RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Antibiotic Stewardship Programs (ASP) have improved empirical and directed antibiotic treatment in Gram-negative bloodstream infections. A decrease in mortality, readmission, and length of hospitalization has been reported. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A pre-post-quasi-experimental study was conducted between November and April 2015-2016 (pre-intervention period), 2016-2017, 2017-2018, and 2018-2019 (post-intervention periods), to analyse the impact of ASP on empirical, directed, and entire treatment optimization, as well as mortality, readmission, and length of hospitalization, in hospitalized patients with Gram-negative bacilli (GNB) bloodstream infections. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-four patients were included (41 in the pre-intervention group, 38 in the first-year post-intervention group, 50 in the second-year post-intervention group, and 45 in the third-year post-intervention group). There was a significant improvement in directed treatment optimization (43.9% in the pre-intervention group, 68.4% in the first-year post-intervention group, 74% in the second-year post-intervention group, and 88.9% in the third-year post-intervention group, P <0.001), as well as in entire treatment optimization (19.5%, 34.2%, 40.0%, and 46.7%, respectively, P=0.013), with increased optimal directed (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.60-8.58) and entire treatment (aOR, 3.31; 95% CI, 1.27-8.58). Although a tendency toward improvement was observed in empirical treatment after ASP implementation, it did not reach statistical significance (41.5% vs. 57.9%, P=0.065). No changes in mortality, readmission, or length of hospitalization were detected. CONCLUSION: ASP implementation improved both directed and entire treatment optimization in patients with GNB bloodstream infections over time. Nevertheless, no improvement was found in clinical outcomes such as mortality, readmission, or length of hospitalization.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to validate the role of the D-dimer to lymphocyte ratio (DLR) for mortality prediction in a large national cohort of hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. METHODS: A retrospective, multicenter, observational study that included hospitalized patients due to SARS-CoV-2 infection in Spain was conducted from March 2020 to March 2022. All biomarkers and laboratory indices analyzed were measured once at admission. RESULTS: A total of 10,575 COVID-19 patients were included in this study. The mean age of participants was 66.9 (±16) years, and 58.6% (6202 patients) of them were male. The overall mortality rate was 16.3% (n = 1726 patients). Intensive care unit admission was needed in 10.5% (n = 1106 patients), non-invasive mechanical ventilation was required in 8.8% (n = 923 patients), and orotracheal intubation was required in 7.5% (789 patients). DLR presented a c-statistic of 0.69 (95% CI, 0.68-0.71) for in-hospital mortality with an optimal cut-off above 1. Multivariate analysis showed an independent association for in-hospital mortality for DLR > 1 (adjusted OR 2.09, 95% CI 1.09-4.04; p = 0.03); in the same way, survival analysis showed a higher mortality risk for DLR > 1 (HR 2.24; 95% CI 2.03-2.47; p < 0.01). Further, no other laboratory indices showed an independent association for mortality in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirmed the usefulness of DLR as a prognostic biomarker for mortality associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection, being an accessible, cost-effective, and easy-to-use biomarker in daily clinical practice.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Produtos de Degradação da Fibrina e do Fibrinogênio , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Feminino , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Prognóstico , Estudos Retrospectivos , SARS-CoV-2 , Biomarcadores , LinfócitosRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020, an intimate relationship between this disease and cardiovascular diseases has been seen. However, few studies assess the development of heart failure during this infection. This study aims to determine the predisposing factors for the development of heart failure (HF) during hospital admission of COVID-19 patients. METHODOLOGY: A retrospective and multicenter study of patients with HF admitted for COVID-19 in 150 Spanish hospitals (SEMI-COVID-19 Registry). A bivariate analysis was performed to relate the different variables evaluated in patients developing heart failure during hospital admission. A multivariate analysis including the most relevant clinical variables obtained in bivariate analyses to predict the outcome of heart failure was performed. RESULTS: A total of 16.474 patients hospitalized for COVID-19 were included (57.5% men, mean age 67 years), 958 of them (5.8%) developed HF during hospitalization. The risk factors for HF development were: age (odds ratio [OR]): 1.042; confidence interval 95% (CI 95%): 1.035-1.050; p < 0.001), atrial fibrillation (OR: 2.022; CI 95%: 1.697-2.410; p < 0.001), BMI > 30 kg/m2 (OR: 1.460 CI 95%: 1.230-1.733; p < 0001), and peripheral vascular disease (OR: 1.564; CI 95%: 1.217-2.201; p < 0.001). Patients who developed HF had a higher rate of mortality (54.1% vs. 19.1%, p < 0.001), intubation rate (OR: 2,36; p < 0.001), and ICU admissions (OR: 2.38; p < 0001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who presented a higher risk of developing HF were older with cardiovascular risk factors. The risk factors for HF development were age, atrial fibrillation, obesity, and peripheral vascular disease. In addition, patients who developed HF more frequently required to be intubated or admitted to the ICU.
RESUMO
COVID-19 is responsible for high mortality, but robust machine learning-based predictors of mortality are lacking. To generate a model for predicting mortality in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 using Gradient Boosting Decision Trees (GBDT). The Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 registry includes 24,514 pseudo-anonymized cases of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 from 1 February 2020 to 5 December 2021. This registry was used as a GBDT machine learning model, employing the CatBoost and BorutaShap classifier to select the most relevant indicators and generate a mortality prediction model by risk level, ranging from 0 to 1. The model was validated by separating patients according to admission date, using the period 1 February to 31 December 2020 (first and second waves, pre-vaccination period) for training, and 1 January to 30 November 2021 (vaccination period) for the test group. An ensemble of ten models with different random seeds was constructed, separating 80% of the patients for training and 20% from the end of the training period for cross-validation. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) was used as a performance metric. Clinical and laboratory data from 23,983 patients were analyzed. CatBoost mortality prediction models achieved an AUC performance of 84.76 (standard deviation 0.45) for patients in the test group (potentially vaccinated patients not included in model training) using 16 features. The performance of the 16-parameter GBDT model for predicting COVID-19 hospital mortality, although requiring a relatively large number of predictors, shows a high predictive capacity.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Humanos , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Aprendizado de Máquina , Sistema de RegistrosRESUMO
The significant impact of COVID-19 worldwide has made it necessary to develop tools to identify patients at high risk of severe disease and death. This work aims to validate the RIM Score-COVID in the SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. The RIM Score-COVID is a simple nomogram with high predictive capacity for in-hospital death due to COVID-19 designed using clinical and analytical parameters of patients diagnosed in the first wave of the pandemic. The nomogram uses five variables measured on arrival to the emergency department (ED): age, sex, oxygen saturation, C-reactive protein level, and neutrophil-to-platelet ratio. Validation was performed in the Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry, which included consecutive patients hospitalized with confirmed COVID-19 in Spain. The cohort was divided into three time periods: T1 from February 1 to June 10, 2020 (first wave), T2 from June 11 to December 31, 2020 (second wave, pre-vaccination period), and T3 from January 1 to December 5, 2021 (vaccination period). The model's accuracy in predicting in-hospital COVID-19 mortality was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC). Clinical and laboratory data from 22,566 patients were analyzed: 15,976 (70.7%) from T1, 4,233 (18.7%) from T2, and 2,357 from T3 (10.4%). AUROC of the RIM Score-COVID in the entire SEMI-COVID-19 Registry was 0.823 (95%CI 0.819-0.827) and was 0.834 (95%CI 0.830-0.839) in T1, 0.792 (95%CI 0.781-0.803) in T2, and 0.799 (95%CI 0.785-0.813) in T3. The RIM Score-COVID is a simple, easy-to-use method for predicting in-hospital COVID-19 mortality that uses parameters measured in most EDs. This tool showed good predictive ability in successive disease waves.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência , Curva ROC , Sistema de Registros , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
The vast majority of malignant melanomas in the small intestine are metastasis of cutaneous tumors. Few cases have been published on primary melanomas in this location, some authors consider that they are always metastatic and that the primary tumor has regressed. In this letter, we present the case of a 77-year-old woman with a history of cutaneous melanoma excision 38 years ago who was diagnosed with ileal melanoma in the absence of other lesions during the study of iron deficiency anemia, and we discuss about the origin of this type of neoplasms.
Assuntos
Melanoma , Neoplasias Cutâneas , Feminino , Humanos , Idoso , Melanoma/cirurgia , Melanoma/patologia , Neoplasias Cutâneas/cirurgia , Neoplasias Cutâneas/patologia , Intestino Delgado/patologia , Íleo/patologiaRESUMO
(1) Background: C-reactive protein (CRP) and albumin are inflammatory markers. We analyzed the prognostic capacity of serum albumin (SA) and CRP for an outcome comprising mortality, length of stay, ICU admission, and non-invasive mechanical ventilation in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. (2) Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study based on the Spanish national SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. Two multivariate logistic models were adjusted for SA, CRP, and their combination. Training and testing samples were used to validate the models. (3) Results: The outcome was present in 41.1% of the 3471 participants, who had lower SA (mean [SD], 3.5 [0.6] g/dL vs. 3.8 [0.5] g/dL; p < 0.001) and higher CRP (108.9 [96.5] mg/L vs. 70.6 [70.3] mg/L; p < 0.001). In the adjusted multivariate model, both were associated with poorer evolution: SA, OR 0.674 (95% CI, 0.551−0.826; p < 0.001); CRP, OR 1.002 (95% CI, 1.001−1.004; p = 0.003). The CRP/SA model had a similar predictive capacity (honest AUC, 0.8135 [0.7865−0.8405]), with a continuously increasing risk and cutoff value of 25 showing the highest predictive capacity (OR, 1.470; 95% CI, 1.188−1.819; p < 0.001). (4) Conclusions: SA and CRP are good independent predictors of patients hospitalized with COVID-19. For the CRP/SA ratio value, 25 is the cutoff for poor clinical course.
RESUMO
Aim: To assess the prevalence of malnutrition, frailty, and sarcopenia and the relationships between them in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study of the prevalence, determinants, and associations between malnutrition (GLIM 2019 criteria), sarcopenia (SARC-F scale, dynamometry, and calf circumference), and frailty (FRAIL scale) upon discharge following hospitalization for COVID 19. Results: A total of 101 patients (67.3% men, mean age 66.3 years) were recruited. Malnutrition was diagnosed in 49.5%, sarcopenia in 32.7%, and frailty in 28.7% of patients. Of the patients with malnutrition, 48% were also sarcopenic, and 42% were frail. There was a significant association between malnutrition and the severity of pneumonia according to the CURB-65 scale (odds ratio [OR] 2.61, p = 0.036), between sarcopenia and a Barthel score lower than 60 points (OR 29.52, p < 0.001), and between frailty and both a Barthel score lower than 60 points (OR 32.27, p < 0.001) and a length of hospital stay of over 30 days (OR 9.11, p = 0.008). Conclusions: Malnutrition, sarcopenia, and frailty are prevalent and interrelated entities in patients hospitalized for acute SARS CoV-2 infection, especially in patients with greater baseline functional impairment prior to admission and a higher infection severity.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To describe the impact of different doses of corticosteroids on the evolution of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, based on the potential benefit of the non-genomic mechanism of these drugs at higher doses. METHODS: Observational study using data collected from the SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. We evaluated the epidemiological, radiological and analytical scenario between patients treated with megadoses therapy of corticosteroids vs low-dose of corticosteroids and the development of complications. The primary endpoint was all-cause in-hospital mortality according to use of corticosteroids megadoses. RESULTS: Of a total of 14,921 patients, corticosteroids were used in 5,262 (35.3%). Of them, 2,216 (46%) specifically received megadoses. Age was a factor that differed between those who received megadoses therapy versus those who did not in a significant manner (69 years [IQR 59-79] vs 73 years [IQR 61-83]; p < .001). Radiological and analytical findings showed a higher use of megadoses therapy among patients with an interstitial infiltrate and elevated inflammatory markers associated with COVID-19. In the univariate study it appears that steroid use is associated with increased mortality (OR 2.07 95% CI 1.91-2.24 p < .001) and megadose use with increased survival (OR 0.84 95% CI 0.75-0.96, p 0.011), but when adjusting for possible confounding factors, it is observed that the use of megadoses is also associated with higher mortality (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.32-1.80; p < .001). There is no difference between megadoses and low-dose (p .298). Although, there are differences in the use of megadoses versus low-dose in terms of complications, mainly infectious, with fewer pneumonias and sepsis in the megadoses group (OR 0.82 95% CI 0.71-0.95; p < .001 and OR 0.80 95% CI 0.65-0.97; p < .001) respectively. CONCLUSION: There is no difference in mortality with megadoses versus low-dose, but there is a lower incidence of infectious complications with glucocorticoid megadoses.
Assuntos
Corticosteroides/uso terapêutico , Tratamento Farmacológico da COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Prednisona/uso terapêutico , Sistema de Registros , SARS-CoV-2/patogenicidade , Sepse/tratamento farmacológico , Adulto , Fatores Etários , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , COVID-19/mortalidade , COVID-19/virologia , Esquema de Medicação , Feminino , Mortalidade Hospitalar/tendências , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , SARS-CoV-2/crescimento & desenvolvimento , Sepse/epidemiologia , Sepse/mortalidade , Sepse/virologia , Espanha/epidemiologia , Análise de Sobrevida , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
We aimed to determine the impact of steroid use in COVID-19 in-hospital mortality, in a retrospective cohort study of the SEMICOVID19 database of admitted patients with SARS-CoV-2 laboratory-confirmed pneumonia from 131 Spanish hospitals. Patients treated with corticosteroids were compared to patients not treated with corticosteroids; and adjusted using a propensity-score for steroid treatment. From March-July 2020, 5.262 (35.26%) were treated with corticosteroids and 9.659 (64.73%) were not. In-hospital mortality overall was 20.50%; it was higher in patients treated with corticosteroids than in controls (28.5% versus 16.2%, OR 2.068 [95% confidence interval; 1.908 to 2.242]; p = 0.0001); however, when adjusting by occurrence of ARDS, mortality was significantly lower in the steroid group (43.4% versus 57.6%; OR 0.564 [95% confidence interval; 0.503 to 0.633]; p = 0.0001). Moreover, the greater the respiratory failure, the greater the impact on mortality of the steroid treatment. When adjusting these results including the propensity score as a covariate, in-hospital mortality remained significantly lower in the steroid group (OR 0.774 [0.660 to 0.907], p = 0.002). Steroid treatment reduced mortality by 24% relative to no steroid treatment (RRR 0.24). These results support the use of glucocorticoids in COVID-19 in this subgroup of patients.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Venous thrombotic events (VTE) are frequent in COVID-19, and elevated plasma D-dimer (pDd) and dyspnea are common in both entities. OBJECTIVE: To determine the admission pDd cut-off value associated with in-hospital VTE in patients with COVID-19. METHODS: Multicenter, retrospective study analyzing the at-admission pDd cut-off value to predict VTE and anticoagulation intensity along hospitalization due to COVID-19. RESULTS: Among 9386 patients, 2.2% had VTE: 1.6% pulmonary embolism (PE), 0.4% deep vein thrombosis (DVT), and 0.2% both. Those with VTE had a higher prevalence of tachypnea (42.9% vs. 31.1%; p = 0.0005), basal O2 saturation <93% (45.4% vs. 33.1%; p = 0.0003), higher at admission pDd (median [IQR]: 1.4 [0.6-5.5] vs. 0.6 [0.4-1.2] µg/ml; p < 0.0001) and platelet count (median [IQR]: 208 [158-289] vs. 189 [148-245] platelets × 109/L; p = 0.0013). A pDd cut-off of 1.1 µg/ml showed specificity 72%, sensitivity 49%, positive predictive value (PPV) 4%, and negative predictive value (NPV) 99% for in-hospital VTE. A cut-off value of 4.7 µg/ml showed specificity of 95%, sensitivity of 27%, PPV of 9%, and NPV of 98%. Overall mortality was proportional to pDd value, with the lowest incidence for each pDd category depending on anticoagulation intensity: 26.3% for those with pDd >1.0 µg/ml treated with prophylactic dose (p < 0.0001), 28.8% for pDd for patients with pDd >2.0 µg/ml treated with intermediate dose (p = 0.0001), and 31.3% for those with pDd >3.0 µg/ml and full anticoagulation (p = 0.0183). CONCLUSIONS: In hospitalized patients with COVID-19, a pDd value greater than 3.0 µg/ml can be considered to screen VTE and to consider full-dose anticoagulation.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Tromboembolia Venosa , Trombose Venosa , Produtos de Degradação da Fibrina e do Fibrinogênio , Hospitalização , Humanos , Sistema de Registros , Estudos Retrospectivos , SARS-CoV-2 , Tromboembolia Venosa/diagnóstico , Tromboembolia Venosa/epidemiologia , Trombose Venosa/diagnóstico , Trombose Venosa/epidemiologiaRESUMO
(1) Objectives: To describe the clinical characteristics and clinical course of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and autoimmune diseases (ADs) compared to the general population. (2) Methods: We used information available in the nationwide Spanish SEMI-COVID-19 Registry, which retrospectively compiles data from the first admission of adult patients with COVID-19. We selected all patients with ADs included in the registry and compared them to the remaining patients. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality during admission, readmission, and subsequent admissions, and secondary outcomes were a composite outcome including the need for intensive care unit (ICU) admission, invasive and non-invasive mechanical ventilation (MV), or death, as well as in-hospital complications. (3) Results: A total of 13,940 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 were included, of which 362 (2.6%) had an AD. Patients with ADs were older, more likely to be female, and had greater comorbidity. On the multivariate logistic regression analysis, which involved the inverse propensity score weighting method, AD as a whole was not associated with an increased risk of any of the outcome variables. Habitual treatment with corticosteroids (CSs), age, Barthel Index score, and comorbidity were associated with poor outcomes. Biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) were associated with a decrease in mortality in patients with AD. (4) Conclusions: The analysis of the SEMI-COVID-19 Registry shows that ADs do not lead to a different prognosis, measured by mortality, complications, or the composite outcome. Considered individually, it seems that some diseases entail a different prognosis than that of the general population. Immunosuppressive/immunoregulatory treatments (IST) prior to admission had variable effects.
RESUMO
There is some evidence that male gender could have a negative impact on the prognosis and severity of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. The aim of the present study was to compare the characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) between hospitalized men and women with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. This multicenter, retrospective, observational study is based on the SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. We analyzed the differences between men and women for a wide variety of demographic, clinical, and treatment variables, and the sex distribution of the reported COVID-19 deaths, as well as intensive care unit (ICU) admission by age subgroups. This work analyzed 12,063 patients (56.8% men). The women in our study were older than the men, on average (67.9 vs. 65.7 years; p < 001). Bilateral condensation was more frequent among men than women (31.8% vs. 29.9%; p = 0.007). The men needed non-invasive and invasive mechanical ventilation more frequently (5.6% vs. 3.6%, p < 0.001, and 7.9% vs. 4.8%, p < 0.001, respectively). The most prevalent complication was acute respiratory distress syndrome, with severe cases in 19.9% of men (p < 0.001). In men, intensive care unit admission was more frequent (10% vs. 6.1%; p < 0.001) and the mortality rate was higher (23.1% vs. 18.9%; p < 0.001). Regarding mortality, the differences by gender were statistically significant in the age groups from 55 years to 89 years of age. A multivariate analysis showed that female sex was significantly and independently associated with a lower risk of mortality in our study. Male sex appears to be related to worse progress in COVID-19 patients and is an independent prognostic factor for mortality. In order to fully understand its prognostic impact, other factors associated with sex must be considered.
RESUMO
It is unclear to which extent the higher mortality associated with hypertension in the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is due to its increased prevalence among older patients or to specific mechanisms. Cross-sectional, observational, retrospective multicenter study, analyzing 12226 patients who required hospital admission in 150 Spanish centers included in the nationwide SEMI-COVID-19 Network. We compared the clinical characteristics of survivors versus non-survivors. The mean age of the study population was 67.5 ± 16.1 years, 42.6% were women. Overall, 2630 (21.5%) subjects died. The most common comorbidity was hypertension (50.9%) followed by diabetes (19.1%), and atrial fibrillation (11.2%). Multivariate analysis showed that after adjusting for gender (males, OR: 1.5, p = 0.0001), age tertiles (second and third tertiles, OR: 2.0 and 4.7, p = 0.0001), and Charlson Comorbidity Index scores (second and third tertiles, OR: 4.7 and 8.1, p = 0.0001), hypertension was significantly predictive of all-cause mortality when this comorbidity was treated with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) (OR: 1.6, p = 0.002) or other than renin-angiotensin-aldosterone blockers (OR: 1.3, p = 0.001) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) (OR: 1.2, p = 0.035). The preexisting condition of hypertension had an independent prognostic value for all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19 who required hospitalization. ARBs showed a lower risk of lethality in hypertensive patients than other antihypertensive drugs.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: In the last 10 years enzyme replacement therapy (ERT) has become an alternative for the treatment of patients with Hunter disease (HD). Nevertheless, the information regarding efficacy and safety is scarce and mainly based on the pivotal trials. This scarcity is especially evident for adults and severe forms of HD. METHODS: A systematic review of publications in the electronic databases PUBMED, EMBASE and Cochrane Central was undertaken. Clinical trials and observational studies were included. The data about efficacy and security were retrieved and analysed with Review Manager version 5.3. RESULTS: 677 records were found, 559 remaining after the removal of duplicates. By title and abstract review, 427 were excluded. Full reading of the rest was made (122 publications) and 42 were finally included. It was not possible to perform meta-analysis of all the endpoints due to high heterogeneity in the reporting and measuring of variables in each publication. Eight clinical trials were included, 6 with high risk of bias. The quality of the other studies was low in 12%, average in 68% and good in 21%. Main findings were: a reduction in the elimination of glycosaminoglycans (GAG) in urine in all the studies (26/26), decrease in liver and spleen size (18/18), increase of 52.59 m (95% CI, 36, 42-68.76, p < .001) in the 6-min walk test (TM6M), increase in forced vital capacity (FVC) of 9.59% (95% CI 4.77-14.51, p < .001), reduction of the left ventricular mass index of 3.57% (95% CI 1.2-5.93) and reduction in mortality (OR) of 0.44 (0.27-0.71). DISCUSSION: The data suggests a clear and consistent effect of ERT in HD reducing the accumulation of GAGs in the body, demonstrated by the reduction of its urinary excretion, as well as by the reduction of its deposits (spleen, liver and heart). Likewise, there is an improvement in physical and respiratory function. In addition, a reduction in mortality has been observed. Lack of studies, small size of the samples, and methodological deficiencies are the main limitations to establish definite conclusions. CONCLUSIONS: The data suggests that ERT is effective and safe in the treatment of HD. There is a need to evaluate patient-centred outcomes and the impact on quality of life.
Assuntos
Terapia de Reposição de Enzimas , Glicosaminoglicanos/genética , Iduronato Sulfatase/genética , Mucopolissacaridose II/terapia , Bases de Dados Factuais , Humanos , Fígado/efeitos dos fármacos , Fígado/patologia , Mucopolissacaridose II/mortalidade , Mucopolissacaridose II/patologia , Qualidade de Vida , Baço/efeitos dos fármacos , Baço/patologiaRESUMO
CONTEXT: Palliative sedation is used to relieve end-of-life refractory symptoms. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to describe the use of palliative sedation in patients who die in internal medicine departments. METHODS: An observational, cross-sectional, retrospective, and multicenter clinical audit study was conducted in 145 hospitals in Spain and Argentina. Each hospital included the first 10 patients who died in the internal medicine department, starting on December 1, 2015. RESULTS: We included 1447 patients, and palliative sedation was administered to 701 patients (48.4%). Having a terminal illness (odds ratio [OR] 2.469, 95% CI 1.971-3.093, P < 0.001) and the length of hospital stay (OR 1.011, 95% CI 1.002-1.021, P = 0.017) were independently associated with the use of palliative sedation. Consent was granted by the families of 582 (83%) patients. The most common refractory symptom was dyspnea, and the most commonly used drugs for sedation were midazolam (77%) and morphine (89.7%). An induction dose was administered in 25.7% of the patients. Rescue doses were scheduled for 70% of the patients, and hydration was maintained in 49.5%. Pain was more common in patients with cancer, whereas dyspnea was more common in those without cancer. Rescue doses were used more often for the patients with cancer (77.8% vs. 67.7%, P = 0.015). Monitoring the palliative sedation with a scale was more frequent in the patients with cancer (23.7% vs. 14.3%, P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Palliative sedation is used more often for terminal patients. There are differences in the administration of palliative sedation between patients with and without cancer.
Assuntos
Neoplasias , Assistência Terminal , Argentina/epidemiologia , Estudos Transversais , Humanos , Hipnóticos e Sedativos/uso terapêutico , Neoplasias/tratamento farmacológico , Cuidados Paliativos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Espanha/epidemiologiaRESUMO
Purpose: Recognition of clinical inertia is essential to improve the control of chronic diseases. Although it is very intuitive, a better interpretation of the concept of clinical inertia is lacking, likely due to its high complexity. Materials and Methods: After a review of the published articles, we propose a practical vision of inertia, contextualized within the clinical process of hypertension care. Results: This new vision enables the integration of previous terms and definitions of clinical inertia, as well as proposing specific strategies for its reduction. Conclusion: Although some concepts should be considered as 'justified inertia' or 'investigator inertia', the idea that inertia may be present throughout the continuum of care gives physicians a holistic view of the problem that is easily applicable to their clinical practice. Measures to overcome inertia are complicated because of the intrinsic complexity of the concept.
Assuntos
Competência Clínica/normas , Gerenciamento Clínico , Hipertensão/terapia , Padrões de Prática Médica/normas , Qualidade da Assistência à Saúde , Anti-Hipertensivos/uso terapêutico , Atitude do Pessoal de Saúde , Sistema Cardiovascular/fisiopatologia , Humanos , Planejamento de Assistência ao PacienteRESUMO
The quantification of enzyme activity in the patient treated with enzyme replacement therapy (ERT) has been suggested as a tool for dosage individualization, so we conducted a study to evaluate the relationship between glucocerebrosidase activity and clinical response in patients with Gaucher disease type I (GD1) to ERT. The study included patients diagnosed with GD1, who were being treated with ERT, and healthy individuals. Markers based on glucocerebrosidase activity measurement in patients' leucocytes were studied: enzyme activity at 15 min. post-infusion (Act75 ) reflects the amount of enzyme that is distributed in the body post-ERT infusion, and accumulated glucocerebrosidase activity during ERT infusion (Act75-0 ) indicates the total drug exposure during infusion. The clinical response was evaluated based on criteria established by Pastores et al. and Gaucher Severity Score Index. Statistical analysis included ROC analysis and area under the curve test. Act75 and Act75-0 were found to be moderate predictive markers of an optimal clinical response (area under the ROC of Act75 was 0.733 and Act75-0 was 0.817). Act75-0 showed statistical significance in its discriminative capacity (p < 0.05) for obtaining an optimal response to ERT. The cut-off point was 58% (RR = 1.800; 95% CI: 1.003-3.229; p < 0.05). Moreover, Act75 showed a significant and inverse correlation with the Gaucher Severity Score Index, and Act75 and Act75-0 presented a significant correlation with residual enzyme activity at diagnosis. Markers based on glucocerebrosidase activity have a good correlation with clinical response to ERT. Therefore, it could provide supporting clinical data for dose management in GD1 patients.
Assuntos
Terapia de Reposição de Enzimas , Doença de Gaucher/tratamento farmacológico , Glucosilceramidase/análise , Leucócitos/enzimologia , Adulto , Idoso , Biomarcadores/análise , Relação Dose-Resposta a Droga , Ensaios Enzimáticos , Feminino , Seguimentos , Doença de Gaucher/sangue , Doença de Gaucher/diagnóstico , Glucosilceramidase/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Prospectivos , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Arterial stiffness (AS) is a well-recognized target organ lesion. This study aims to determine: 1) the frequency of AS in community pharmacies; 2) if stiffened subjects identified by brachial oscillometry have more CV risk factors than normal subjects, and 3) the dependence of stiffness on using either age-adjusted values or a fixed threshold. PATIENTS AND METHOD: Observational, cross-sectional study in 32 community pharmacies of the Valencia Community, between November/2015 and April/2016. Stiffness was as pulse wave velocity (PWV) measured with a semi-automatic, validated device (Mobil-O-Graph®, IEM), followed by a 10-item questionnaire. RESULTS: Mean age of the 1,427 consecutive recruited patients was 56.6 years. Overall proportion of patients with AS was 17.4% with age-adjusted PWV (9.4% in normotensives, 28.3% in hypertensives). Multivariate logistic regression showed independent association of stiffness in normotensives with male gender, obesity, higher pulse pressure and heart rate, in hypertensives, with higher pulse pressure and lower age. AS was globally found in 20.5% of subjects, defining stiffness by PWV>10m/s (6.2% in normotensives, 40.2% in hypertensives). It was associated with higher age and pulse pressure in both groups. Concordance in classifying stiffness was 74.6%. CONCLUSIONS: Frequency of AS varied between 17.4-20.5%. Age-adjusted stiffness is associated in normotensives with male gender, pulse pressure, obesity and heart rate, in hypertensives with pulse pressure and inversely to age. Stiffness by 10m/s is determined by higher pulse pressure and higher age. Both definitions of PWV are not interchangeable.
Assuntos
Hipertensão/fisiopatologia , Rigidez Vascular , Adulto , Fatores Etários , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Artéria Braquial/fisiopatologia , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Estudos Transversais , Feminino , Humanos , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Oscilometria , Farmácias , Análise de Onda de PulsoRESUMO
Modern medicine is characterized by a continuous genesis of evidence making it very difficult to translate the latest findings into a better clinical practice. Clinical practice guidelines (CPG) emerge to provide clinicians evidence-based recommendations for their daily clinical practice. However, the high number of existing CPG as well as the usual differences in the given recommendations usually increases the clinician's confusion and doubts. It has apparently been the case for the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) Guideline on the Treatment of Blood Cholesterol. These CPG proposed new and controversial concepts that have usually been considered an antagonist shift respective to European CPG. The most controversial published proposals are: 1) to consider evidence just from randomized clinical trials, 2) creation of a new cardiovascular (CV) risk calculator, 3) to consider reducing CV risk instead of reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDLc) as the target of the treatment, and 4) consideration of statins as the only drugs for treatment. A deep analysis of the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association CPG and comparison with the European ones show that from a practical and clinical point of view, there are more similarities than differences. To further help clinicians in their daily work, in the present globalized world, it is time to discuss and adopt a mutually agreed upon document created by both sides of the Atlantic. Probably it is not a short-term solution. Meanwhile, taking advantage of the similarities, the recommended practical attitude for the daily clinical practice should be based on 1) early detection of people with increased CV risk promoting the use of validated local scales, 2) reinforce the mainstream importance of nonpharmacological treatment, and 3) need for periodically monitoring response with analytical parameters (LDL or non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol) and global CV risk estimation. Technological solutions such as the big data technology could help to obtain high-quality evidence in an intermediate term.