The third Intensive Care Bundle with Blood Pressure Reduction in Acute Cerebral Haemorrhage Trial (INTERACT3): an international, stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Early control of elevated blood pressure is the most promising treatment for acute intracerebral haemorrhage. We aimed to establish whether implementing a goal-directed care bundle incorporating protocols for early intensive blood pressure lowering and management algorithms for hyperglycaemia, pyrexia, and abnormal anticoagulation, implemented in a hospital setting, could improve outcomes for patients with acute spontaneous intracerebral haemorrhage. METHODS: We performed a pragmatic, international, multicentre, blinded endpoint, stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial at hospitals in nine low-income and middle-income countries (Brazil, China, India, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Peru, Sri Lanka, and Viet Nam) and one high-income country (Chile). Hospitals were eligible if they had no or inconsistent relevant, disease-specific protocols, and were willing to implement the care bundle to consecutive patients (aged ≥18 years) with imaging-confirmed spontaneous intracerebral haemorrhage presenting within 6 h of the onset of symptoms, had a local champion, and could provide the required study data. Hospitals were centrally randomly allocated using permuted blocks to three sequences of implementation, stratified by country and the projected number of patients to be recruited over the 12 months of the study period. These sequences had four periods that dictated the order in which the hospitals were to switch from the control usual care procedure to the intervention implementation of the care bundle procedure to different clusters of patients in a stepped manner. To avoid contamination, details of the intervention, sequence, and allocation periods were concealed from sites until they had completed the usual care control periods. The care bundle protocol included the early intensive lowering of systolic blood pressure (target <140 mm Hg), strict glucose control (target 6·1-7·8 mmol/L in those without diabetes and 7·8-10·0 mmol/L in those with diabetes), antipyrexia treatment (target body temperature ≤37·5°C), and rapid reversal of warfarin-related anticoagulation (target international normalised ratio <1·5) within 1 h of treatment, in patients where these variables were abnormal. Analyses were performed according to a modified intention-to-treat population with available outcome data (ie, excluding sites that withdrew during the study). The primary outcome was functional recovery, measured with the modified Rankin scale (mRS; range 0 [no symptoms] to 6 [death]) at 6 months by masked research staff, analysed using proportional ordinal logistic regression to assess the distribution in scores on the mRS, with adjustments for cluster (hospital site), group assignment of cluster per period, and time (6-month periods from Dec 12, 2017). This trial is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03209258) and the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR-IOC-17011787) and is completed. FINDINGS: Between May 27, 2017, and July 8, 2021, 206 hospitals were assessed for eligibility, of which 144 hospitals in ten countries agreed to join and were randomly assigned in the trial, but 22 hospitals withdrew before starting to enrol patients and another hospital was withdrawn and their data on enrolled patients was deleted because regulatory approval was not obtained. Between Dec 12, 2017, and Dec 31, 2021, 10 857 patients were screened but 3821 were excluded. Overall, the modified intention-to-treat population included 7036 patients enrolled at 121 hospitals, with 3221 assigned to the care bundle group and 3815 to the usual care group, with primary outcome data available in 2892 patients in the care bundle group and 3363 patients in the usual care group. The likelihood of a poor functional outcome was lower in the care bundle group (common odds ratio 0·86; 95% CI 0·76-0·97; p=0·015). The favourable shift in mRS scores in the care bundle group was generally consistent across a range of sensitivity analyses that included additional adjustments for country and patient variables (0·84; 0·73-0·97; p=0·017), and with different approaches to the use of multiple imputations for missing data. Patients in the care bundle group had fewer serious adverse events than those in the usual care group (16·0% vs 20·1%; p=0·0098). INTERPRETATION: Implementation of a care bundle protocol for intensive blood pressure lowering and other management algorithms for physiological control within several hours of the onset of symptoms resulted in improved functional outcome for patients with acute intracerebral haemorrhage. Hospitals should incorporate this approach into clinical practice as part of active management for this serious condition. FUNDING: Joint Global Health Trials scheme from the Department of Health and Social Care, the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office, and the Medical Research Council and Wellcome Trust; West China Hospital; the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia; Sichuan Credit Pharmaceutic and Takeda China.

Strategies to safely rule out pulmonary embolism in COVID-19 outpatients: a multicenter retrospective study.

OBJECTIVES: The objective was to define a safe strategy to exclude pulmonary embolism (PE) in COVID-19 outpatients, without performing CT pulmonary angiogram (CTPA). METHODS: COVID-19 outpatients from 15 university hospitals who underwent a CTPA were retrospectively evaluated. D-Dimers, variables of the revised Geneva and Wells scores, as well as laboratory findings and clinical characteristics related to COVID-19 pneumonia, were collected. CTPA reports were reviewed for the presence of PE and the extent of COVID-19 disease. PE rule-out strategies were based solely on D-Dimer tests using different thresholds, the revised Geneva and Wells scores, and a COVID-19 PE prediction model built on our dataset were compared. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC), failure rate, and efficiency were calculated. RESULTS: In total, 1369 patients were included of whom 124 were PE positive (9.1%). Failure rate and efficiency of D-Dimer > 500 µg/l were 0.9% (95%CI, 0.2-4.8%) and 10.1% (8.5-11.9%), respectively, increasing to 1.0% (0.2-5.3%) and 16.4% (14.4-18.7%), respectively, for an age-adjusted D-Dimer level. D-dimer > 1000 µg/l led to an unacceptable failure rate to 8.1% (4.4-14.5%). The best performances of the revised Geneva and Wells scores were obtained using the age-adjusted D-Dimer level. They had the same failure rate of 1.0% (0.2-5.3%) for efficiency of 16.8% (14.7-19.1%), and 16.9% (14.8-19.2%) respectively. The developed COVID-19 PE prediction model had an AUC of 0.609 (0.594-0.623) with an efficiency of 20.5% (18.4-22.8%) when its failure was set to 0.8%. CONCLUSIONS: The strategy to safely exclude PE in COVID-19 outpatients should not differ from that used in non-COVID-19 patients. The added value of the COVID-19 PE prediction model is minor. KEY POINTS: • D-dimer level remains the most important predictor of pulmonary embolism in COVID-19 patients. • The AUCs of the revised Geneva and Wells scores using an age-adjusted D-dimer threshold were 0.587 (95%CI, 0.572 to 0.603) and 0.588 (95%CI, 0.572 to 0.603). • The AUC of COVID-19-specific strategy to rule out pulmonary embolism ranged from 0.513 (95%CI: 0.503 to 0.522) to 0.609 (95%CI: 0.594 to 0.623).

Protein-Losing Enteropathy in Primary Lymphangiectasia.

Teaching Point: Intestinal lymphangectasia should be evoked in the rare context of protein-losing enteropathy with low-attenuation thickening of the bowel wall.

Assessment of Resection Margins in Bone Tumor Surgery.

Limb salvage surgery is now the preferred procedure for bone tumor surgery. To decrease the risk of local recurrence, it is crucial to obtain adequate resection margins. The obtained margins must be evaluated postoperatively because they influence what treatment is given subsequently when margins are not adequate (e.g., surgical revision and radiotherapy). The study aims to evaluate margin assessment of tumor specimen by MRI compared to conventional histology (to establish the viability of using MRI) and assess the accuracy of a patient-specific instrument when narrow margins were aimed. The resection margins in 12 consecutive patients that were operated on for bone tumor resection were prospectively analyzed using three methods: MRI of the resection specimen, macroscopic evaluation of specimen slices, and microscopic pathological evaluation. The assessments were qualitative (R0, R1, and R2) and quantitative (distance in mm). MRI, macroscopic, and microscopic margins generated similar results for both the qualitative (all resections were R0) and quantitative assessments. The median error in safe margins was 2 mm with a surgical guide (PSI) and 5 mm without a surgical guide. Local recurrences were not detected after a mean follow-up period of 3.7 years (range, 2.1-5 years); however, four patients died during the study. In conclusion, MRI is a valuable tool for assessing safe margins. When specimens are not available for pathological assessment (e.g., extracorporeally irradiated autograft or autoclaved autograft), MRI could be used to evaluate margins. In particular, when tumor volume is high, MRI could also help to focus the pathological examination on areas of concern.