Prevention of cardiac surgery-associated acute kidney injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis of non-pharmacological interventions.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac surgery-associated acute kidney injury (CSA-AKI) is frequent. While two network meta-analyses assessed the impact of pharmacological interventions to prevent CSA-AKI, none focused on non-pharmacological interventions. We aim to assess the effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions to reduce the incidence of CSA-AKI. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, Central and clinical trial registries from January 1, 2004 (first consensus definition of AKI) to July 1, 2023. Additionally, we conducted manual screening of abstracts of major anesthesia and intensive care conferences over the last 5 years and reference lists of relevant studies. We selected all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing a non-pharmacological intervention to reduce the incidence of CSA-AKI, without language restriction. We excluded RCTs of heart transplantation or involving a pediatric population. The primary outcome variable was CSA-AKI. Two reviewers independently identified trials, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted to calculate risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation to assess the quality of evidence. RESULTS: We included 86 trials (25,855 patients) evaluating 10 non-pharmacological interventions to reduce the incidence of CSA-AKI. No intervention had high-quality evidence to reduce CSA-AKI. Two interventions were associated with a significant reduction in CSA-AKI incidence, with moderate quality of evidence: goal-directed perfusion (RR, 0.55 [95% CI 0.40-0.76], I2 = 0%; Phet = 0.44) and remote ischemic preconditioning (RR, 0.86 [0.78-0.95]; I2 = 23%; Phet = 0.07). Pulsatile flow during cardiopulmonary bypass was associated with a significant reduction in CSA-AKI incidence but with very low quality of evidence (RR = 0.69 [0.48; 0.99]; I2 = 53%; Phet < 0.01). We found high quality of evidence for lack of effect of restrictive transfusion strategy (RR, 1.02 [95% CI 0.92; 1.12; Phet = 0.67; I2 = 3%) and tight glycemic control (RR, 0.86 [95% CI 0.55; 1.35]; Phet = 0.25; I2 = 26%). CONCLUSIONS: Two non-pharmacological interventions are likely to reduce CSA-AKI incidence, with moderate quality of evidence: goal-directed perfusion and remote ischemic preconditioning.

Delaying anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction increases the rate and severity of medial chondral injuries.

Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between chondral injury and interval from anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear to surgical reconstruction (ACLr). Methods: Between January 2012 and January 2022, 1,840 consecutive ACLrs were performed and included in a single-centre retrospective cohort. Exclusion criteria were partial tears, multiligament knee injuries, prior ipsilateral knee surgery, concomitant unicompartmental knee arthroplasty or high tibial osteotomy, ACL agenesis, and unknown date of tear. A total of 1,317 patients were included in the final analysis, with a median age of 29 years (interquartile range (IQR) 23 to 38). The median preoperative Tegner Activity Score (TAS) was 6 (IQR 6 to 7). Patients were categorized into four groups according to the delay to ACLr: < three months (427; 32%), three to six months (388; 29%), > six to 12 months (248; 19%), and > 12 months (254; 19%). Chondral injury was assessed during arthroscopy using the International Cartilage Regeneration and Joint Preservation Society classification, and its association with delay to ACLr was analyzed using multivariable analysis. Results: In the medial compartment, delaying ACLr for more than 12 months was associated with an increased rate (odds ratio (OR) 1.93 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.27 to 2.95); p = 0.002) and severity (OR 1.23 (95% CI 1.08 to 1.40); p = 0.002) of chondral injuries, compared with < three months, with no association in patients aged > 50 years old. No association was found for shorter delays, but the overall dose-effect analysis was significant for the rate (p = 0.015) and severity (p = 0.026) of medial chondral injuries. Increased TAS was associated with a significantly reduced rate (OR 0.88 (95% CI 0.78 to 0.99); p = 0.036) and severity (OR 0.96 (95% CI 0.92 to 0.99); p = 0.017) of medial chondral injuries. In the lateral compartment, no association was found between delay and chondral injuries. Conclusion: Delay was associated with an increased rate and severity of medial chondral injuries in a dose-effect fashion, in particular for delays > 12 months. Younger patients seem to be at higher risk of chondral injury when delaying surgery. The timing of ACLr should be optimally reduced in this population.

Heterogeneity in the definition of delirium in ICUs and association with the intervention effect in randomized controlled trials: a meta-epidemiological study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the heterogeneity in the definition of delirium in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) included in meta-analyses of delirium in intensive care units (ICUs) and to explore whether intervention effect depends on the definition used. METHODS: We searched PubMed for meta-analyses including RCTs evaluating prevention or treatment strategies of delirium in ICU. The definition of delirium was collected from RCTs and classified as validated (DSM criteria, CAM-ICU, ICDSC, NEECHAM, DRS-R98) or non-validated (non-validated scales, set of symptoms, physician appreciation or not reported). We conducted a meta-epidemiological analysis to compare intervention effects between trials using or not a validated definition by a two-step method as primary analysis and a multilevel model as secondary analysis. A ratio of odds ratios (ROR) < 1 indicated larger intervention effects in trials using a non-validated definition. RESULTS: Of 149 RCTs (41 meta-analyses), 109 (73.1%) used a validated definition and 40 (26.8%) did not (including 31 [20.8%] not reporting the definition). The primary analysis of 7 meta-analyses (30 RCTs) found no significant difference in intervention effects between trials using a validated definition and the others (ROR = 0.54, 95% CI 0.27-1.08), whereas the secondary multilevel analysis including 12 meta-analyses (67 RCTs) found significantly larger effects for trials using a non-validated versus a validated definition (ROR = 0.36, 95% CI 0.21-0.62). CONCLUSION: The definition of delirium was heterogeneous across RCTs, with one-fifth not reporting how they evaluated delirium. We did not find a significant association with intervention effect in the primary analysis. The secondary analysis including more studies revealed significantly larger intervention effects in trials using a non-validated versus a validated definition.

Days Spent at Home and Mortality After Critical Illness: A Cluster Analysis Using Nationwide Data.

BACKGROUND: Beyond the question of short-term survival, days spent at home could be considered a patient-centered outcome in critical care trials. RESEARCH QUESTION: What are the days spent at home and health care trajectories during the year after surviving critical illness? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Data were extracted on adult survivors spending at least 2 nights in a French ICU during 2018 who were treated with invasive mechanical ventilation or vasopressors or inotropes. Trauma, burn, organ transplant, stroke, and neurosurgical patients were excluded. Stays at home, death, and hospitalizations were reported before and after ICU stay, using state sequence analysis. An unsupervised clustering method was performed to identify cohorts based on post-ICU trajectories. RESULTS: Of 77,132 ICU survivors, 89% returned home. In the year after discharge, these patients spent a median of 330 (interquartile range [IQR], 283-349) days at home. At 1 year, 77% of patients were still at home and 17% had died. Fifty-one percent had been re-hospitalized, and 10% required a further ICU admission. Forty-eight percent used rehabilitation facilities, and 5.7%, hospital at home. Three clusters of patients with distinct post-ICU trajectories were identified. Patients in cluster 1 (68% of total) survived and spent most of the year at home (338 [323-354] days). Patients in cluster 2 (18%) had more complex trajectories, but most could return home (91%), spending 242 (174-277) days at home. Patients in cluster 3 (14%) died, with only 37% returning home for 45 (15-90) days. INTERPRETATION: Many patients had complex health care trajectories after surviving critical illness. Wide variations in the ability to return home after ICU discharge were observed between clusters, which represents an important patient-centered outcome.

Life expectancy and likelihood of surgery in multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1: AFCE and GTE cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The overall natural history, risk of death and surgical burden of patients with multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1) is not well known. METHODS: Patients with MEN1 from a nationwide cohort were included. The survival of patients with MEN1 was compared with that of the general population using simulated controls. The cumulative probabilities of MEN1-specific operations and postoperative mortality were assessed, and surgical sequences were analysed using sunburst charts and Venn diagrams. RESULTS: A total of 1386 patients with MEN1 were included. Life expectancy was significantly reduced in patients with MEN1 compared with simulated controls from the general population, with a lifetime difference of 15 years. Mutations affecting the JunD interaction domain had a significant negative impact on survival. Survival for patients with MEN1 compared with the general population improved over time. The probability of experiencing at least one specific MEN1 operation was above 95 per cent after 75 years, and most patients had surgery at least twice during their lifetime. Time to a 50 per cent risk of MEN1 surgery was 30.5 years for patients born after 1960, compared with 47.9 years for those born before 1960. Sex and mutations affecting the JunD interacting domain had no impact on time to first surgery. There was considerable heterogeneity in surgical sequences, with no specific clinical pathway. CONCLUSION: Life expectancy was significantly lower among patients with MEN1 compared with the general population, and further decreased in patients with mutations affecting the JunD interacting domain. Almost all patients underwent at least one MEN1-specific operation during their lifetime, but there was no standardized sequence of surgery.

Validation of Artificial Intelligence to Support the Automatic Coding of Patient Adverse Drug Reaction Reports, Using Nationwide Pharmacovigilance Data.

INTRODUCTION: Adverse drug reaction reports are usually manually assessed by pharmacovigilance experts to detect safety signals associated with drugs. With the recent extension of reporting to patients and the emergence of mass media-related sanitary crises, adverse drug reaction reports currently frequently overwhelm pharmacovigilance networks. Artificial intelligence could help support the work of pharmacovigilance experts during such crises, by automatically coding reports, allowing them to prioritise or accelerate their manual assessment. After a previous study showing first results, we developed and compared state-of-the-art machine learning models using a larger nationwide dataset, aiming to automatically pre-code patients' adverse drug reaction reports. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to determine the best artificial intelligence model identifying adverse drug reactions and assessing seriousness in patients reports from the French national pharmacovigilance web portal. METHODS: Reports coded by 27 Pharmacovigilance Centres between March 2017 and December 2020 were selected (n = 11,633). For each report, the Portable Document Format form containing free-text information filled by the patient, and the corresponding encodings of adverse event symptoms (in Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities Preferred Terms) and seriousness were obtained. This encoding by experts was used as the reference to train and evaluate models, which contained input data processing and machine-learning natural language processing to learn and predict encodings. We developed and compared different approaches for data processing and classifiers. Performance was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (AUC), F-measure, sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value. We used data from 26 Pharmacovigilance Centres for training and internal validation. External validation was performed using data from the remaining Pharmacovigilance Centres during the same period. RESULTS: Internal validation: for adverse drug reaction identification, Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency (TF-IDF) + Light Gradient Boosted Machine (LGBM) achieved an AUC of 0.97 and an F-measure of 0.80. The Cross-lingual Language Model (XLM) [transformer] obtained an AUC of 0.97 and an F-measure of 0.78. For seriousness assessment, FastText + LGBM achieved an AUC of 0.85 and an F-measure of 0.63. CamemBERT (transformer) + Light Gradient Boosted Machine obtained an AUC of 0.84 and an F-measure of 0.63. External validation for both adverse drug reaction identification and seriousness assessment tasks yielded consistent and robust results. CONCLUSIONS: Our artificial intelligence models showed promising performance to automatically code patient adverse drug reaction reports, with very similar results across approaches. Our system has been deployed by national health authorities in France since January 2021 to facilitate pharmacovigilance of COVID-19 vaccines. Further studies will be needed to validate the performance of the tool in real-life settings.

Association Between Lack of Blinding and Mortality Results in Critical Care Randomized Controlled Trials: A Meta-Epidemiological Study.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether intervention effect estimates for mortality differ between blinded and nonblinded randomized controlled trials conducted in critical care. We used a meta-epidemiological approach, comparing effect estimates between blinded and nonblinded randomized controlled trials for the same research question. DATA SOURCES: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials evaluating a therapeutic intervention on mortality in critical care, published between January 2009 and March 2019 in high impact factor general medical or critical care journals and by Cochrane. DATA EXTRACTION: For each randomized controlled trial included in eligible meta-analyses, we evaluated whether the trial was blinded (i.e., double-blinded and/or reporting adequate methods) or not (i.e., open-label, single-blinded, or unclear). We collected risk of bias evaluated by the review authors and extracted trial results. DATA SYNTHESIS: Within each meta-analysis, we compared intervention effect estimates between blinded and nonblinded randomized controlled trials by using a ratio of odds ratio (< 1 indicates larger estimates in nonblinded than blinded randomized controlled trials). We then combined ratio of odds ratios across meta-analyses to obtain the average relative difference between nonblinded and blinded trials. Among 467 randomized controlled trials included in 36 meta-analyses, 267 (57%) were considered blinded and 200 (43%) nonblinded. Intervention effect estimates were statistically significantly larger in nonblinded than blinded trials (combined ratio of odds ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.84-0.99). We found no heterogeneity across meta-analyses (p = 0.72; I2 = 0%; τ2 = 0). Sensitivity analyses adjusting the main analysis on risk of bias items yielded consistent results. CONCLUSIONS: Intervention effect estimates of mortality were slightly larger in nonblinded than blinded randomized controlled trials conducted in critical care, but confounding cannot be excluded. Blinding of both patients and personnel is important to consider when possible in critical care trials, even when evaluating mortality.