RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) coinfection occurs in 20% to 30% of Canadians living with HIV and is responsible for a heavy burden of morbidity and mortality. Management of HIV-HCV coinfection is more complex due to the accelerated progression of liver disease, the timing and nature of antiretroviral and HCV therapy, mental health and addictions management, socioeconomic obstacles and drug-drug interactions between new HCV direct-acting antiviral therapies and antiretroviral regimens. OBJECTIVE: To update national standards for the management of HCV-HIV coinfected adults in the Canadian context. METHODS: A standing working group with specific clinical expertise in HIV-HCV coinfection was convened by The Canadian Institute of Health Research HIV Trials Network to review recently published data regarding HCV antiviral treatments and to update the Canadian HIV-HCV coinfection guidelines. RESULTS: Recent data suggest that the gap in sustained virological response rates between HCV monoinfection and HIV-HCV coinfection has been eliminated with newer HCV antiviral regimens. All HIV-HCV coinfected individuals should be assessed for HCV therapy. First-line treatment for genotypes 1 through 6 includes pegylated interferon and weight-based ribavirin dosing plus the nucleotide sofosbuvir for 12 weeks. Sofosbuvir in combination with the protease inhibitor simeprevir is another first-line consideration for genotype 1 infection. Sofosbuvir with ribavirin for 12 weeks (genotype 2) and 24 weeks (genotype 3) is also recommended as first-line treatment. DISCUSSION: Recommendations may not supersede individual clinical judgement.
HISTORIQUE: De 20 % à 30 % des Canadiens qui vivent avec le VIH sont co-infectés par le virus de l'hépatite C (VHC), lequel est responsable d'une morbidité et d'une mortalité importantes. La prise en charge du VIH et du VHC est plus complexe en raison de l'évolution accélérée de la maladie hépatique, du choix et des critères d'initiation de la thérapie antirétrovirale et du traitement anti-VHC, de la prise en charge de la santé mentale et des toxicomanies, des obstacles socioéconomiques et des interactions entre les nouvelles thérapies antivirales à action directe du VHC et les antirétroviraux. OBJECTIF: Mettre à jour les normes nationales pour la prise en charge des adultes co-infectés par le VHC et le VIH dans le contexte canadien. MÉTHODOLOGIE: Le Réseau canadien pour les essais VIH des Instituts de recherche en santé du Canada a réuni un groupe d'experts possédant des compétences cliniques en coinfection par le VIH et le VHC pour réviser les publications récentes sur les traitements antiviraux contre le VHC et mettre à jour les lignes directrices canadiennes sur la coinfection du VIH et du VHC. RÉSULTATS: Selon de récentes données, les nouvelles posologies antivirales ont éliminé la disparité entre le taux de réponse virologique soutenue de la monoinfection par le VIH et celui de la coinfection par le VIH et le VHC. Toutes les personnes co-infectées par le VIH et le VHC devraient subir une évaluation en vue de recevoir un traitement du VHC. Le traitement de première ligne du VHC des génotypes 1 à 6 inclut un régime composé d'interféron pégylé et de ribavirine dosée en fonction du poids, associé au sofosbuvir, un analogue des nucléotides, pendant 12 semaines. Le sofosbuvir combiné au siméprévir, un inhibiteur de la protéase, peut également constituer un traitement de première ligne pour l'infection par le génotype 1. Le sofosbuvir associé à de la ribavirine pendant 12 semaines (génotype 2) et 24 semaines (génotype 3) est également recommandé en première ligne. EXPOSÉ: Les recommandations ne se substituent pas nécessairement au jugement clinique personnel.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To provide an update to French guidelines about "Difficult intubation and extubation in adult anaesthesia 2006". DESIGN: A consensus committee of 13 experts was convened. A formal conflict-of-interest (COI) policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. The entire guidelines process was conducted independent of any industry funding. The authors were advised to follow the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence. The potential drawbacks of making strong recommendations in the presence of low-quality evidence were emphasized. Few recommendations were ungraded. METHODS: The panel focused on 6 questions: 1) Why must oxygen desaturation be avoided during intubation and what preoxygenation and oxygenation techniques should be used to prevent it? 2) Should videolaryngoscopes be used instead of standard laryngoscopy with or without a long stylet to achieve a better success rate of intubation after the first attempt during anticipated difficult intubation off fiberoptic intubation? 3) Should TCI or target controlled inhalation anaesthesia (TCIA) be used instead of bolus sedation for airway control in the event of suspected or proven difficulty in a patient spontaneously breathing? 4) What mode of anaesthesia should be performed in patients with difficult intubation criteria and potentially difficult mask ventilation? 5) In surgical patients, what criteria predict difficulties encountered during postoperative tracheal extubation? 6) Should decision trees and algorithms be employed to direct decision-making for the management of difficult intubation, whether foreseen or not? (based on the information from the preceding five issues). Population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) questions were reviewed and updated as needed, and evidence profiles were generated. The analysis of the literature and the recommendations were then conducted according to the GRADE® methodology. RESULTS: The SFAR Guideline panel provided 13 statements on difficult intubation and extubation in adult anaesthesia. After two rounds of discussion and various amendments, a strong agreement was reached for 99% of recommendations. Of these recommendations, five have a high level of evidence (Grade 1±), 8 have a low level of evidence (Grade 2±). No recommendation was provided for one question. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial agreement exists among experts regarding many strong recommendations for the best care of patients with difficult intubation and extubation in adult anaesthesia.