la COVID-19 (CoronaVac [Sinovac-Butantan] o bien Oxford-AstraZeneca [Fiocruz]). Se notificaron y analizaron un total de 474 ESAVI (32,7 eventos/10 000 dosis) de 254 personas, y todos se clasificaron como no graves. Se encontró una relación entre el empleo de la vacuna CoronaVac y la cefalea (OR = 2,1; IC del 95 %: 1,4–3,2), dolor en el lugar de la inyección (OR = 9,6; IC del 95 %: 3,9–23,8), letargo (OR = 5,2; IC del 95 %: 1,8–14,8), cansancio (OR = 10,1; IC del 95 %: 2,4–42,3), diarrea (OR = 4,4; IC del 95 %: 1,5–12,5) y síntomas similares al resfriado (OR = 8,0; IC del 95 %: 1,9 a 34,0). Sin embargo, la proporción de pacientes que notificaron fiebre fue mayor entre los que recibieron la vacuna de Oxford-AstraZeneca (OR = 3,1; IC del 95 %: 1,5 a 6,4). Este estudio observacional poblacional refuerza la evidencia sobre la seguridad y tolerabilidad de las vacunas CoronaVac y Oxford-AstraZeneca empleadas contra la COVID-19.

Resumen: Diferentes factores pueden influir en la calidad de vida de personas con discapacidad intelectual. Este estudio investigó los factores asociados con la calidad de vida relacionada con la salud oral en niños con discapacidades intelectuales desde la perspectiva de sus cuidadores. Se realizó un estudio transversal con niños brasileños institucionalizados, que fueron evaluados clínicamente y sus respectivos tutores, quienes respondieron cuestionarios. Los datos fueron recolectados a través de registros médicos, aplicación de instrumentos de evaluación y examen clínico oral (n=92). La mayoría de los niños presentaban una higiene oral deficiente (64,10%) y una experiencia de caries alta (59,8%). Si bien la percepción específicamente de las madres respecto del impacto de las condiciones de la salud oral en la calidad de vida fue baja, mostró una tendencia a aumentar en cuanto disminuía el nivel educacional, la frecuencia de cepillado y la historia de lactancia materna (p≤0.05). El hecho de que la percepción del impacto en la calidad de vida por parte de los tutores no se condiga con las precarias condiciones de salud oral exhibida por los niños con discapacidad intelectual, no sólo demuestra el desconocimiento respecto de la importancia de la salud oral en un contexto general, sino que también evidencia la necesidad de promover acciones que incentiven el cuidado y educación en relación con este aspecto, tanto en los tutores como en los niños afectados.

Abstract: Different factors can influence the perception of quality of life in individuals with intellectual disabilities. This study investigated the factors associated with quality of life related to oral health in children with intellectual disabilities from the perspective of their parents. A cross-sectional study was carried out with Brazilian children from specialized institutions and their respective guardians. Data were collected through medical records, application of instruments and oral clinical examination (n=92). Most children had poor oral hygiene (64.10%) and a high caries experience (59.8%). The mothers' perception of quality of life related to oral health was low, however there was an association of greater perception when they had low education, female child, less brushing frequency and history of breastfeeding (p≤0.05). Although the perception of quality of life was low, the oral condition found evidences the need to promote oral health education actions with children with intellectual disabilities and their respective guardians.

Abstract Introduction: Heart transplantation (HTx) is the gold standard procedure for selected individuals with refractory heart failure. High-intensity interval training (HIIT) is safe and allows patients to exercise in high intensity for longer time when compared to moderate-intensity continuous training (MICT). The primary aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis about the effect of HIIT compared to MICT on exercise capacity, peak heart rate, and heart rate reserve in HTx recipients. Secondarily, we pooled data comparing MICT and no exercise training in these patients. Methods: This systematic review followed the standardization of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement and the Cochrane Collaboration Handbook. We presented the treatment effects of HIIT on the outcomes of interest as mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Meta-analysis was performed using the random-effects, generic inverse variance method. Results: HIIT improved peak oxygen consumption (peakVO2) (MD = 2.1; 95% CI 1.1, 3.1; P<0.0001), peak heart rate (MD = 3.4; 95% CI 0.8, 5.9; P=0.009), and heart rate reserve (MD = 4.8; 95% CI -0.05, 9.6; P=0.05) compared to MICT. Improvements on peakVO2 (MD = 3.5; 95% CI 2.3, 4.7; P<0.00001) and peak heart rate (MD = 5.6; 95% CI 1.6, 9.6; P=0.006) were found comparing HIIT and no exercise training. Conclusion: Current available evidence suggests that HIIT leads to improvements on peakVO2, peak heart rate, and heart rate reserve compared to MICT in HTx recipients. However, the superiority of HIIT should be tested in isocaloric protocols. Introduction (HTx failure Highintensity High (HIIT moderateintensity moderate . (MICT) metaanalysis meta analysis capacity recipients Secondarily Methods Metaanalyses Meta analyses Handbook MD 95 CI. (CI) Metaanalysis randomeffects, randomeffects random effects, random-effects method Results peakVO (peakVO2 2.1 21 2 1 11 1.1 3.1 31 3 P<0.0001, P00001 P P<0.0001 , 0 0001 P<0.0001) 3.4 34 4 08 8 0.8 5.9 59 5 9 P=0.009, P0009 P=0.009 009 P=0.009) 4.8 48 0.05, 005 05 -0.05 9.6 96 6 P=0.05 P005 3.5 35 23 2.3 4.7 47 7 P<0.00001 P000001 00001 5.6 56 16 1.6 P=0.006 P0006 006 Conclusion However protocols (MICT (CI (peakVO 2. 1. 3. P0000 P<0.000 000 0. 5. P000 P=0.00 00 4. 0.05 -0.0 9. P=0.0 P00 P<0.0000 P00000 0000 P<0.00 0.0 -0. P=0. P0 P<0.0 -0 P=0 P<0. - P= P<0 P<