RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD)-associated peripheral spondyloarthritis (pSpA) decreases quality of life and remains poorly understood. Given the prevalence of this condition and its negative impact, it is surprising that evidence-based disease definitions and diagnostic strategies are lacking. This systematic review summarizes available data to facilitate development and validation of diagnostics, patient-reported outcomes, and imaging indices specific to this condition. METHODS: A literature search was conducted. Consensus or classification criteria, case series, cross-sectional studies, cohort studies, and randomized controlled trials related to diagnosis were included. RESULTS: A total of 44 studies reporting data on approximately 1500 patients with pSpA were eligible for analysis. Data quality across studies was only graded as fair to good. Due to large heterogeneity, meta-analysis was not possible. The majority of studies incorporated patient-reported outcomes and a physical examination. A total of 13 studies proposed or validated screening tools, consensus, classification, or consensus criteria. A total of 28 studies assessed the role of laboratory tests, none of which were considered sufficiently accurate for use in diagnosis. A total of 17 studies assessed the role of imaging, with the available literature insufficient to fully endorse any imaging modality as a robust diagnostic tool. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights existing inconsistency and lack of a clear diagnostic approach for IBD-associated pSpA. Given the absence of an evidence-based approach, a combination of existing criteria and physician assessment should be utilized. To address this issue comprehensively, our future efforts will be directed toward pursuit of a multidisciplinary approach aimed at standardizing evaluation and diagnosis of IBD-associated pSpA.
This systematic review highlights the lack of an evidence-based approach to the diagnosis of inflammatory bowel diseaseassociated peripheral spondyloarthritis and the need to standardize evaluation and diagnosis via multidisciplinary collaboration with development of patient-reported outcomes and imaging indices.
RESUMO
The prophylactic use of amiodarone to reduce the incidence of postoperative arrhythmias is effective for patients undergoing general cardiac surgeries; however, no data exists for the use of prophylactic amiodarone to prevent postoperative arrhythmias after CF-LVAD. This single-center, retrospective analysis compared patients with CF-LVADs placed between April 2014 and June 2020 who received prophylactic postoperative amiodarone to those who did not. Based on institution practice at the respective times, patients with a CF-LVAD placed between April 2014 and June 2018 were included in the group receiving postoperative amiodarone arrhythmia prophylaxis and patients with a CF-LVAD placed July 2018 to June 2020 were included in the group not receiving arrhythmia prophylaxis. The primary outcome was the incidence of first occurring atrial or ventricular arrhythmia from CF-LVAD placement to 21 days or hospital discharge. Sixty patients received amiodarone for arrhythmia prophylaxis and 27 patients did not receive prophylaxis. The primary outcome occurred in 40% of the prophylaxis group and 66.7% in the no prophylaxis group (RR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.40-0.90; p = 0.038). In patients receiving CF-LVADs, the use of prophylactic amiodarone was associated with a reduction in the incidence of postoperative arrhythmias, which was driven primarily by a reduction in postoperative atrial arrhythmias, without significantly increasing the rate of amiodarone-related adverse events.
Assuntos
Amiodarona , Fibrilação Atrial , Coração Auxiliar , Humanos , Amiodarona/efeitos adversos , Antiarrítmicos/efeitos adversos , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a significant contributor to morbidity and mortality in the United States. Catheter-directed, ultrasound-assisted thrombolysis (USAT) uses high-frequency, low-energy ultrasound waves to disaggregate uncrosslinked fibrin fibers and increase thrombus penetration of a locally delivered thrombolytic to treat an acute PE. The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of catheter-directed USAT versus systemic anticoagulation alone in submassive PE. This was a single-center, retrospective study of patients with a diagnosis of acute submassive PE from April 4, 2014 to May 1, 2019 at a large, academic medical center. Subjects were split into two different groups based on treatment with either USAT with systemic anticoagulation or systemic anticoagulation alone. The primary outcome was the incidence of severe or life-threatening GUSTO bleeding within 72 h or until hospital discharge if sooner. A total of 130 subjects were included (n = 40 in the USAT group and n = 90 in systemic anticoagulation alone group). Significantly fewer subjects in the USAT group had an active diagnosis of cancer at the time of presentation (7.5% vs 28.9%, p = 0.006). There was no difference in severe or life-threatening GUSTO bleeding or any component of the GUSTO bleeding definitions. Administration of USAT with systemic anticoagulation was well-tolerated when compared to systemic anticoagulation alone, but bias may have led to selection of patients for USAT with a lower bleeding risk and higher functional status at baseline.