Association between heavy metal exposure and bacterial vaginosis: A cross-sectional study

by Yu-Xue Feng, Ming-Zhi Tan, Hui-Han Qiu, Jie-Rong Chen, Si-Zhe Wang, Ze-Min Huang, Xu-Guang Guo

Bacterial vaginosis (BV) is a prevalent cause of vaginal symptoms in women of reproductive age. With the widespread of heavy metal pollutants and their harmful function on women’s immune and hormonal systems, it is necessary to explore the association between heavy metal exposure and BV. This study investigates the potential relationship between serum heavy metals and bacterial vaginosis in a cohort of American women. The present study employed a cross-sectional analysis of 2,493 women participating in the 2001–2004 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). Multivariable logistic regression models were utilized in the study to assess the correlation between these variables. A stratified analysis was performed to investigate the relationship among different population groups further, and smooth curve fittings were conducted to intuitively evaluate the correlation. According to the current cross-sectional study results, a significant correlation was identified between the high levels of lead and cadmium in the serum and the likelihood of developing bacterial vaginosis. We found that serum lead (OR = 1.35, 95% CI: 1.06–1.72, p = 0.016) and serum cadmium (OR = 1.41, 95% CI: 1.01–1.98, p = 0.047) increased the risk of bacterial vaginosis by 35% and 41%, respectively, in the highest level group in comparison to the lowest level group in the fully adjusted model. Furthermore, the research discovered no statistically significant association between the levels of total mercury in the serum and a heightened susceptibility to bacterial vaginosis (OR = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.75–1.23, p = 0.763). Results of our study indicated an inverse association between serum heavy metals and bacterial vaginosis risk, including lead and cadmium. Reducing exposure to heavy metals could be vital to preventing and managing bacterial vaginosis.

Comparative study on wound healing and infection between open and minimally invasive surgical methods in pediatric otolaryngology surgery

Abstract

Pediatric otolaryngology surgeries are crucial interventions requiring careful consideration of surgical methods to optimize outcomes. The choice between open and minimally invasive surgical approaches in this context warrants thorough investigation. While both methods aim to address ear, nose, and throat conditions in children, a comparative study assessing their impact on crucial factors such as intraoperative parameters, wound healing, complications, and postoperative pain is essential. This study aims to compare the effects of open and minimally invasive surgical methods on wound healing and infection in pediatric otolaryngology surgery, and provide a scientific basis for the selection of surgical methods. Two groups of patients were selected, with 90 people in each group. One group received open surgery and the other received minimally invasive surgery. Recording the intraoperative time, anesthesia time, and intraoperative blood loss; the number of days required for wound healing; the occurrence of wound-related complications; the comparison of pain on postoperative Days 1, 3, and 7; and the factors influencing postoperative wound healing were analyzed. In the minimally invasive surgery group, the intraoperative time was shorter, the anesthesia time was relatively reduced, and the amount of bleeding was significantly reduced. Wounds also take fewer days to heal and have lower rates of wound-related complications. When comparing the pain on 1, 3, and 7 days after surgery, the minimally invasive surgery group had relatively mild pain. Analysis of postoperative wound healing factors showed that minimally invasive surgical methods have a positive impact on healing. In pediatric otolaryngology surgery, minimally invasive surgery performs better than open surgery in terms of intraoperative operation time, anesthesia time, blood loss, wound healing time, complication rate, and postoperative pain. Therefore, minimally invasive surgery may be a safer and more effective surgical method.