In May 2023, the United States Food and Drug Administration approved a Pfizer©-sponsored (Pfizer, New York, NY, USA) bivalent respiratory syncytial virus prefusion F protein-based vaccine (RSVpreF) RSV vaccine (AbrysvoTM [Pfizer]) for use during pregnancy to prevent neonatal/infant RSV infection. In February of 2022, trials sponsored by GSK© (Brentford, England, UK) on a similar RSVpreF vaccine were halted because of the identification of a safety signal related to preterm births. As these vaccines use identical pre-fusion F-protein technology, we sought to synthesize the existing data on their effectiveness and safety. We identified all randomized controlled trials and used RevMan 5.4.1 (The Cochrane Collaboration, England, UK) to perform the analysis with 95% confidence intervals and risk ratios (RRs). We found many maternal side effects were more prevalent in the RSVpreF group, with more local reactions, blood disorders, fatigue, joint pain, cardiac disorders, headache, fever, gastrointestinal disorders and pregnancy complications. The vaccinated group demonstrated significant reductions in RSV-lower respiratory tract cases (RR, 0.44 [0.33, 0.57]; P<0.00001), severe respiratory illness (RR, 0.29 [0.19, 0.44]; P<0.00001), and hospitalizations (RR, 0.40 [0.24, 0.67]; P=0.0005). RSVpreF vaccination was associated with a higher incidence of preterm delivery (RR, 1.24 [1.08, 1.44]; P=0.003). No significant difference in neonatal deaths was observed (RR, 1.42 [0.70, 2.89]; P=0.34). In conclusion, RSVpreF vaccination results in systemic adverse events and an increase in preterm delivery. Vaccination appears to have acceptable short-term newborn safety, but is not related to a significant decrease in neonatal death.

In May 2023, the United States Food and Drug Administration approved a Pfizer©-sponsored (Pfizer, New York, NY, USA) bivalent respiratory syncytial virus prefusion F protein-based vaccine (RSVpreF) RSV vaccine (AbrysvoTM [Pfizer]) for use during pregnancy to prevent neonatal/infant RSV infection. In February of 2022, trials sponsored by GSK© (Brentford, England, UK) on a similar RSVpreF vaccine were halted because of the identification of a safety signal related to preterm births. As these vaccines use identical pre-fusion F-protein technology, we sought to synthesize the existing data on their effectiveness and safety. We identified all randomized controlled trials and used RevMan 5.4.1 (The Cochrane Collaboration, England, UK) to perform the analysis with 95% confidence intervals and risk ratios (RRs). We found many maternal side effects were more prevalent in the RSVpreF group, with more local reactions, blood disorders, fatigue, joint pain, cardiac disorders, headache, fever, gastrointestinal disorders and pregnancy complications. The vaccinated group demonstrated significant reductions in RSV-lower respiratory tract cases (RR, 0.44 [0.33, 0.57]; P<0.00001), severe respiratory illness (RR, 0.29 [0.19, 0.44]; P<0.00001), and hospitalizations (RR, 0.40 [0.24, 0.67]; P=0.0005). RSVpreF vaccination was associated with a higher incidence of preterm delivery (RR, 1.24 [1.08, 1.44]; P=0.003). No significant difference in neonatal deaths was observed (RR, 1.42 [0.70, 2.89]; P=0.34). In conclusion, RSVpreF vaccination results in systemic adverse events and an increase in preterm delivery. Vaccination appears to have acceptable short-term newborn safety, but is not related to a significant decrease in neonatal death.

In May 2023, the United States Food and Drug Administration approved a Pfizer©-sponsored (Pfizer, New York, NY, USA) bivalent respiratory syncytial virus prefusion F protein-based vaccine (RSVpreF) RSV vaccine (AbrysvoTM [Pfizer]) for use during pregnancy to prevent neonatal/infant RSV infection. In February of 2022, trials sponsored by GSK© (Brentford, England, UK) on a similar RSVpreF vaccine were halted because of the identification of a safety signal related to preterm births. As these vaccines use identical pre-fusion F-protein technology, we sought to synthesize the existing data on their effectiveness and safety. We identified all randomized controlled trials and used RevMan 5.4.1 (The Cochrane Collaboration, England, UK) to perform the analysis with 95% confidence intervals and risk ratios (RRs). We found many maternal side effects were more prevalent in the RSVpreF group, with more local reactions, blood disorders, fatigue, joint pain, cardiac disorders, headache, fever, gastrointestinal disorders and pregnancy complications. The vaccinated group demonstrated significant reductions in RSV-lower respiratory tract cases (RR, 0.44 [0.33, 0.57]; P<0.00001), severe respiratory illness (RR, 0.29 [0.19, 0.44]; P<0.00001), and hospitalizations (RR, 0.40 [0.24, 0.67]; P=0.0005). RSVpreF vaccination was associated with a higher incidence of preterm delivery (RR, 1.24 [1.08, 1.44]; P=0.003). No significant difference in neonatal deaths was observed (RR, 1.42 [0.70, 2.89]; P=0.34). In conclusion, RSVpreF vaccination results in systemic adverse events and an increase in preterm delivery. Vaccination appears to have acceptable short-term newborn safety, but is not related to a significant decrease in neonatal death.

In May 2023, the United States Food and Drug Administration approved a Pfizer©-sponsored (Pfizer, New York, NY, USA) bivalent respiratory syncytial virus prefusion F protein-based vaccine (RSVpreF) RSV vaccine (AbrysvoTM [Pfizer]) for use during pregnancy to prevent neonatal/infant RSV infection. In February of 2022, trials sponsored by GSK© (Brentford, England, UK) on a similar RSVpreF vaccine were halted because of the identification of a safety signal related to preterm births. As these vaccines use identical pre-fusion F-protein technology, we sought to synthesize the existing data on their effectiveness and safety. We identified all randomized controlled trials and used RevMan 5.4.1 (The Cochrane Collaboration, England, UK) to perform the analysis with 95% confidence intervals and risk ratios (RRs). We found many maternal side effects were more prevalent in the RSVpreF group, with more local reactions, blood disorders, fatigue, joint pain, cardiac disorders, headache, fever, gastrointestinal disorders and pregnancy complications. The vaccinated group demonstrated significant reductions in RSV-lower respiratory tract cases (RR, 0.44 [0.33, 0.57]; P<0.00001), severe respiratory illness (RR, 0.29 [0.19, 0.44]; P<0.00001), and hospitalizations (RR, 0.40 [0.24, 0.67]; P=0.0005). RSVpreF vaccination was associated with a higher incidence of preterm delivery (RR, 1.24 [1.08, 1.44]; P=0.003). No significant difference in neonatal deaths was observed (RR, 1.42 [0.70, 2.89]; P=0.34). In conclusion, RSVpreF vaccination results in systemic adverse events and an increase in preterm delivery. Vaccination appears to have acceptable short-term newborn safety, but is not related to a significant decrease in neonatal death.

In May 2023, the United States Food and Drug Administration approved a Pfizer©-sponsored (Pfizer, New York, NY, USA) bivalent respiratory syncytial virus prefusion F protein-based vaccine (RSVpreF) RSV vaccine (AbrysvoTM [Pfizer]) for use during pregnancy to prevent neonatal/infant RSV infection. In February of 2022, trials sponsored by GSK© (Brentford, England, UK) on a similar RSVpreF vaccine were halted because of the identification of a safety signal related to preterm births. As these vaccines use identical pre-fusion F-protein technology, we sought to synthesize the existing data on their effectiveness and safety. We identified all randomized controlled trials and used RevMan 5.4.1 (The Cochrane Collaboration, England, UK) to perform the analysis with 95% confidence intervals and risk ratios (RRs). We found many maternal side effects were more prevalent in the RSVpreF group, with more local reactions, blood disorders, fatigue, joint pain, cardiac disorders, headache, fever, gastrointestinal disorders and pregnancy complications. The vaccinated group demonstrated significant reductions in RSV-lower respiratory tract cases (RR, 0.44 [0.33, 0.57]; P<0.00001), severe respiratory illness (RR, 0.29 [0.19, 0.44]; P<0.00001), and hospitalizations (RR, 0.40 [0.24, 0.67]; P=0.0005). RSVpreF vaccination was associated with a higher incidence of preterm delivery (RR, 1.24 [1.08, 1.44]; P=0.003). No significant difference in neonatal deaths was observed (RR, 1.42 [0.70, 2.89]; P=0.34). In conclusion, RSVpreF vaccination results in systemic adverse events and an increase in preterm delivery. Vaccination appears to have acceptable short-term newborn safety, but is not related to a significant decrease in neonatal death.

Objective: To report a unique surgical procedure that was utilized to locate a missing vibrator in the pelvis of a patient. Emergency room admissions and surgery secondary to the malfunctioning of devices intended for sexual stimulation are extremely common. Emergency room staff of hospitals in the United States usually are skilled in the detection and removal of these devices. Occasionally, surgical intervention is warranted if the device enters a cavity that cannot safely be explored in the emergency room setting. We report a case of a vibrator that was lost during sexual activity. A flat plate X-ray showed it to be in the abdominal cavity. Careful questioning of the patient revealed that the device had an unusually small diameter. Surgical intervention showed that the device ultimately ended up in the bladder without causing traumatic injury. Methods: We created a narrated video to demonstrate the surgical procedure (Canadian Task Force Classification III). Results: Laparoscopy and cystoscopy were used to visualize and successfully remove the device. The patient recovered uneventfully. Conclusion Following laparoscopic confirmation of the location of the device, it was removed via cystoscopy. This case demonstrates how background information, such as the size of the missing device in this case, can be critical to providing high quality patient care.

Objective: To report a unique surgical procedure that was utilized to locate a missing vibrator in the pelvis of a patient. Emergency room admissions and surgery secondary to the malfunctioning of devices intended for sexual stimulation are extremely common. Emergency room staff of hospitals in the United States usually are skilled in the detection and removal of these devices. Occasionally, surgical intervention is warranted if the device enters a cavity that cannot safely be explored in the emergency room setting. We report a case of a vibrator that was lost during sexual activity. A flat plate X-ray showed it to be in the abdominal cavity. Careful questioning of the patient revealed that the device had an unusually small diameter. Surgical intervention showed that the device ultimately ended up in the bladder without causing traumatic injury. Methods: We created a narrated video to demonstrate the surgical procedure (Canadian Task Force Classification III). Results: Laparoscopy and cystoscopy were used to visualize and successfully remove the device. The patient recovered uneventfully. Conclusion Following laparoscopic confirmation of the location of the device, it was removed via cystoscopy. This case demonstrates how background information, such as the size of the missing device in this case, can be critical to providing high quality patient care.