Antidepressant Dispensing to US Adolescents and Young Adults: 2016-2022.

BACKGROUND: Mental health worsened in adolescents and young adults after the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak in March 2020, but whether antidepressant dispensing to this population changed is unknown. METHODS: We identified antidepressant prescriptions dispensed to US individuals aged 12 to 25 years from 2016 to 2022 using the IQVIA Longitudinal Prescription Database, an all-payer national database. The outcome was the monthly antidepressant dispensing rate, defined as the monthly number of individuals with ≥1 dispensed antidepressant prescription per 100 000 people. We fitted linear segmented regression models assessing for level or slope changes during March 2020 and conducted subgroup analyses by sex and age group. RESULTS: Between January 2016 and December 2022, the monthly antidepressant dispensing rate increased 66.3%, from 2575.9 to 4284.8. Before March 2020, this rate increased by 17.0 per month (95% confidence interval: 15.2 to 18.8). The COVID-19 outbreak was not associated with a level change but was associated with a slope increase of 10.8 per month (95% confidence interval: 4.9 to 16.7). The monthly antidepressant dispensing rate increased 63.5% faster from March 2020 onwards compared with beforehand. In subgroup analyses, this rate increased 129.6% and 56.5% faster from March 2020 onwards compared with beforehand among females aged 12 to 17 years and 18 to 25 years, respectively. In contrast, the outbreak was associated with a level decrease among males aged 12 to 17 years and was not associated with a level or slope change among males aged 18 to 25 years. CONCLUSIONS: Antidepressant dispensing to adolescents and young adults was rising before the COVID-19 outbreak and rose 63.5% faster afterward. This change was driven by increased antidepressant dispensing to females and occurred despite decreased dispensing to male adolescents.

Epidemiology of asylum seekers and refugees at the Mexico-US border: a cross-sectional analysis from the migrant settlement camp in Matamoros, Mexico.

BACKGROUND: The number of migrants and asylum seekers at the Mexico-US border has increased to historic levels. Our objective was to determine the medical diagnoses and treatments of migrating people seeking care in humanitarian clinics in Matamoros, Mexico. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of patient encounters by migrating people through a humanitarian clinic in Matamoros, Mexico, from November 22, 2019, to March 18, 2021. The clinics were operated by Global Response Medicine in concert with local non-governmental organizations. Clinical encounters were each coded to the appropriate ICD-10/CPT code and categorized according to organ system. We categorized medications using the WHO List of Essential Medicines and used multivariable logistic regression to determine associations between demographic variables and condition frequency. RESULTS: We found a total of 8,156 clinical encounters, which included 9,744 diagnoses encompassing 132 conditions (median age 26.8 years, female sex 58.2%). People originated from 24 countries, with the majority from Central America (n = 5598, 68.6%). The most common conditions were respiratory (n = 1466, 15.0%), musculoskeletal (n = 1081, 11.1%), and skin diseases (n = 473, 4.8%). Children were at higher risk for respiratory disease (aOR = 1.84, 95% CI: 1.61-2.10), while older adults had greater risk for joint disorders (aOR = 3.35, 95% CI: 1.73-6.02). Women had decreased risk for injury (aOR = 0.50, 95% CI: 0.40-0.63) and higher risk for genitourinary diseases (aOR = 4.99, 95% CI: 3.72-6.85) compared with men. Among 10,405 medications administered, analgesics were the most common (n = 3190, 30.7%) followed by anti-infectives (n = 2175, 21.1%). CONCLUSIONS: In this large study of a migrating population at the Mexico-US border, we found a variety of clinical conditions, with respiratory, musculoskeletal, and skin illnesses the most common in this study period which encompassed a period of restrictive immigration policy and the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Valve-Sparing Aortic Root Replacement Technique: Valsalva Graft versus Two Straight Tubular Grafts.

Background: There are many variations in valve-sparing aortic root replacement techniques. Our aim is to determine the impact of the graft on mid-term outcomes: Valsalva graft vs. two straight tubular grafts. Methods: From 2004 to 2020, 332 patients underwent valve-sparing aortic root replacement with either a Valsalva graft (Valsalva group: n = 270) or two straight tubular grafts (two-graft group: n = 62). Data were obtained through chart review and the National Death Index. Primary outcomes were mid-term survival and freedom from reoperation. Results: The preoperative characteristics of the groups were similar, but the two-graft group had more type A dissections (32% vs. 19%) and emergent operations (26% vs. 15%) and was younger (45 vs. 50 years). Intraoperatively, the groups were similar, but the two-graft group had longer cross-clamp (245 vs. 215 minutes) and cardiopulmonary bypass times (284 vs. 255 minutes). Postoperative complications including reoperation for bleeding, stroke, pacemaker implantation, and renal failure were slightly more frequent in the Valsalva group, but the differences were not significant. Operative mortality was similar between the Valsalva and two-graft groups (0.7% vs. 0%). Five-year survival in the two-graft group was 100% compared to 96% in the Valsalva group (p=0.56). Five-year freedom from reoperation in the two-graft group was 100% compared to 93% in the Valsalva group (p=0.29). Conclusions: The Valsalva and two-graft techniques both have excellent short- and mid-term outcomes. The two-graft technique might have slightly better survival and freedom from reoperation, but a larger sample size and longer follow-up are needed to determine if these advantages are significant.

Monocytes and Macrophages in Heart Valves: Uninvited Guests or Critical Performers?

Monocytes and macrophages are critical components of the myeloid niche of the innate immune system. In addition to traditional roles as phagocytes, this subsection of innate immunity has been implicated in its ability to regulate tissue homeostasis and inflammation across diverse physiological systems. Recent emergence of discriminatory features within the monocyte/macrophage niche within the last 5 years has helped to clarify specific function(s) of the subpopulations of these cells. It is becoming increasingly aware that these cells are likely implicated in valve development and disease. This review seeks to use current literature and opinions to show the diverse roles and potential contributions of this niche throughout valvulogenic processes, adult homeostatic function, valve disease mechanisms, and tissue engineering approaches.