Evaluación del desempeño diagnóstico del Índice de Riesgo de Malignidad II en mujeres con diagnóstico de masa anexial en un hospital de tercer nivel.

OBJETIVO: Evaluar la exactitud diagnóstica del Índice de Riesgo de Malignidad II (IRM II) en 100 pacientes con diagnóstico de masa anexial. MÉTODO: En una muestra de 100 pacientes con diagnóstico de masa anexial se cuantificaron variables demográficas y se aplicó el IRM II. Mediante una tabla 2 × 2 se obtuvieron la sensibilidad, la especificidad, el valor predictivo positivo, el valor predictivo negativo y la exactitud diagnóstica, y se compararon con el resultado histopatológico. RESULTADOS: El IRM II con resultado positivo se presentó en el 73.1% (52 pacientes) de los casos con resultado histopatológico maligno y en el 26.9% de aquellos con resultado histopatológico benigno. Presenta una sensibilidad en la prueba del 73.1%, una especificidad del 70.8%, un valor predictivo positivo del 73.2% y un valor predictivo negativo del 70.8%. La exactitud diagnóstica es del 72%. CONCLUSIONES: El IRM II es una herramienta de cribaje con aceptable desempeño diagnóstico para normar la conducta, como referir a un centro especializado o solicitar estudios más específicos en pacientes con diagnóstico de masa anexial por sospecha de malignidad. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the usefulness of the Malignancy Risk Index II (MRI II) using diagnostic accuracy variables in 100 patients diagnosed with adnexal mass. METHOD: In a sample of 100 patients with a diagnosis of adnexal mass, demographic variables were quantified and MRI II was applied. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and diagnostic accuracy were obtained using a 2 × 2 table and compared with the histopathological result. RESULTS: MRI II with positive result was presented in 73.1% (52 patients) with malignant histopathological result and in 26.9% of patients with benign histopathological result. It presents a sensitivity in the test of 73.1%, a specificity of 70.8%, positive and negative predictive value of 73.2 and 70.8%, respectively. Diagnostic accuracy of 72%. CONCLUSIONS: MRI II is a screening tool with acceptable diagnostic performance to regulate behavior, such as referring to a specialized center or requesting more specific studies in patients diagnosed with adnexal mass due to suspected malignancy.

Índices neutrófilo/linfocito, plaqueta/linfocito e inmunidad/inflamación sistémica en pacientes con neumonía por COVID-19 / Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio and systemic immune-inflammation index in patients with COVID-19-associated pneumonia

Resumen Introducción: Existen índices hematológicos que correlacionan la severidad y predicen la mortalidad, principalmente en estados sépticos y de inflamación. Objetivo: Correlacionar los índices neutrófilo/linfocito (INL), plaqueta/linfocito (IPL) e inmunidad/inflamación sistémica (IIIS) con la severidad de COVID-19. Método: Estudio descriptivo, analítico y retrospectivo de pacientes con neumonía por COVID-19, en quienes se analizaron INL, IPL e IIIS. Resultados: Se incluyeron 100 pacientes, 54 hombres y 46 mujeres, con una media de 49.4 ± 19.3 años. Las medias de INL, IPL e IIIS fueron 10.7 ± 10.9, 290.1 ± 229.2 y 2.6 ± 3.4 × 109, respectivamente. En 54 %, la neumonía fue leve y en 46 %, grave. En cuanto a los desenlaces hospitalarios, 75 % egresó por mejoría y 25 % falleció. Las medias de INL, IPL e IIIS de los pacientes que fallecieron versus las de los pacientes que mejoraron fueron 20.4 ± 16.9 versus 7.5 ± 4.9 (p = 0.001), 417.1 ± 379.7 versus 247.7 ± 127.4 (p = 0.038) y 4.8 ± 6.1 versus 1.9 ± 1.2 × 109 (p = 0.030), respectivamente. Conclusión: Los índices hematológicos en pacientes con neumonía por COVID-19 pueden ser empleados como predictores de severidad y pronóstico.

Abstract Introduction: There are hematological parameters that correlate severity and predict mortality mainly in septic and inflammatory states. Objective: To correlate the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and systemic immune-inflammation index (SII) with COVID-19 severity. Method: Descriptive, analytical, retrospective study of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, in which NLR, PLR and SII were analyzed. Results: One-hundred patients were included, 54 men and 46 women, with a mean age of 49.4 ± 19.3 years. NLR, PLR and SII means were 10.7 ± 10.9, 290.1 ± 229.2, and 2.6 ± 3.4 × 109, respectively. In 54 %, pneumonia was mild, and in 46 %, severe. Regarding hospital outcomes, 75 % were discharged due to improvement and 25 % died. NLR, PLR and SII means of the patients who died versus the patients who improved were 20.4 ± 16.9 versus 7.5 ± 4.9 (p = 0.001), 417.1 ± 379.7 versus 247.7 ± 127.4 (p = 0.038) and 4.8 ± 6.1 versus 1.9 ± 1.2 × 109 (p = 0.030), respectively. Conclusion: Hematological parameters can be used in patients with COVID-19-associated pneumonia as predictors of severity and prognosis.

Improvement in OMERACT domains and renal function with regular treatment for gout: a 12-month follow-up cohort study.

OMERACT proposed a set of mandatory and discretionary domains to evaluate the effect of treatment in patients with gout. To determine the percentage of improvement and the effect size 6 and 12 months after starting a proper treatment in patients with gout from our cohort (GRESGO) based on the OMERACT proposal for chronic gout. GRESGO is a cohort of consecutive, new patients with gout attending either of two dedicated clinics. This report includes 141 patients evaluated at baseline and 6 months plus 101 of them completing a 12-month follow-up in 2012. Clinical data including the OMERACT domains for chronic gout were collected at baseline and every 6 months. Treatment was prescribed by their attending physician with the purpose of getting < 6 mg/dL of seric uric acid (sUA). Most patients were males (96%) with inappropriate treatment (95%); 66% had tophi, 30% metabolic syndrome, and 32% low renal function. Mean dose of allopurinol at baseline and throughout the study went from 344 ± 168 mg/day to 453 ± 198 at 12 months. Most OMERACT domains and renal function improved significantly; 73% improved > 20% from 6 to 12 months. Greater improvement was observed in the domains: flares, index tophus size, pain, general health assessment, and HAQ score, all of them associated to lower sUA values. Chronic gout patients improve significantly in most OMERACT domains when conventional and regular treatment is indicated. sUA < 6 mg/dL is associated with greater improvement.

Use of the CONUT Index as a Predictor of Integration Of Cutaneous Grafts in Burn Patients.

OBJECTIVE: To present the initial experience of 12 patients with burns treated with cutaneous grafts and to analyse the variables that influence their integration. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analysed data from 12 patients seen in a year in the regional hospital of high speciality of Oaxaca. Quantified variables: Age, sex, burned body surface, depth of burn, airway injury, nutritional status by CONUT index, type of graft, development of local infection and days of hospital stay. RESULTS: We included 10 men (83%) and 2 women (17%) with median age of 28 years, median burned body surface area of 19%, depth: 75% were mixed burns and 25% were third degree; with median time between injury and application of grafts of 13 days, 1 patient presented airway injury and 50% concomitant trauma. REGARDING NUTRITIONAL STATUS: Fifty percent had severe malnutrition, 33% moderate and 16% mild. About 67% of the grafts were meshed and 33% intact, the mean integration percentage was 80%, 25% developed local infection and the average length of hospital stay was 21 days. CONCLUSIONS: Cutaneous grafts are the definitive treatment of burns, in their integration process influence different factors, including nutritional status. The CONUT index seems to be a useful, safe and widely available tooling in the nutritional assessment of the burned patient and can be related to the percentage of integration of the grafts and the days of hospital stay.

[Prevalence of and risk factors for hepatitis C in blood donors]. / Prevalencia y factores de riesgo para hepatitis C en donadores de sangre.

OBJECTIVE: Determine hepatitis C prevalence and risk factors in blood donors from the Blood Bank at the Centro Médico Nacional 20 de Noviembre ISSSTE, in Mexico City. METHODS: A total of 41,957 blood donors were included in the study was done from January 1996 to August 2000. To study risk factors, a case-control study cases were defined as blood donors with repeatedly positive anti-hepatitis C virus (HCV) ELISA test. Controls were defined as blood donors with negative anti-HCV ELISA test. All cases were interviewed a second time on HCV infection-associated risk factors. Odd ratio (OR) and confidence interval 95% (CI 95%) were calculated for each risk factoring in a univariate analysis. Multivariate analysis was performed subsequents to determine the independent contribution or each risk factor. RESULTS: HCV crude total prevalence was 0.84%. Risk factors were found in 36.16% anti-HCV-positive blood donors. During the second interview, 30% of sero-positive blood donors recalled one or more risk factors they previously denied. The most important risk factors, found were as follows sexual relations with prostitutes (OR 7.48, CI 95% 1.43-38.92) transfusion (OR 6, CI 95% 2.62-13.72); nasal cocaine use (OR 8.89, CI 95%, 1.01-86.89); dental surgery (OR 8.89, CI 95% 1.01-86.89) and contact with hepatitis-infected subject (OR 3.01, CI 95% 1.17-7.70). Other risk factors did not show a significant association. DISCUSSION: In this study, we found a crude total prevalence of 0.84%, very close to the prevalence reported in Mexican population by the National Center for Blood Transfusion.