RESUMO
Background: Vasospasm and cerebral ischemia after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage are associated with mortality and poor neurological outcomes. We studied the efficacy of all available strategies targeting vasospasm and cerebral ischemia on outcomes in a network meta-analysis. Methods: We searched EMBASE and MEDLINE databases from 1 January 1990 and 28 November 2021 according to PRISMA guidelines. Randomized controlled trials and longitudinal studies were included. All curative or preventive strategies targeting vasospasm and/or cerebral ischemia were eligible. A network meta-analysis was performed to compare all interventions with one another in a primary (randomized controlled trials only) and a secondary analysis (both trials and longitudinal studies). Mortality by 3 months was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were vasospasm, neurological outcome by 3 months, and dichotomized as "good" or "poor" recovery according to each study definition. Results: A total of 2,382 studies were screened which resulted in the selection of 192 clinical trials (92 (47.9%) and 100 cohorts (52.1%) and the inclusion of 41,299 patients. In randomized controlled studies, no strategy decreased mortality by 3 months. Statins (0.79 [0.62-1]), tirilazad (0.82 [0.69-0.97]), CSF drainage (0.47 [0.29-0.77]), and clazosentan (0.51 [0.36-0.71]) significantly decreased the incidence of vasospasm. Cilostazol was the only treatment associated with improved neurological outcomes by 3 months in the primary (OR 1.16, 95% CI [1.05-1.28]) and secondary analyses (OR 2.97, 95% CI [1.39-6.32]). Discussion: In the modern era of subarachnoid hemorrhage, all strategies targeting vasospasm failed to decrease mortality. Cilostazol should be confirmed as a treatment to improve neurological outcomes. The link between vasospasm and neurological outcome appears questionable. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=116073, identifier: PROSPERO CRD42018116073.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of fluocinolone acetonide implant (FAci) injected 1 month after the last dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEXi) in chronic diabetic macular oedema (DME) patients. METHODS: Retrospective multicentric study conducted in pseudophakic patients with chronic DME frequently treated with dexamethasone intravitreal implant (DEXi; time to DME recurrence ≤ 6 months), receiving FAci 1 month after the last DEXi, with at least a 6-month follow-up. Best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), central macular thickness (CMT) on optical coherence tomography, intraocular pressure (IOP) and additional treatments were assessed on the day of FAci injection (M0), 1 (M1) and 3 months (M3) later and then every 3 months. RESULTS: A total of 41 eyes from 34 patients were included. At M0, patients' mean age was 68.7 ± 9.8 years, the mean DME duration was 63.9 ± 22.9 months, the mean interval between two DEXi was 14.2 ± 3.3 weeks. M12 data were available for 71% of patients. At baseline, the mean BCVA, CMT and IOP were 63.2 ± 16.6 letters, 299.4 ± 103.3 µm, and 16.2 ± 4.5 mmHg, respectively, and remained stable during the follow-up. At M12, 14% of patients required additional intravitreal treatments. CONCLUSION: In pseudophakic patients with chronic DME showing good response to DEXi but requiring repeated injections every < 6 months, switching to FAci 1 month after the last DEXi was effective and safe. Further prospective randomized controlled studies are needed to confirm these findings, and to determine the best interval between the last DEXi and the first FAci.
RESUMO
Introduction: The growing needs related to the loss of autonomy of elderly people should be the opportunity to imagine alternatives to nursing homes. In this context, our study aimed to assess the effect of a reinforced home care model on the evolution of frailty in elderly people whose health conditions could have justified entering a nursing home. Methods: A retrospective observational study focusing on the evolution of the SEGA score and other variables reflecting the frailty of people over 75 years old according to classic home care, institutionalization, or reinforced home care. Results: The average SEGA scores of the Ehpad-@-Dom (reinforced home care) and SAD (classic home care) groups are significantly better than that of the Ehpad group after 6 months (T6: Ehpad-@-Dom vs Ehpad, p =0.01 and SAD vs Ehpad, p=0.039) and 12 months (T12: Ehpad-@-Dom vs Ehpad, p=0.021). Conclusion: "Reinforced home care" seems to be an alternative to the classic nursing home model.
Introduction: Face aux besoins liés à la perte d'autonomie des personnes âgées vieillissantes, des alternatives à l'institutionnalisation doivent être imaginées. Dans ce contexte, notre étude visait à évaluer l'effet d'un modèle de maintien à domicile renforcé sur l'évolution de la fragilité de personnes âgées dont l'état de santé aurait pu justifier une institutionnalisation. Méthodes: Étude observationnelle rétrospective s'intéressant à l'évolution du score SEGA et d'autres variables reflétant la fragilité de personnes âgées de plus de 75 ans en fonction d'un maintien à domicile classique, une institutionnalisation, ou un maintien à domicile renforcé. Résultats: Les score SEGA moyens des groupes Ehpad-@-Dom (maintien à domicile renforcé) et SAD (maintien à domicile classique) sont significativement meilleurs que celui du groupe Ehpad après 6 mois (T6 : Ehpad-@-Dom vs Ehpad, p = 0,01 et SAD vs Ehpad, p = 0,039) et 12 mois (T12 : Ehpad-@-Dom vs Ehpad, p = 0,021). Conclusion: Le « maintien à domicile renforcé ¼ semble être une alternative à l'entrée classique en Ehpad.
Assuntos
Fragilidade , Humanos , Idoso , Estudos Retrospectivos , Casas de SaúdeRESUMO
Clinical history and physical examination are usually not sufficient to diagnose leg chronic exertional compartment syndrome (CECS). Two predictive clinical models have been proposed. The first model by De Bruijn et al. is displayed as a nomogram that predicts the probability of CECS according to a risk score. The second model by Fouasson-Chailloux et al. combines two signs (post-effort muscle hardness on palpation or hernia). To evaluate those models, we performed a prospective study on patients who were referred for possible CECS. 201 patients underwent intra-compartmental pressure at 1-min post-exercise (CECS if ≥ 30 mmHg) - 115 had CECS. For the De Bruijn et al. model, the risk score was 7.5±2.2 in the CECS group and 4.6±1.7 in the non-CECS group (p<0.001) with an area under the ROC curve of 0.85. The model accuracy was 80% with a sensitivity of 82% and a specificity of 78%. Concerning Fouasson-Chailloux et al. model, the accuracy was 86%; the sensitivity and the specificity were 75 and 98%, respectively. The De Bruijn et al. model was a good collective model but less efficient in individual application. In patients having both muscle hardness and hernia, we could clinically make the diagnosis of CECS.
