GABRIEL TARICANI KUBOTA
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Instituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina - Médico
LIM/62 - Laboratório de Fisiopatologia Cirúrgica, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina
LIM/62 - Laboratório de Fisiopatologia Cirúrgica, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina
19 resultados
Resultados de Busca
Agora exibindo 1 - 10 de 19
conferenceObject Recurrent visits to the Emergency Department (ED) due to Headache: economic burden and epidemiological profile(2019) SOUZA, Marcio Nattan P.; CALDERARO, Marcelo; OLIVEIRA, Ana Paula D. S.; KUBOTA, Gabriel T.; ZAMBON, Lucas S.; ANGHINAH, Renato; JORDAO, Mauricio R.- High resolution vessel wall magnetic resonance imaging in HIV associated vasculopathy(2017) KUBOTA, G. Taricani; FERREIRA, R. de Faria; FIGUEIREDO, T. Rocha; SANTOS, G. Titoneli dos; MORAIS, L. Martins Tavares Scianni; BARBOSA, B. J. Alencar Pires; YAMAMOTO, F. Iuji; GUEDES, B. Fukelmann; CONFORTO, A. Bastos
conferenceObject Profile of migraine investigation in the emergency department of a tertiary hospital in Brazil: the exceeding use of Brain CT(2021) SOUZA, M. N.; KUBOTA, G.; FONSECA, A. P.; CALDERARO, M.; KUSTER, G.; JORDAO, M.; CARVALHO, R.; OLIVEIRA, A. P.; PINCERATO, R.conferenceObject Online survey revealing patients' journey throughout the Brazilian healthcare system(2021) SOUZA, M. N.; KUBOTA, G.; SIMIONI, C.; CALDERARO, M.; MATTOS, B.; CHAVES, L.; COSTA, B.; SANTOS, F. R.; PASSARELLI, V.; FORTINI, I.- Posterior-superior insular deep transcranial magnetic stimulation alleviates peripheral neuropathic pain - A pilot double-blind, randomized cross-over study(2021) DONGYANG, Liu; FERNANDES, Ana Mercia; CUNHA, Pedro Henrique Martins da; TIBES, Raissa; SATO, Joao; LISTIK, Clarice; DALE, Camila; KUBOTA, Gabriel Taricani; GALHARDONI, Ricardo; TEIXEIRA, Manoel Jacobsen; SILVA, Valquiria Aparecida da; ROSI, Jefferson; ANDRADE, Daniel Ciampi deObjectives. - Peripheral neuropathic pain (pNeP) is prevalent, and current treatments, including drugs and motor cortex repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) leave a substantial proportion of patients with suboptimal pain relief. Methods. - We explored the intensity and short-term duration of the analgesic effects produced in pNeP patients by 5 days of neuronavigated deep rTMS targeting the posterior superior insula (PSI) with a double-cone coil in a sham-controlled randomized cross-over trial. Results. - Thirty-one pNeP patients received induction series of five active or sham consecutive sessions of daily deep-rTMS to the PSI in a randomized sequence, with a washout period of at least 21 days between series. The primary outcome [number of responders (>50% pain intensity reduction from baseline in a numerical rating scale ranging from 0 to 10)] was significantly higher after real (58.1%) compared to sham (19.4%) stimulation (p = 0.002). The number needed to treat was 2.6, and the effect size was 0.97 [95% CI (0.6; 1.3)]. One week after the 5th stimulation day, pain scores were no longer different between groups, and no difference in neuropathic pain characteristics and interference with daily living were present. No major side effects occurred, and milder adverse events (i.e., short-lived headaches after stimulation) were reported in both groups. Blinding was effective, and analgesic effects were not affected by sequence of the stimulation series (active-first or sham-first), age, sex or pain duration of participants. Discussion. - PSI deep-rTMS was safe in refractory pNeP and was able to provide significant pain intensity reduction after a five-day induction series of treatments. Post-hoc assessment of neuronavigation targeting confirmed deep-rTMS was delivered within the boundaries of the PSI in all participants. Conclusion. - PSI deep-rTMS provided significant pain relief during 5-day induction sessions compared to sham stimulation.
- It is time anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies be considered first-line prophylaxis for migraine(2022) KUBOTA, Gabriel TaricaniThe result of more than thirty years of research, anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies are currently the state of the art for migraine preventive therapy. Their efficacy and safety, supported by an already large and growing body of evidence, are added by many other advantages: an early onset of action, favorable posology, negligible pharmacological interaction, and a broad-reaching efficacy in many challenging clinical contexts. When compared to standard prophylactics, these novel medications seem at least as efficacious, clearly more tolerable and, consequently, with a superior adherence profile. Furthermore, recently published analyses indicate that they are cost-effective, especially among those with chronic migraine. Yet, current guidelines endorse their use only after multiple other preventives have failed or have been deemed not tolerable. Although this recommendation may have been sensible at first, the now available data strongly point that time has come for anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies to be acknowledged as first-line treatments for migraine patients with severe disability. For these individuals, delaying treatment until several other alternatives have failed incurs in significant losses, both economically and to many relevant aspects of their lives.
conferenceObject Profile of migraine investigation in the emergency department of a tertiary hospital in Brazil: the exceeding use of Brain CT(2021) SOUZA, M. N.; KUBOTA, G.; FONSECA, A. P.; CALDERARO, M.; KUSTER, G.; AO, M. Jord; CARVALHO, R.; OLIVEIRA, A. P.; PINCERATO, R.- Motor corticospinal excitability abnormalities differ between distinct chronic low back pain syndromes(2023) SILVA, Marcelo Luiz da; FERNANDES, Ana Mercia; SILVA, Valquiria A.; GALHARDONI, Ricardo; FELAU, Valter; ARAUJO, Joaci O. de; JR, Jefferson Rosi; BROCK, Roger S.; KUBOTA, Gabriel T.; TEIXEIRA, Manoel J.; YENG, Lin T.; ANDRADE, Daniel Ciampi deObjectives: It is not known whether cortical plastic changes reported in low-back pain (LBP) are present in all etiologies of LBP. Here we report on the assessment of patients with three LBP con-ditions: non-specific-LBP (ns-LBP), failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS), and sciatica (Sc).Methods: Patients underwent a standardized assessment of clinical pain, conditioned pain mod-ulation (CPM), and measures of motor evoked potential (MEPs)-based motor corticospinal excit-ability (CE) by transcranial magnetic stimulation, including short interval intracortical inhibition (SICI), and intracortical facilitation (ICF). Comparisons were also made with normative data from sex-and age-matched healthy volunteers.Results: 60 patients (42 women, 55.1 +/- 9.1 years old) with LBP were included (20 in each group). Pain intensity was higher in patients with neuropathic pain [FBSS (6.8 +/- 1.3), and Sc (6.4 +/- 1.4)] than in those with ns-LBP (4.7 +/- 1.0, P<0.001). The same was shown for pain interference (5.9 +/- 2.0, 5.9 +/- 1.8, 3.2 +/- 1.9, P<0.001), disability (16.4 +/- 3.3, 16.3 +/- 4.3, 10.4 +/- 4.3, P<0.001), and catastrophism (31.1 +/- 12.3, 33.0 +/- 10.4, 17.4 +/- 10.7, P<0.001) scores for FBSS, Sc, and ns-LBP groups, respectively. Patients with neuropathic pain (FBSS, Sc) had lower CPM (-14.8 +/- 1.9,-14.1 +/- 16.7, respectively) compared to ns-LBP (-25.4 +/- 16.6; P<0.02). 80.0% of the FBSS group had defective ICF compared to the other two groups (52.5% for ns-LBP, P=0.025 and 52.5% for Sc, P=0.046). MEPs (140%-rest motor threshold) were low in 50.0% of patients in the FBSS group com-pared to 20.0% of ns-LBP (P=0.018) and 15.0% of Sc (P=0.001) groups. Higher MEPs were corre-lated with mood scores (r=0.489), and with lower neuropathic pain symptom scores(r=-0.415) in FBSS.Conclusions: Different types of LBP were associated with different clinical, CPM and CE profiles, which were not uniquely related to the presence of neuropathic pain. These results highlight the need to further characterize patients with LBP in psychophysics and cortical neurophysiology studies.(c) 2023 The Author(s).
- Prevalence and characteristics of new-onset pain in COVID-19 survivours, a controlled study(2021) SOARES, Felipe Henriques Carvalho; KUBOTA, Gabriel Taricani; FERNANDES, Ana Mercia; HOJO, Bruno; COURAS, Catarina; COSTA, Barbara Venturoti; LAPA, Jorge Dornellys da Silva; BRAGA, Luiza Mansur; ALMEIDA, Matheus Merula de; CUNHA, Pedro Henrique Martins da; PEREIRA, Vitor Hugo Honorato; MORAIS, Adriano Donizeth Silva de; TEIXEIRA, Manoel Jacobsen; ANDRADE, Daniel Ciampi deBackground We assessed whether COVID-19 is associated with de novo pain and de novo chronic pain (CP). Methods This controlled cross-sectional study was based on phone interviews of patients discharged from hospital after COVID-19 compared to the control group composed of individuals hospitalized during the same period due to non-COVID-19 causes. Patients were classified as having previous CP based on the ICD-11/IASP criteria, de novo pain (i.e. any new type of pain, irrespective of the pain status before hospital stay), and de novo CP (i.e. persistent or recurring de novo pain, lasting more than 3 months) after COVID-19. We assessed pain prevalence and its characteristics, including headache profile, pain location, intensity, interference, and its relationship with fatigue, and persistent anosmia. Forty-six COVID-19 and 73 control patients were included. Both groups had similar sociodemographic characteristics and past medical history. Results Length of in-hospital-stay and ICU admission rates were significantly higher amongst COVID-19 survivours, while mechanical ventilation requirement was similar between groups. Pre-hospitalisation pain was lower in COVID-19 compared to control group (10.9% vs. 42.5%; p = 0.001). However, the COVID-19 group had a significantly higher prevalence of de novo pain (65.2% vs. 11.0%, p = 0.001), as well as more de novo headache (39.1%) compared to controls (2.7%, p = 0.001). New-onset CP was 19.6% in COVID-19 patients and 1.4% (p = 0.002) in controls. These differences remained significant (p = 0.001) even after analysing exclusively (COVID: n = 40; controls: n = 34) patients who did not report previous pain before the hospital stay. No statistically significant differences were found for mean new-onset pain intensity and interference with daily activities between both groups. COVID-19 pain was more frequently located in the head/neck and lower limbs (p < 0.05). New-onset fatigue was more common in COVID-19 survivours necessitating inpatient hospital care (66.8%) compared to controls (2.5%, p = 0.001). COVID-19 patients who reported anosmia had more new-onset pain (83.3%) compared to those who did not (48.0%, p = 0.024). Conclusion COVID-19 was associated with a significantly higher prevalence of de novo CP, chronic daily headache, and new-onset pain in general, which was associated with persistent anosmia. Significance There exists de novo pain in a substantial number of COVID-19 survivours, and some develop chronic pain. New-onset pain after the infection was more common in patients who reported anosmia after hospital discharge.
- Neurological consultations and diagnoses in a large, dedicated COVID-19 university hospital(2020) STUDART-NETO, Adalberto; GUEDES, Bruno Fukelmann; TUMA, Raphael de Luca e; CAMELO FILHO, Antonio Edvan; KUBOTA, Gabriel Taricani; IEPSEN, Bruno Diogenes; MOREIRA, Gabriela Pantaleao; RODRIGUES, Julia Chartouni; FERRARI, Maira Medeiros Honorato; CARRA, Rafael Bernhart; SPERA, Raphael Ribeiro; OKU, Mariana Hiromi Manoel; TERRIM, Sara; LOPES, Cesar Castello Branco; PASSOS NETO, Carlos Eduardo Borges; FIORENTINO, Matheus Dalben; SOUZA, Julia Carvalhinho Carlos De; BAIMA, Jose Pedro Soares; SILVA, Tomas Fraga Ferreira Da; MORENO, Cristiane Araujo Martins; SILVA, Andre Macedo Serafim; HEISE, Carlos Otto; MENDONCA, Rodrigo Holanda; FORTINI, Ida; SMID, Jerusa; ADONI, Tarso; GONCALVES, Marcia Rubia Rodrigues; PEREIRA, Samira Luisa Apostolos; PINTO, Lecio Figueira; GOMES, Helio Rodrigues; ZANOTELI, Edmar; BRUCKI, Sonia Maria Dozzi; CONFORTO, Adriana Bastos; CASTRO, Luiz Henrique Martins; NITRINI, RicardoBackground: More than one-third of COVID-19 patients present neurological symptoms ranging from anosmia to stroke and encephalopathy. Furthermore, pre-existing neurological conditions may require special treatment and may be associated with worse outcomes. Notwithstanding, the role of neurologists in COVID-19 is probably underrecognized. Objective: The aim of this study was to report the reasons for requesting neurological consultations by internists and intensivists in a COVID-19-dedicated hospital. Methods: This retrospective study was carried out at Hospital das Clinicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de Sao Paulo, Brazil, a 900-bed COVID-19 dedicated center (including 300 intensive care unit beds). COVID-19 diagnosis was confirmed by SARS-CoV-2-RT-PCR in nasal swabs. All inpatient neurology consultations between March 23rd and May 23rd, 2020 were analyzed. Neurologists performed the neurological exam, assessed all available data to diagnose the neurological condition, and requested additional tests deemed necessary. Difficult diagnoses were established in consensus meetings. After diagnosis, neurologists were involved in the treatment. Results: Neurological consultations were requested for 89 out of 1,208 (7.4%) inpatient COVID admissions during that period. Main neurological diagnoses included: encephalopathy (44.4%), stroke (16.7%), previous neurological diseases (9.0%), seizures (9.0%), neuromuscular disorders (5.6%), other acute brain lesions (3.4%), and other mild nonspecific symptoms (11.2%). Conclusions: Most neurological consultations in a COVID-19-dedicated hospital were requested for severe conditions that could have an impact on the outcome. First-line doctors should be able to recognize neurological symptoms; neurologists are important members of the medical team in COVID-19 hospital care.