Delays in Multiple Sclerosis diagnosis (DIMES): protocol for a multicentre, observational study of multiple sclerosis diagnostic pathways in the United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland.

BACKGROUND: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a leading cause of non-traumatic disability in young adults. Accumulating evidence indicates early diagnosis and early treatment improves long-term outcomes. However, the MS diagnostic pathway is increasingly complex, and delays may occur at several stages. Factors causing delays remain understudied. We aim to quantify the time taken for MS to be diagnosed, and characterise the diagnostic pathway and initial care provided, in the United Kingdom (UK) and Republic of Ireland (ROI). METHODS: Delays In MultiplE Sclerosis diagnosis (DIMES) in the UK and ROI is a multicentre, observational, retrospective study that will be conducted via the Neurology and Neurosurgery Interest Group (NANSIG) collaborative network. Any hospital in the UK and ROI providing an MS diagnostic service is eligible to participate. Data on consecutive individuals newly diagnosed with MS between 1st July 2022 and 31st December 2022 will be collected. The primary outcomes are 1) time from symptoms/signs prompting referral to neurology, to MS diagnosis; and 2) time from referral to neurology for suspected MS, to MS diagnosis. Secondary outcomes include: MS symptoms, referring specialties, investigations performed, neurology appointments, functional status, use of disease modifying treatments, and support at diagnosis including physical activity, and follow up. Demographic characteristics of people newly diagnosed with MS will be summarised, adherence to quality standards summarised as percentages, and time-to-event variables presented with survival curves. Multivariable models will be used to investigate the association of demographic and clinical factors with time to MS diagnosis, as defined in our primary outcomes. DISCUSSION: DIMES aims to be the largest multicentre study of the MS diagnostic pathway in the UK and ROI. The proposed data collection provides insights that cannot be provided from contemporary registries, and the findings will inform approaches to MS services nationally in the future.

Survival Advantage Comparing Older Living Donor Versus Standard Criteria Donor Kidney Transplants.

The aim of this analysis was to explore mortality outcomes for kidney transplant candidates receiving older living donor kidneys (age ≥60 years) versus younger deceased donors or remaining on dialysis. From 2000 to 2019, all patients on dialysis listed for their first kidney-alone transplant were included in a retrospective cohort analysis of UK transplant registry data. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality, with survival analysis conducted by intention-to-treat principle. Time-to-death from listing was modelled using nonproportional hazard Cox regression models with transplantation handled as a time-dependent covariate. A total of 32,978 waitlisted kidney failure patients formed the primary study cohort, of whom 18,796 (58.5%) received a kidney transplant (1,557 older living donor kidneys and 18,062 standard criteria donor kidneys). Older living donor kidney transplantation constituted only 17.0% of all living donor kidney transplant activity (overall cohort; n = 9,140). Recipients of older living donor kidneys had reduced all-cause mortality compared to receiving SCD kidneys (HR 0.904, 95% CI 0.845-0.967, p = 0.003) and much lower all-cause mortality versus remaining on the waiting list (HR 0.160, 95% CI 0.149-0.172, p < 0.001). Older living kidney donors should be actively explored to expand the living donor kidney pool and are an excellent treatment option for waitlisted kidney transplant candidates.

Survival of patients with kidney failure awaiting transplantation stratified by age and ethnicity: population-based cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: Kidney transplantation is the treatment of choice for people living with kidney failure who are suitable for surgery, but survival benefits for older and/or ethnic minority candidates are unclear. To inform decision-making, the survival of patients on a waiting list for kidney transplantation was assessed. METHODS: A retrospective study was undertaken of registry data for patients with kidney failure listed for transplantation in the UK. From 1 January 2000 until 30 September 2019, all patients listed for a first kidney-alone transplant were included. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. After testing for violations of the proportional hazards assumption, an extended Cox regression model factoring in transplantation as a time-dependent variable according to the intention-to-treat principle was developed. RESULTS: The study cohort included 47 917 patients on a waiting list for kidney transplantation, of whom 34 558 (72.1%) subsequently received a transplant. Transplantation compared with remaining on dialysis was associated with an overall survival benefit (HR 0.17, 95% c.i. 0.16 to 0.18; P < 0.001), occurring immediately within 30 days, and observed regardless of ethnicity. For White kidney transplant candidates aged at least 65 or at least 70 years, a significant survival benefit was observed within 6 months (HR 0.49, 0.29 to 0.82) and 1 year (HR 0.45, 0.25 to 0.79) after transplantation respectively, which contrasted with 3 years after kidney transplantation for candidates from ethnic minorities aged at least 65 years (HR 0.53, 0.36 to 0.78) or at least 70 years (HR 0.53, 0.36 to 0.78). CONCLUSION: Although time-to-survival benefits are stratified by age and ethnicity, all kidney transplant candidates on the waiting list are better off with transplantation compared with remaining on dialysis. The absence of any early postoperative mortality suggests that some high-risk patients with kidney failure may not be receiving transplantation opportunities.

Getting a kidney transplant is the best treatment if you have kidney failure because it makes you live longer. However, it is not known whether this is still true if you are older or if you are not White. The authors looked at data from the UK for all people with kidney failure who were put on to the kidney transplant list. It was found that found that anyone with kidney failure lived longer if they got a kidney transplant and this benefit started very early after the operation, within the first month. However, the benefit of living longer with a kidney transplant was delayed for older people and those who were Asian or Black. The conclusion was that people with kidney failure who are fit for surgery do better with a kidney transplant rather than staying on dialysis.

Outcomes of cochlear implantation in Usher syndrome: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: This study is a systematic review of the literature which seeks to evaluate auditory and quality of life (QOL) outcomes of cochlear implantation in patients with Usher syndrome. METHODS: Systematic review of studies indexed in Medline via PubMed, Ovid EMBASE, Web of Science, CENTRAL and clinicaltrials.gov was performed up to March 9th 2022, conducted in accordance with the PRISMA statement. Patient demographics, comorbidity, details of cochlear implantation, auditory, and QOL outcomes were extracted and summarized. RESULTS: 33 studies reported over 217 cochlear implants in 187 patients with Usher syndrome, comprising subtypes 1 (56 patients), 2 (9 patients), 3 (23 patients), and not specified (99 patients). Auditory outcomes included improved sound detection, speech perception, and speech intelligibility. QOL outcomes were reported for 75 patients, with benefit reported in the majority. CONCLUSIONS: Many patients with Usher syndrome develop improved auditory outcomes after cochlear implantation with early implantation being an important factor.

All Expanded Criteria Donor Kidneys are Equal But are Some More Equal Than Others? A Population-Cohort Analysis of UK Transplant Registry Data.

Survival outcomes for kidney transplant candidates based on expanded criteria donor (ECD) kidney type is unknown. A retrospective cohort study was undertaken of prospectively collected registry data of all waitlisted kidney failure patients receiving dialysis in the United Kingdom. All patients listed for their first kidney-alone transplant between 2000-2019 were included. Treatment types included; living donor; standard criteria donor (SCD); ECD60 (deceased donor aged ≥60 years); ECD50-59 (deceased donor aged 50-59 years with two from the following three; hypertension; raised creatinine and/or death from stroke) or remains on dialysis. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality, with time-to-death from listing analyzed using time-dependent non-proportional Cox regression models. The study cohort comprised 47,917 waitlisted kidney failure patients, of whom 34,558 (72.1%) received kidney transplantation. ECD kidneys (n = 7,356) were stratified as ECD60 (n = 7,009) or ECD50-59 (n = 347). Compared to SCD, both ECD60 (Hazard Ratio 1.126, 95% CI 1.093-1.161) and ECD50-59 (Hazard Ratio 1.228, 95% CI 1.113-1.356) kidney recipients have higher all-cause mortality. However, compared to dialysis, both ECD60 (Hazard Ratio 0.194, 95% CI 0.187-0.201) and ECD50-59 (Hazard Ratio 0.218, 95% CI 0.197-0.241) kidney recipients have lower all-cause mortality. ECD kidneys, regardless of definition, provide equivalent and superior survival benefits in comparison to remaining waitlisted.

Survival for waitlisted kidney failure patients receiving transplantation versus remaining on waiting list: systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the survival benefit of transplantation versus dialysis for waitlisted kidney failure patients with a priori stratification. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Online databases MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Collection, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched between database inception and 1 March 2021. INCLUSION CRITERIA: All comparative studies that assessed all cause mortality for transplantation versus dialysis in patients with kidney failure waitlisted for transplant surgery were included. Two independent reviewers extracted the data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Meta-analysis was done using the DerSimonian-Laird random effects model, with heterogeneity investigated by subgroup analyses, sensitivity analyses, and meta-regression. RESULTS: The search identified 48 observational studies with no randomised controlled trials (n=1 245 850 patients). In total, 92% (n=44/48) of studies reported a long term (at least one year) survival benefit associated with transplantation compared with dialysis. However, 11 of those studies identified stratums in which transplantation offered no statistically significant benefit over remaining on dialysis. In 18 studies suitable for meta-analysis, kidney transplantation showed a survival benefit (hazard ratio 0.45, 95% confidence interval 0.39 to 0.54; P<0.001), with significant heterogeneity even after subgroup/sensitivity analyses or meta-regression analysis. CONCLUSION: Kidney transplantation remains the superior treatment modality for most patients with kidney failure to reduce all cause mortality, but some subgroups may lack a survival benefit. Given the continued scarcity of donor organs, further evidence is needed to better inform decision making for patients with kidney failure. STUDY REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42021247247.

Cochlear Implantation in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine outcomes following cochlear implantation (CI) in children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). DATABASES REVIEWED: MEDLINE, Embase, Web of science, Cochrane Library, and Clinicaltrial.gov. METHODS: The review was performed according to the PRISMA statement. Primary outcomes measures were changes in speech perception and speech production scores. Secondary outcome measures included communication mode, device use, parental recommendation of implant, postoperative hyperacusis, and quality of life measures. Pooled analysis of outcomes was performed if possible. RESULTS: Twenty-four studies reported on 159 children with ASD. There were improvements in speech perception in 78% of cases and in speech expression in 63% of cases, though the extent of this improvement was variable. Seventy-four percent of children with ASD and CI are nonoral communicators. Intermittent/nonuse rate was 31%. Hearing outcomes are worse compared to children with other disabilities. The vast majority of parents would recommend CI based on their experiences. CONCLUSION: Outcome in children with ASD and CI are highly variable and significantly poorer compared to non-ASD children. Despite this, most parents report positive experiences and the evidence supports the use of CI in children with ASD.

Elective Cancer Surgery in COVID-19-Free Surgical Pathways During the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: An International, Multicenter, Comparative Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19-free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19-free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). RESULTS: Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19-free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19-free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score-matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). CONCLUSION: Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19-free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks.

Cochlear Implantation Outcomes in Post Synaptic Auditory Neuropathies: A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis.

To establish outcomes following cochlear implantation (CI) in patients with postsynaptic auditory neuropathy (AN). Systematic review and narrative synthesis. Databases searched: MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Collection and ClinicalTrials.gov. No limits placed on language or year of publication. Review conducted in accordance with the PRISMA statement. Searches identified 98 studies in total, of which 14 met the inclusion criteria reporting outcomes in 25 patients with at least 28 CIs. Of these, 4 studies focused on Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease (CMT), 3 on Brown-Vialetto-Van-Laere syndrome (BVVL), 2 on Friedreich Ataxia (FRDA), 2 on Syndromic dominant optic atrophy (DOA+), 2 on Cerebellar ataxia - areflexia - pes cavus - optic atrophy - sensorineural hearing loss (CAPOS) syndrome, and 1 on Deafness-dystonia-optic neuronopathy (DDON) syndrome. All studies were Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine (OCEBM) grade IV. Overall trend was towards good post-CI outcomes with 22 of the total 25 patients displaying modest to significant benefit. Hearing outcomes following CI in postsynaptic ANs are variable but generally good with patients showing improvements in hearing thresholds and speech perception. In the future, development of a clearer stratification system into pre, post, and central AN would have clinical and academic benefits. Further research is required to understand AN pathophysiology and develop better diagnostic tools for more accurate identification of lesion sites. Multicenter longitudinal studies with standardized comprehensive outcome measures including health-related quality of life data will be key in establishing a better understanding of short and long-term post-CI outcomes.

Outcomes of Cochlear Implantation in Patients with Superficial Siderosis: A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis.

This study aimed to establish outcomes following cochlear implantation (CI) in patients with superficial siderosis (SS). MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for this systematic review. No limits were placed on the language or the year of publication. The review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Of a total of 46 studies, 19 studies met the inclusion criteria reporting outcomes in 38 patients. Of the 44 implants, 23 implants (52.27%) had good hearing outcomes at the last follow-up, 9 (20.45%) were initially beneficial for the patient, but then the performance deteriorated (4 of which were re-implanted), and 12 (27.27%) were not beneficial for the patient. All studies were classified as grade 4 studies using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (OCEBM) grading system, being retrospective in nature and consisting of case reports and noncontrolled case series with a small number of patients. Of the 44 implants, 32 (72.73%) showed improved hearing outcomes following CI for SS at some point in time, of which 23 (52.2%) implants showed sustained benefit at the last follow-up (average follow-up time was 21.97 months). It is difficult to predict the longevity of benefit owing to the progressive nature of the disease or the patients in whom it may be beneficial, as the preoperative investigations inadequately predict benefit. Preimplantation and postimplantation counseling with the patient and their family regarding the potential limited benefit and eventual parallel decline with the neurological disease are crucial, along with thorough clinical investigations.