Prevalence of COVID-19 and Risk Factors for Infection Among Pediatric Anesthesia Patients: A Report From the PEACOC Research Network.

BACKGROUND: The Pediatric Anesthesia COVID-19 Collaborative (PEACOC) is a research network to advance the care of children during the pandemic. Here we calculate the prevalence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) among children undergoing anesthesia, look at prevalence in the population data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and assess independent risk factors for infection. METHODS: This was a multicenter, retrospective, observational study. Children aged 28 days to 18 years scheduled for anesthesia services at 12 centers requiring universal COVID-19 testing from March 29, 2020 to June 30, 2020 were included. COVID-19 positivity rates among those tested were plotted and trends were assessed using the Cochran Armitage test of trend. Independent risk factors were explored using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Data were collected and analyzed on 33,320 anesthesia encounters including 265 children with COVID-19. Over the study period, the rates of infections in the pediatric anesthesia population did not demonstrate a significant trend. In the general population, there was a significant downward trend in infection rates ( P < .001). In exploratory analysis, multivariable risk factors for a COVID-19 positive test were Black/African American race, Hispanic ethnicity, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status III or above, overweight and obese body mass index (BMI), orthopedic cases, abdominal cases, emergency cases, absence of injury and trauma, and West region (all P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Rates of COVID-19 in pediatric anesthesia patients were consistently lower than in the general population. Independent risk factors of a positive test for children were identified. This is the first time universal testing for a single infectious disease was undertaken on a wide scale. As such, the association of infection with surgical case type or emergency case status is unprecedented.

Vigilance: the behavioral impact of quantitative monitoring on administration and antagonism of neuromuscular blocking agents.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine whether use of acceleromyography (1) changes dosing of neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs), and (2) increases the time between neostigmine administration and extubation, when compared with subjective assessment of neuromuscular blockade. METHODS: For this retrospective study, data were collected from patient electronic medical records. Patients were included if they had received an NMBA as part of a general anesthetic in 2013 and 2014. Data were analyzed by category of monitoring device: quantitative monitor (acceleromyograph [AMG]) or subjective device (peripheral nerve stimulator [PNS]). Outcomes measured were the total dose of NMBA administered and, the timing of the last dose of NMBA and anticholinesterase relative to tracheal extubation. RESULTS: Results from multivariate models showed that use of acceleromyography was not associated with a change in the total dose of NMBA administered. In contrast, the number of times any monitor was used, as determined by the frequency with which the train-of-four count (TOFC) was recorded, correlated with the administration of greater amounts of rocuronium (P < 0.01) and vecuronium (P < 0.01). The use of acceleromyography did not prolong the time interval between neostigmine administration and tracheal extubation. The number of times any monitor was used during an anesthetic was associated with a decrease in this time interval. The interval decreased an average of 2.7 min each successive time the TOFC was recorded (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The data presented provides insight about the behavioral engineering inherent to the practice of anesthesiology. Introduction of neuromuscular blockade assessment appeared to increase provider vigilance in dosing of NMBAs-regardless of assessment method. The frequency of intraoperative monitoring (quantitative or subjective) was associated with an increased total dose of NMBA administered and decreased time interval between the last dose of neostigmine and extubation.

Selection of pfcrt K76 and pfmdr1 N86 Coding Alleles after Uncomplicated Malaria Treatment by Artemether-Lumefantrine in Mali.

BACKGROUND: Artemether-lumefantrine is a highly effective artemisinin-based combination therapy that was adopted in Mali as first-line treatment for uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria. This study was designed to measure the efficacy of artemether-lumefantrine and to assess the selection of the P. falciparum chloroquine resistance transporter (pfcrt) and P. falciparum multi-drug resistance 1 (pfmdr1) genotypes that have been associated with drug resistance. METHODS: A 28-day follow-up efficacy trial of artemether-lumefantrine was conducted in patients aged 6 months and older suffering from uncomplicated falciparum malaria in four different Malian areas during the 2009 malaria transmission season. The polymorphic genetic markers MSP2, MSP1, and Ca1 were used to distinguish between recrudescence and reinfection. Reinfection and recrudescence were then grouped as recurrent infections and analyzed together by PCR-restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) to identify candidate markers for artemether-lumefantrine tolerance in the P. falciparum chloroquine resistance transporter (pfcrt) gene and the P. falciparum multi-drug resistance 1 (pfmdr1) gene. RESULTS: Clinical outcomes in 326 patients (96.7%) were analyzed and the 28-day uncorrected adequate clinical and parasitological response (ACPR) rate was 73.9%. The total PCR-corrected 28-day ACPR was 97.2%. The pfcrt 76T and pfmdr1 86Y population prevalence decreased from 49.3% and 11.0% at baseline (n = 337) to 38.8% and 0% in patients with recurrent infection (n = 85); p = 0.001), respectively. CONCLUSION: Parasite populations exposed to artemether-lumefantrine in this study were selected toward chloroquine-sensitivity and showed a promising trend that may warrant future targeted reintroduction of chloroquine or/and amodiaquine.

Polymorphisms in Plasmodium falciparum chloroquine resistance transporter and multidrug resistance 1 genes: parasite risk factors that affect treatment outcomes for P. falciparum malaria after artemether-lumefantrine and artesunate-amodiaquine.

Adequate clinical and parasitologic cure by artemisinin combination therapies relies on the artemisinin component and the partner drug. Polymorphisms in the Plasmodium falciparum chloroquine resistance transporter (pfcrt) and P. falciparum multidrug resistance 1 (pfmdr1) genes are associated with decreased sensitivity to amodiaquine and lumefantrine, but effects of these polymorphisms on therapeutic responses to artesunate-amodiaquine (ASAQ) and artemether-lumefantrine (AL) have not been clearly defined. Individual patient data from 31 clinical trials were harmonized and pooled by using standardized methods from the WorldWide Antimalarial Resistance Network. Data for more than 7,000 patients were analyzed to assess relationships between parasite polymorphisms in pfcrt and pfmdr1 and clinically relevant outcomes after treatment with AL or ASAQ. Presence of the pfmdr1 gene N86 (adjusted hazards ratio = 4.74, 95% confidence interval = 2.29 - 9.78, P < 0.001) and increased pfmdr1 copy number (adjusted hazards ratio = 6.52, 95% confidence interval = 2.36-17.97, P < 0.001 : were significant independent risk factors for recrudescence in patients treated with AL. AL and ASAQ exerted opposing selective effects on single-nucleotide polymorphisms in pfcrt and pfmdr1. Monitoring selection and responding to emerging signs of drug resistance are critical tools for preserving efficacy of artemisinin combination therapies; determination of the prevalence of at least pfcrt K76T and pfmdr1 N86Y should now be routine.

Results and risk factors for recurrence following single-level tubular lumbar microdiscectomy.

OBJECT: The use of minimally invasive surgical techniques, including microscope-assisted tubular lumbar microdiscectomy (tLMD), has gained increasing popularity in treating lumbar disc herniations (LDHs). This particular procedure has been shown to be both cost-efficient and effective, resulting in outcomes comparable to those of open surgical procedures. Lumbar disc herniation recurrence necessitating reoperation, however, remains an issue following spinal surgery, with an overall reported incidence of approximately 3-13%. The authors' aim in the present study was to report their experience using tLMD for single-level LDH, hoping to provide further insight into the rate of surgical recurrence and to identify potential risk factors leading to this complication. METHODS: The authors retrospectively reviewed the cases of 217 patients who underwent tLMD for single-level LDH performed identically by 2 surgeons (J.B., R.H.) between 2004 and 2008. Evaluation for LDH recurrence included detailed medical chart review and telephone interview. Recurrent LDH was defined as the return of preoperative signs and symptoms after an interval of postoperative resolution, in conjunction with radiographic demonstration of ipsilateral disc herniation at the same level and pathological confirmation of disc material. A cohort of patients without recurrence was used for comparison to identify possible risk factors for recurrent LDH. RESULTS: Of the 147 patients for whom the authors were able to definitively assess symptomatic recurrence status, 14 patients (9.5%) experienced LDH recurrence following single-level tLMD. The most common level involved was L5-S1 (42.9%) and the mean length of time to recurrence was 12 weeks (range 1.5-52 weeks). Sixty-four percent of the patients were male. In a comparison with patients without recurrence, the authors found that relatively lower body mass index was significantly associated with recurrence (p = 0.005), such that LDH in nonobese patients was more likely to recur. CONCLUSIONS: Recurrence rates following tLMD for LDH compare favorably with those in patients who have undergone open discectomy, lending further support for its effectiveness in treating single-level LDH. Nonobese patients with a relatively lower body mass index, in particular, appear to be at greater risk for recurrence.