Clinical Practice Guideline for Red Blood Cell Transfusion Thresholds in Very Preterm Neonates.

Importance: Red blood cell (RBC) transfusion is a common medical intervention to treat anemia in very preterm neonates; however, best transfusion practices, such as thresholds, remain uncertain. Objective: To develop recommendations for clinicians on the use of RBC transfusions in very preterm neonates. Evidence Review: An international steering committee reviewed evidence from a systematic review of 6 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that compared high vs low hemoglobin-based or hematocrit-based transfusion thresholds. The steering committee reached consensus on certainty-of-evidence ratings and worked with a panel from stakeholder organizations on reviewing the evidence. With input from parent representatives and the stakeholder panel, the steering committee used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to develop recommendations. Findings: A systematic review of 6 RCTs encompassing 3483 participants (1759 females [51.3%]; mean [SD] age range, 25.9-29.8 [1.5-3.0] weeks) was used as the basis of the recommendations. The ranges for higher hemoglobin concentration (liberal) vs lower hemoglobin concentration (restrictive) threshold study arms were similar across the trials. However, specific thresholds differed based on the severity of illness, which was defined using variable criteria in the trials. There was moderate certainty of evidence that low transfusion thresholds likely had little to no difference in important short-term and long-term outcomes. The recommended hemoglobin thresholds varied on the basis of postnatal week and respiratory support needs. At postnatal weeks 1, 2, and 3 or more, for neonates on respiratory support, the recommended thresholds were 11, 10, and 9 g/dL, respectively; for neonates on no or minimal respiratory support, the recommended thresholds were 10, 8.5, and 7 g/dL, respectively (to convert hemoglobin to grams per liter, multiply by 10.0). Conclusions and Relevance: This consensus statement recommends a restrictive RBC transfusion strategy, with moderate certainty of evidence, for preterm neonates with less than 30 weeks' gestation.

Leukotriene receptor antagonists as add-on therapy to antihistamines for urticaria: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: The benefits and harms of adding antileukotrienes to H1-antihistamines for the management of urticaria (hives, itch, and/or angioedema) remain unclear. OBJECTIVE: We sought to systematically synthesize the treatment outcomes of antileukotrienes in combination with H1-antihistamines versus H1-antihistamines alone for acute and chronic urticaria. METHODS: As part of updating American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology and American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters urticaria guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, LILACS, WPRIM, IBECS, ICTRP, CBM, CNKI, VIP, Wanfang, FDA, and EMA databases from inception to December 18th, 2023 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating antileukotrienes and H1-antihistamines versus H1-antihistamines alone in patients with urticaria. Paired reviewers independently screened citations, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Random effects models pooled effect estimates for urticaria activity, itch, wheal, sleep, quality of life, and harms. The GRADE approach informed certainty of evidence ratings. Open Science Framework registration: https://osf.io/h2bfx/. RESULTS: Thirty-four RCTs enrolled 3,324 children and adults. Compared to H1-antihistamines alone, the combination of a leukotriene receptor antagonist (LTRA) with H1-antihistamines probably modestly reduces urticaria activity (mean difference: -5.04, 95%CI -6.36 to -3.71; 7-day Urticaria Activity Score) with moderate certainty. We made similar findings for itch and wheal severity, and quality of life. Adverse events were probably not different between groups (moderate certainty), however, no RCT reported on neuropsychiatric adverse events. CONCLUSION: Among patients with urticaria, adding LTRAs to H1-antihistamines probably modestly improves urticaria activity with little to no increase in overall adverse events. The added risk of neuropsychiatric adverse events in this population with LTRAs is small and uncertain.

Panel stacking is a threat to consensus statement validity.

Consensus statements can be very influential in medicine and public health. Some of these statements use systematic evidence synthesis but others fail on this front. Many consensus statements use panels of experts to deduce perceived consensus through Delphi processes. We argue that stacking of panel members towards one particular position or narrative is a major threat, especially in absence of systematic evidence review. Stacking may involve financial conflicts of interest, but non-financial conflicts of strong advocacy can also cause major bias. Given their emerging importance, we describe here how such consensus statements may be misleading, by analysing in depth a recent high-impact Delphi consensus statement on COVID-19 recommendations as a case example. We demonstrate that many of the selected panel members and at least 35% of the core panel members had advocated towards COVID-19 elimination (zero-COVID) during the pandemic and were leading members of aggressive advocacy groups. These advocacy conflicts were not declared in the Delphi consensus publication, with rare exceptions. Therefore, we propose that consensus statements should always require rigorous evidence synthesis and maximal transparency on potential biases towards advocacy or lobbyist groups to be valid. While advocacy can have many important functions, its biased impact on consensus panels should be carefully avoided.

Reporting Conflicts of Interest and Funding in Health Care Guidelines: The RIGHT-COI&F Checklist.

BACKGROUND: Conflicts of interest (COIs) of contributors to a guideline project and the funding of that project can influence the development of the guideline. Comprehensive reporting of information on COIs and funding is essential for the transparency and credibility of guidelines. OBJECTIVE: To develop an extension of the Reporting Items for practice Guidelines in HealThcare (RIGHT) statement for the reporting of COIs and funding in policy documents of guideline organizations and in guidelines: the RIGHT-COI&F checklist. DESIGN: The recommendations of the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) network were followed. The process consisted of registration of the project and setting up working groups, generation of the initial list of items, achieving consensus on the items, and formulating and testing the final checklist. SETTING: International collaboration. PARTICIPANTS: 44 experts. MEASUREMENTS: Consensus on checklist items. RESULTS: The checklist contains 27 items: 18 about the COIs of contributors and 9 about the funding of the guideline project. Of the 27 items, 16 are labeled as policy related because they address the reporting of COI and funding policies that apply across an organization's guideline projects. These items should be described ideally in the organization's policy documents, otherwise in the specific guideline. The remaining 11 items are labeled as implementation related and they address the reporting of COIs and funding of the specific guideline. LIMITATION: The RIGHT-COI&F checklist requires testing in real-life use. CONCLUSION: The RIGHT-COI&F checklist can be used to guide the reporting of COIs and funding in guideline development and to assess the completeness of reporting in published guidelines and policy documents. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: The Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities of China.

Time-Dependent Bacterial Contamination of a Surgical Suction Tip.

Background: No in vitro surgical study has evaluated the time-dependent contamination of surgical suction tips compared with controls. Our purpose was to determine the difference in suction tip bacterial contamination rates between suction-positive and suction-negative tips. Materials and Methods: A matched-pair analysis of the contamination of surgical suction tips over a six-hour period was performed in two clean operating rooms. One suction tip was connected to standard wall suction (suction-positive group), with a matched control tip not connected to wall suction (suction-negative group). At time zero and then at hourly intervals for six hours, the distal 3 cm of suction tips were removed, placed in nutrient broth for 48 hours, then plate cultured. One hundred tips were collected for each time interval. Results: Eighty-two of 700 (11.7%) suction tips had bacterial contamination. Sixty-three (18.0%) of 350 suction-positive tips were contaminated, with 19 (5.4%) of the 350 suction-negative tips contaminated (χ2 = 26.7, p < 0.001). Suction tip contamination was time-dependent with the first significant difference between groups occurring after two hours of continuous suction (χ2 = 4.0, p = 0.04). Contamination rate in the suction-positive group increased significantly after one hour compared with time-zero controls (χ2 = 7.1, p = 0.008). There was no significant difference in frequency of positive cultures over time in the suction-negative group compared with time-zero controls. Conclusions: This is the first controlled laboratory study suggesting a time-dependent increase in positive suction tip cultures. From our data, operating room staff should have an awareness that suction tips represent a potential source of bacterial concentration. We recommend that when not in use, suction tip valves be closed if this feature is available, that hosing be manipulated to cease suction when not needed, that suckers be disconnected from tubing, or that suckers be exchanged at frequent intervals. Doing so may reduce bacterial contamination on the suction tip.

Efficacy and Safety of Systemic Corticosteroids for Urticaria: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: Short courses of adjunctive systemic corticosteroids are commonly used to treat acute urticaria and chronic urticaria flares (both with and without mast cell-mediated angioedema), but their benefits and harms are unclear. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of treating acute urticaria or chronic urticaria flares with versus without systemic corticosteroids. METHODS: We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CNKI, VIP, Wanfang, and CBM databases from inception to July 8, 2023, for randomized controlled trials of treating urticaria with versus without systemic corticosteroids. Paired reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and appraised risk of bias with the Cochrane 2.0 tool. We performed random-effects meta-analyses of urticaria activity, itch severity, and adverse events. We assessed certainty of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. RESULTS: We identified 12 randomized trials enrolling 944 patients. For patients with low or moderate probability (17.5%-64%) to improve with antihistamines alone, add-on systemic corticosteroids likely improve urticaria activity by a 14% to 15% absolute difference (odds ratio [OR], 2.17, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.43-3.31; number needed to treat [NNT], 7; moderate certainty). Among patients with a high chance (95.8%) for urticaria to improve with antihistamines alone, add-on systemic corticosteroids likely improved urticaria activity by a 2.2% absolute difference (NNT, 45; moderate certainty). Corticosteroids may improve itch severity (OR, 2.44; 95% CI: 0.87-6.83; risk difference, 9%; NNT, 11; low certainty). Systemic corticosteroids also likely increase adverse events (OR, 2.76; 95% CI: 1.00-7.62; risk difference, 15%; number needed to harm, 9; moderate certainty). CONCLUSIONS: Systemic corticosteroids for acute urticaria or chronic urticaria exacerbations likely improve urticaria, depending on antihistamine responsiveness, but also likely increase adverse effects in approximately 15% more.

Decision theoretical foundation of clinical practice guidelines: an extension of the ASH thrombophilia guidelines.

Decision analysis can play an essential role in informing practice guidelines. The American Society of Hematology (ASH) thrombophilia guidelines have made a significant step forward in demonstrating how decision modeling integrated within GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Developing, and Evaluation) methodology can advance the field of guideline development. Although the ASH model was transparent and understandable, it does, however, suffer from the certain limitations that may have generated potentially wrong recommendations. That is, the panel considered two models separately- after 3-6 months of index venous thromboembolism (VTE), the panel compared Thrombophilia Testing (A) vs. discontinuing anticoagulants (B) and Test (A) vs C (recommending indefinite anticoagulation to all patients) instead of considering all relevant options simultaneously (A vs. B vs. C). Our study aimed to avoid what we refer to as the omitted choice bias by integrating two ASH models into a single unifying threshold decision model. We analyzed 6 ASH panel's recommendations related to testing for thrombophilia in settings of "provoked" vs. "unprovoked" venous thromboembolism (VTE) and low vs. high-bleeding risk (total 12 recommendations). Our model disagreed with the ASH guidelines panels' recommendations in 4 of the 12 recommendations we considered. Considering all three options simultaneously, our model provided results that would have produced sounder recommendations for patient care. By revisiting the ASH guidelines methodology, we have not only improved recommendations for thrombophilia but also provided a method that can be easily applied to other clinical problems and promises to improve the current guidelines' methodology.

Attentional modulation of secondary somatosensory and visual thalamus of mice.

Each sensory modality has its own primary and secondary thalamic nuclei. While the primary thalamic nuclei are well understood to relay sensory information from the periphery to the cortex, the role of secondary sensory nuclei is elusive. One hypothesis has been that secondary nuclei may support feature-based attention. If this is true, one would also expect the activity in different nuclei to reflect the degree to which modalities are or are not behaviorally relevant in a task. We trained head-fixed mice to attend to one sensory modality while ignoring a second modality, namely to attend to touch and ignore vision, or vice versa. Arrays were used to record simultaneously from secondary somatosensory thalamus (POm) and secondary visual thalamus (LP). In mice trained to respond to tactile stimuli and ignore visual stimuli, POm was robustly activated by touch and largely unresponsive to visual stimuli. A different pattern was observed when mice were trained to respond to visual stimuli and ignore touch, with POm now more robustly activated during visual trials. This POm activity was not explained by differences in movements (i.e., whisking, licking, pupil dilation) resulting from the two tasks. Post hoc histological reconstruction of array tracks through POm revealed that subregions varied in their degree of plasticity. LP exhibited similar phenomena. We conclude that behavioral training reshapes activity in secondary thalamic nuclei. Secondary nuclei may respond to behaviorally relevant, reward-predicting stimuli regardless of stimulus modality.

Proton pump inhibitors for gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis in critically ill patients: A systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are the most commonly prescribed drugs for preventing upper gastrointestinal bleeding in critically ill patients. However, concerns have arisen about the possible harms of using PPIs, including potentially increased risk of pneumonia, Clostridioides difficile infection, and more seriously, an increased risk of death in the most severely ill patients. Triggered by the REVISE trial, which is a forthcoming large randomized trial comparing pantoprazole to placebo in invasively mechanically ventilated patients, we will conduct this systematic review to evaluate the efficacy and safety of PPIs versus no prophylaxis for critically ill patients. METHODS: We will systematically search randomized trials that compared gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis with PPIs versus placebo or no prophylaxis in adults in the intensive care unit (ICU). Pairs of reviewers will independently screen the literature, and for those eligible trials, extract data and assess risk of bias. We will perform meta-analyses using a random-effects model, and calculate relative risks for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences for continuous outcomes, and the associated 95% confidence intervals. We will conduct subgroup analysis to explore whether the impact of PPIs on mortality differs in more and less severely ill patients. We will assess certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. DISCUSSION: This systematic review will provide the most up-to-date evidence regarding the merits and limitations of stress ulcer prophylaxis with PPIs in critically ill patients in contemporary practice.

Mineralocorticoid receptor and aldosterone: Interaction between NR3C2 genetic variants, sex and age in a mixed cohort.

CONTEXT: Hypertension, a prevalent cardiovascular risk, often involves dysregulated aldosterone and its interaction with the mineralocorticoid receptor (MR). Experimental designs in animal models and human cohorts have demonstrated a sex and age dependency of aldosterone secretion that expands our pathophysiologic understanding. OBJECTIVE: This study explores the genetic variation of NR3C2, which encodes MR, in relation to aldosterone, considering age, sex, and race. METHODS: Incorporating 720 Caucasians and 145 Africans from the HyperPATH cohort, we investigated the impact of rs4835490, a single nucleotide risk allele variant, on aldosterone levels and vasculature. RESULTS: Notably, a significant association between rs4835490 and plasma aldosterone under liberal salt conditions emerged in individuals of European ancestry (P=0.0002). Homozygous carriers of the risk A allele exhibited elevated plasma aldosterone levels (AA=8.1±0.9 vs GG=4.9±0.5 ng/dl). Additionally, aldosterone activation through posture (P=0.025) and urinary excretion (P=0.0122) showed notable associations. Moreover, genetic interactions with race, sex, and age were observed. Caucasian females under 50 years displayed higher plasma aldosterone, urine aldosterone, and posture aldosterone with the AA genotype compared to females over 50 years, suggesting a potential connection with menopausal or estrogen influences. Interestingly, such age-dependent interactions were absent in the African cohort. CONCLUSIONS: our study highlights the significance of NR3C2 genetic variation and its interplay with age, sex, and race in aldosterone activation. The findings point towards an estrogen-modulating effect on MR activation, particularly in women underlining the role of aldosterone dysregulation in hypertension development. This insight advances our comprehension of hypertension's complexities and opens avenues for personalized interventions.

Nicolau Syndrome Following Glatiramer Injection in a Middle-Aged Woman.

Nicolau syndrome is a rare adverse reaction that can occur in the setting of intramuscular, intravenous, and subcutaneous injections. Proper diagnosis and management are critical to avoid complications including abscesses, muscular atrophy, and necrotizing fasciitis. Here, we report a 55-year-old female with multiple sclerosis who presented to our clinic following a subcutaneous injection of 40mg of glatiramer. She immediately noted a sharp pain and erythema, which developed into a purple discoloration, became purulent, and eventually necrosed. The patient's wound was debrided, and she was advised to clean the wound with soap and water, apply topical mupirocin, and change dressings twice daily. She continued to receive appropriate follow-up care with weekly to bi-weekly debridement with excellent resolution.

Factors Impacting Physician Prognostic Accuracy in Heart Failure Patients With Reduced Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction.

BACKGROUND: A recent study showed that the accuracy of heart failure (HF) cardiologists and family doctors to predict mortality in outpatients with HF proved suboptimal, performing less well than models. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to evaluate patient and physician factors associated with physician accuracy. METHODS: The authors included outpatients with HF from 11 HF clinics. Family doctors and HF cardiologists estimated patient 1-year mortality. They calculated predicted mortality using the Seattle HF Model and followed patients for 1 year to record mortality (or urgent heart transplant or ventricular assist device implant as mortality-equivalent events). Using multivariable logistic regression, the authors evaluated associations among physician experience and confidence in estimates, duration of patient-physician relationship, patient-physician sex concordance, patient race, and predicted risk, with concordant results between physician and model predictions. RESULTS: Among 1,643 patients, 1-year event rate was 10% (95% CI: 8%-12%). One-half of the estimates showed discrepant results between model and physician predictions, mainly owing to physician risk overestimation. Discrepancies were more frequent with increasing patient risk from 38% in low-risk to ∼75% in high-risk patients. When making predictions on male patients, female HF cardiologists were 26% more likely to have discrepant predictions (OR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.58-0.94). HF cardiologist estimates in Black patients were 33% more likely to be discrepant (OR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.45-0.99). Low confidence in predictions was associated with discrepancy. Analyses restricted to high-confidence estimates showed inferior calibration to the model, with risk overestimation across risk groups. CONCLUSIONS: Discrepant physician and model predictions were more frequent in cases with perceived increased risk. Model predictions outperform physicians even when they are confident in their predictions. (Predicted Prognosis in Heart Failure [INTUITION]; NCT04009798).

Role of Raptor Gene Variants in Hypertension: Influence on Blood Pressure Independent of Salt Intake in White Population.

BACKGROUND: The mTOR (mechanistic target of rapamycin) is an essential regulator of fundamental biological processes. mTOR forms 2 distinct complexes, mTORC1 (mTOR complex 1) when it binds with RAPTOR (Regulatory-associated Protein of mTOR) and mTORC2 (mTOR complex 2) when it associates with RICTOR (Rapamycin-insesitive companion of mTOR). Due to the previous link between the mTOR pathway, aldosterone, and blood pressure (BP), we anticipated that variants in the mTOR complex might be associated with salt-sensitive BP. METHODS: BP and other parameters were assessed after a one-week liberal Na+ (200 mmol/d) and a one-week restricted Na+ (10 mmol/d) diet in 608 White subjects from the Hypertensive Pathotype cohort, single-nucleotide variants in MTOR, RPTOR, and RICTOR genes were obtained for candidate genes analyses. RESULTS: The analysis revealed a significant association between a single nucleotide variants within the RPTOR gene and BP. Individuals carrying the RPTOR rs9901846 homozygous risk allele (AA) and heterozygous risk allele (GA) exhibited a 5 mm Hg increase in systolic BP on a liberal diet compared with nonrisk allele individuals (GG), but only in women. This single nucleotide variants effect was more pronounced on the restricted diet and present in both sexes, with AA carriers having a 9 mm Hg increase and GA carriers having a 5 mm Hg increase in systolic BP compared with GG. Interestingly, there were no significant associations between MTOR or RICTOR gene variants and BP. CONCLUSIONS: The RPTOR gene variation is associated with elevated BP in White participants, regardless of salt intake, specifically in females.

The GRADE Working Group and CINeMA approaches provided inconsistent certainty of evidence ratings for a network meta-analysis of opioids for chronic noncancer pain.

OBJECTIVES: Assessment of the certainty of evidence (CoE) from network meta-analysis is critical to convey the strength of inferences for clinical decision-making. Both the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) Working Group (GWG) and the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) framework have been designed to assess the CoE of treatment effects informed by network meta-analysis; however, the concordance of results is uncertain. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We assessed the CoE for treatment effects of individual opioids on pain relief and physical functioning from a network meta-analysis for chronic noncancer pain using the GWG approach and the CINeMA framework. Both approaches evaluate the CoE as high, moderate, low or very low. We quantified the number of discrepant CoE ratings between approaches and the magnitude of the difference (ie, one level, two levels, or three levels). RESULTS: Across 105 comparisons among individual opioids for pain relief, the GWG and CINeMA approaches provided different CoE ratings in 34% of cases (36 of 105). Across 66 comparisons for physical functioning, there was discordance in 17% of cases (11 of 66). All discrepancies were separated by one level. The CINeMA framework typically provided lower CoE ratings compared to the GWG approach, predominantly because of differences in the assessment of transitivity and heterogeneity. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest there are differences between the CoE ratings provided by the GWG and CINeMA approaches when applied to network meta-analyses. Further research is needed to replicate or refute our findings in other network meta-analyses and assess the implications for clinical decision-making.

Scoping Review: Anesthesiologist Involvement in Alternative Payment Models, Value Measurement, and Nonclinical Capabilities for Success in the United States of America.

The US healthcare sector is undergoing significant payment reforms, leading to the emergence of Alternative Payment Models (APMs) aimed at improving clinical outcomes and patient experiences while reducing costs. This scoping review provides an overview of the involvement of anesthesiologists in APMs as found in published literature. It specifically aims to categorize and understand the breadth and depth of their participation, revolving around 3 main axes or "Aims": (1) shaping APMs through design and implementation, (2) gauging the value and quality of care provided by anesthesiologists within these models, and (3) enhancing nonclinical abilities of anesthesiologists for promoting more value in care. To map out the existing literature, a comprehensive search of relevant electronic databases was conducted, yielding a total of 2173 articles, of which 24 met the inclusion criteria, comprising 21 prospective or retrospective cohort studies, 2 surveys, and 1 case-control cohort study. Eleven publications (45%) discussed value-based, bundled, or episode-based payments, whereas the rest discussed non-payment-based models, such as Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (7 articles, 29%), Perioperative Surgical Home (4 articles, 17%), or other models (3 articles, 13%).The review identified key themes related to each aim. The most prominent themes for aim 1 included protocol standardization (16 articles, 67%), design and implementation leadership (8 articles, 33%), multidisciplinary collaboration (7 articles, 29%), and role expansion (5 articles, 21%). For aim 2, the common themes were Process-Based & Patient-Centric Metrics (1 article, 4%), Shared Accountability (3 articles, 13%), and Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing (TDABC) (3 articles, 13%). Furthermore, we identified a wide range of quality metrics, spanning 8 domains that were used in these studies to evaluate anesthesiologists' performance. For aim 3, the main extracted themes included Education on Healthcare Transformation and Policies (3 articles, 13%), Exploring Collaborative Leadership Skills (5 articles, 21%), and Embracing Advanced Analytics and Data Transparency (4 articles, 17%).Findings revealed the pivotal role of anesthesiologists in the design, implementation, and refinement of these emerging delivery and payment models. Our results highlight that while payment models are shifting toward value, patient-centered metrics have yet to be widely accepted for use in measuring quality and affecting payment for anesthesiologists. Gaps remain in understanding how anesthesiologists assess their direct impact and strategies for enhancing the sustainability of anesthesia practices. This review underscores the need for future research contributing to the successful adaptation of clinical practices in this new era of healthcare delivery.