Gender has no influence on mortality after burn injuries: A 20-year single center study with 839 patients.

BACKGROUND: According to the ABSI - Abbreviated Burn Severity Index - women exhibit an increased risk of succumbing to burn injuries. In contrast, following non-thermal trauma, increased mortality has been shown for the male gender. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate gender-specific differences among burn patients with special regard to burn mortality. METHODS: We retrospectively studied 839 patients who were admitted to the Burn Intensive Care Unit (BICU) and underwent surgical treatment between June 1994 and December 2014. In-hospital mortality was the main clinical endpoint. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated using univariate and multivariate logistic regression models for the association between sex and mortality. RESULTS: In total, we included 530 male and 309 female burn patients. All patients had at least partial-thickness burns and underwent one or more operative procedures. Women were significantly older than men (mean 60.0 years vs 46.2 years; p<0.001). Despite having smaller injuries (24.6% vs 30.3% total body surface area (TBSA); p<0.001), burn mortality among women significantly differed from that of men (27.8% vs 21.7%; OR 1.39, p=0.045, 95% CI 1.01-1.92). This association, however, did not persist after adjusting for age, %TBSA, inhalation injury and full-thickness burns (OR 1.07, p=0.77, 95% CI 0.68-1.70). CONCLUSIONS: Despite increasing research directed at women's health, the assoziation between gender and burn mortality has yielded conflicting results. This study does not support a gender-specific difference in burn mortality in our study population.

Telomere Biology and Thoracic Aortic Aneurysm.

Ascending aortic aneurysms are mostly asymptomatic and present a great risk of aortic dissection or perforation. Consequently, ascending aortic aneurysms are a source of lethality with increased age. Biological aging results in progressive attrition of telomeres, which are the repetitive DNA sequences at the end of chromosomes. These telomeres play an important role in protection of genomic DNA from end-to-end fusions. Telomere maintenance and telomere attrition-associated senescence of endothelial and smooth muscle cells have been indicated to be part of the pathogenesis of degenerative vascular diseases. This systematic review provides an overview of telomeres, telomere-associated proteins and telomerase to the formation and progression of aneurysms of the thoracic ascending aorta. A better understanding of telomere regulation in the vascular pathology might provide new therapeutic approaches. Measurements of telomere length and telomerase activity could be potential prognostic biomarkers for increased risk of death in elderly patients suffering from an aortic aneurysm.

Impact of Rabbit Antithymocyte Globulin Dose on Long-term Outcomes in Heart Transplant Patients.

BACKGROUND: Optimal dosing strategies have not been established for rabbit antithymocyte globulin (rATG) after heart transplantation, and there is currently wide variability in rATG regimens with respect to both dose and duration. METHODS: In a retrospective, single-center analysis, 523 patients undergoing heart transplantation during 1996 to 2009 were stratified by cumulative rATG dose: less than 4.5 mg/kg (group A), 4.5 to 7.5 mg/kg (group B) or greater than 7.5 mg/kg (group C). RESULTS: Survival at 1 year after transplantation was 80% in group A, 90% in group B, and 88% in group C (P = 0.062). Incidence of acute rejection per 1000 patient-years was significantly higher in group A (hazards ratio [HR], 54.8; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 33.9-83.8) compared to groups B (19.6; 95% CI, 11.4-31.4) and C (23.6; 95% CI, 17.5-31.3). Incidence of severe infection 10 years after transplantation was higher in group C (45%) than groups A (37%) or B (23%) (P < 0.001); cytomegalovirus infection rates were 35%, 20% and 23%, respectively (P = 0.009). Multivariable Cox regression showed an HR of 0.51 (95% CI, 0.25-1.02) for acute rejection with group B versus group A, and 0.54 (95% CI, 0.33-0.88; P = 0.013) for severe infection. The rate of malignancy per 1000 patient-years was higher in groups B (13.85) and C (14.95) than group A (7.83). CONCLUSIONS: These retrospective data suggest that a cumulative rATG dose of 4.5 to 7.5 mg/kg may offer a better risk-benefit ratio than lower or higher doses, with acceptable rates of infection and posttransplant malignancy. Prospective trials are needed.

Induction therapy in heart transplantation: where are we now?

Although induction therapy has been used in heart transplantation for many years, its role has not been fully elucidated. Early safety concerns relating to OKT3 or intensive lymphocyte-depleting regimens have largely been addressed by modern induction protocols using rabbit antithymocyte globulin (rATG [Thymoglobuline(®) or ATG-Fresenius]) and interleukin-2 receptor antagonist (IL-2RA) agents, but although the number of randomized controlled studies has expanded there are still gaps in the evidence base. Rejection prophylaxis may be somewhat more effective with rATG than IL-2RA agents, but this has not been proven conclusively. Administration of induction therapy to support delayed introduction of calcineurin inhibitors in patients at risk of renal dysfunction is relatively well documented and widely used. Increasingly, it is recognized that sensitized patients and individuals with primary graft function are suitable candidates for induction therapy, and the possibility that rATG may inhibit cardiac allograft vasculopathy is also of considerable interest. Until the question of whether rATG is associated with increased risk of infection, routine prophylaxis is advisable. IL-2RA induction has an excellent safety profile. Dosing rATG according to lymphocyte count reduces cumulative dose without compromising efficacy. Further controlled trials are required to determine when and how to deploy induction most effectively following heart transplantation.

Predictive value of neuromarkers supported by a set of clinical criteria in patients with mild traumatic brain injury: S100B protein and neuron-specific enolase on trial: clinical article.

OBJECT: The role of the neuromarkers S100B protein and neuron-specific enolase (NSE) in minor head injury is well established. Moreover, there are sensitive decision rules available in the literature to identify clinically important brain lesions. However, it is not clear if using the biomarkers has an influence on the predictability of the decision rule. The purpose of this study was to determine if a set of preclinical and clinical parameters combined with 2 neuromarker levels could serve as reliable guidance for accurate diagnosis. METHODS: Prospective evaluation of a cohort of head trauma patients with Glasgow Coma Scale scores of 13-15 was performed at an academic, Level I trauma center. Blood samples and cranial CT studies were obtained for all patients within 3 hours after injury. The hypothesis of the study was whether the combination of an increase of S100B and NSE levels in serum and other defined risk factors are associated with a pathological finding on CT. A forward stepwise logistic regression model was used. RESULTS: The study included 107 head trauma patients with a mean age of 59 ± 23 years. Twenty-five patients (23.4%) had traumatic lesions on CT. Eight patients underwent craniotomy. The analysis provided a model with good overall accuracy for discriminating cases with clinically important brain injury, including the 6 variables of S100B, NSE, nausea, amnesia, vomiting, and loss of consciousness. The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.88 (0.83-0.93). The receiver operating characteristic curve plots detecting clinically important brain injury for the single variables of S100B and NSE showed an AUC of 0.63 and 0.64, respectively. Conclusions The integration of the neuromarker panel as part of a diagnostic rule including the high-risk factors of nausea, vomiting, amnesia, and loss of consciousness is safe and reliable in determining a diagnosis, pending the availability of more brain-specific neuromarkers. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NO.: NCT00622778 (ClinicalTrials.gov).