Open Minimally Invasive Parathyroidectomy Versus Minimally Invasive Video-Assisted Parathyroidectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Various minimally invasive techniques exist for surgical parathyroidectomy. The aim of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis comparing two popular minimally invasive techniques: minimally invasive video-assisted parathyroidectomy (MIVAP) and open minimally invasive parathyroidectomy (OMIP). An extensive search was conducted of online databases to identify all previous studies that had compared MIVAP and OMIP. The primary outcome measures considered were visual analog scale (VAS) score 24 hours postoperatively, conversion of operation (to open), failure rate and analgesic consumption. The data from these studies was extracted and compiled into a meta-analysis. The literature search yielded 104 studies of which four were included, enrolling 903 patients in this analysis. A significant difference was found regarding rates of conversion to open parathyroidectomy between the two groups, with the OMIP group demonstrating fewer conversions (MD = 3.52, CI = (2.04-6.08), P< 0.00001). No statistically significant differences were found between the two groups when comparing postoperative VAS scores at 24 hours (MD = -1.75, CI = (-9.8-6.3), P = 0.67), consumption of analgesia (OR = 0.49, CI = 0.07-3.54, P = 0.48) or failure rates (OR = 1.81, CI = 0.58-5.72, P = 0.31). OMIP was seen to require less need to convert to open parathyroidectomy with shorter operative times, while similar complication rates and scar lengths to MIVAP. More studies are required to evaluate the superior technique for parathyroidectomy.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the management of chronic heart failure.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is an unprecedented challenge. Meeting this has resulted in changes to working practices and the impact on the management of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is largely unknown. We performed a retrospective, observational study contrasting patients diagnosed with HFrEF attending specialist heart failure clinics at a UK hospital, whose subsequent period of optimisation of medical therapy was during the COVID-19 pandemic, with patients diagnosed the previous year. The primary outcome was the change in equivalent dosing of ramipril and bisoprolol at 6-months. Secondary outcomes were the number and type of follow-up consultations, hospitalisation for heart failure and all-cause mortality. In total, 60 patients were diagnosed with HFrEF between 1 December 2019 and 30 April 2020, compared to 54 during the same period of the previous year. The absolute number of consultations was higher (390 vs 270; p = 0.69), driven by increases in telephone consultations, with a reduction in appointments with hospital nurse specialists. After 6-months, we observed lower equivalent dosing of ramipril (3.1 ± 3.0 mg vs 4.4 ± 0.5 mg; p = 0.035) and similar dosing of bisoprolol (4.1 ± 0.5 mg vs 4.9 ± 0.5 mg; p = 0.27), which persisted for ramipril (mean difference 1.0 mg, 95% CI 0.018-2.09; p = 0.046) and bisoprolol (mean difference 0.52 mg, 95% CI -0.23-1.28; p = 0.17) after adjustment for baseline dosing. We observed no differences in the proportion of patients who died (5.0% vs 7.4%; p = 0.59) or were hospitalised with heart failure (13.3% vs 9.3%; p = 0.49). Our study suggests the transition to telephone appointments and re-deployment of heart failure nurse specialists was associated with less successful optimisation of medical therapy, especially renin-angiotensin inhibitors, compared with usual care.

Predicting treatment response to IL6R blockers in rheumatoid arthritis.

Patients with severe, active RA who have not responded to conventional therapy may receive biological disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs). However, 40% of cases do not achieve complete disease control, resulting in a negative impact on patient quality of life and representing a waste of healthcare resources. Ongoing research seeks to establish biomarkers, which can be used to predict treatment response to biologics in RA to enable more targeted approaches to treatment. However, much of the work has focused on one class of biologic drug, the TNF inhibitors (TNFi). Here, we will review the current state of research to identify biomarkers predictive of response to the class of bDMARDs targeting the IL6R. While success has been limited thus far, serum drug and low ICAM1 levels have shown promise, with associations reported in independent studies. The challenges faced by researchers and lessons learned from studies of TNFi will be discussed.