Randomized Trial of Facilitated Adherence to Screening Colonoscopy vs Sequential Fecal-Based Blood Test.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening guidelines include screening colonoscopy and sequential high-sensitivity fecal occult blood testing (HSgFOBT), with expectation of similar effectiveness based on the assumption of similar high adherence. However, adherence to screening colonoscopy compared with sequential HSgFOBT has not been reported. In this randomized clinical trial, we assessed adherence and pathology findings for a single screening colonoscopy vs sequential and nonsequential HSgFOBTs. METHODS: Participants aged 40-69 years were enrolled at 3 centers representing different clinical settings. Participants were randomized into a single screening colonoscopy arm vs sequential HSgFOBT arm composed of 4-7 rounds. Initial adherence to screening colonoscopy and sequential adherence to HSgFOBT, follow-up colonoscopy for positive HSgFOBT tests, crossover to colonoscopy, and detection of advanced neoplasia or large serrated lesions (ADN-SERs) were measured. RESULTS: There were 3523 participants included in the trial; 1761 and 1762 participants were randomized to the screening colonoscopy and HSgFOBT arms, respectively. Adherence was 1473 (83.6%) for the screening colonoscopy arm vs 1288 (73.1%) for the HSgFOBT arm after 1 round (relative risk [RR], 1.14; 95% CI, 1.10-1.19; P ≤ .001), but only 674 (38.3%) over 4 sequential HSgFOBT rounds (RR, 2.19; 95% CI, 2.05-2.33). Overall adherence to any screening increased to 1558 (88.5%) in the screening colonoscopy arm during the entire study period and 1493 (84.7%) in the HSgFOBT arm (RR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.02-1.07). Four hundred thirty-six participants (24.7%) crossed over to screening colonoscopy during the first 4 rounds. ADN-SERs were detected in 121 of the 1473 participants (8.2%) in the colonoscopy arm who were adherent to protocol in the first 12 months of the study, whereas detection of ADN-SERs among those who were not sequentially adherent (n = 709) to HSgFOBT was subpar (0.6%) (RR, 14.72; 95% CI, 5.46-39.67) compared with those who were sequentially adherent (3.3%) (n = 647) (RR, 2.52; 95% CI, 1.61-3.98) to HSgFOBT in the first 4 rounds. When including colonoscopies from HSgFOBT patients who were never positive yet crossed over (n = 1483), 5.5% of ADN-SERs were detected (RR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.15-1.96) in the first 4 rounds. CONCLUSIONS: Observed adherence to sequential rounds of HSgFOBT was suboptimal compared with a single screening colonoscopy. Detection of ADN-SERs was inferior when nonsequential HSgFOBT adherence was compared with sequential adherence. However, the greatest number of ADN-SERs was detected among those who crossed over to colonoscopy and opted to receive a colonoscopy. The effectiveness of an HSgFOBT screening program may be enhanced if crossover to screening colonoscopy is permitted. CLINICALTRIALS: gov, Number: NCT00102011.

Basiliximab induction versus no induction in adult heart transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Induction immunosuppression in heart transplant recipients varies greatly by center. Basiliximab (BAS) is the most commonly used induction immunosuppressant but has not been shown to reduce rejection or improve survival. The objective of this retrospective study was to compare rejection, infection, and mortality within the first 12 months following heart transplant in patients who received BAS or no induction. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of adult heart transplant recipients given BAS or no induction from January 1, 2017 to May 31, 2021. The primary endpoint was incidence of treated acute cellular rejection (ACR) at 12-months post-transplant. Secondary endpoints included ACR at 90 days post-transplant, incidence of antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) at 90 days and 1 year, incidence of infection, and all-cause mortality at 1 year. RESULTS: A total of 108 patients received BAS, and 26 patients received no induction within the specified timeframe. There was a lower incidence of ACR within the first year in the BAS group compared to the no induction group (27.7 vs. 68.2%, p < .002). BAS was independently associated with a lower probability of having a rejection event during the first 12-months post-transplant (hazard ratio (HR) .285, 95% confidence interval [CI] .142-.571, p < .001). There was no difference in the rate of infection and in mortality after hospital discharge at 1-year post-transplant (6% vs. 0%, p = .20). CONCLUSION: BAS appears to be associated with greater freedom from rejection without an increase in infections. BAS may be a preferred to a no induction strategy in patients undergoing heart transplantation.

Erdheim-Chester Disease: A Case of Right Atrial Involvement and Superior Vena Cava Stenosis.

We describe the case of a 79-year-old woman with a history of Erdheim-Chester disease who presented with bradyarrhythmia and infiltration of the superior vena cava and right atrium. This case highlights an important consideration in type of pacemaker placement given the frequency of right atrial involvement in Erdheim-Chester disease. (Level of Difficulty: Advanced.).

4-Factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate (PCC4, Kcentra®) Protocol Reduces Blood Requirements for Heart Transplantation: A Novel Protocol.

BACKGROUND All patients with a ventricular assist device (VAD) awaiting heart transplantation are anticoagulated with warfarin to prevent thromboembolism. The use of 4 factor prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC4, Kcentra®) for anticoagulation reversal prior to surgery may include benefits such as quicker reversal, longer duration of action, and a reduction in total volume of blood products used compared to other reversal practices. The study objective is to evaluate benefits of using an anticoagulation reversal protocol featuring PCC4, over standard of care in heart transplant patients requiring anticoagulation. MATERIAL AND METHODS This is a single center, combined retrospective and prospective, time-matched cohort study compared 12 patients transplanted pre-protocol and 11 patients transplanted post-protocol. The primary outcome was the total volume of blood and blood products used. Secondary outcomes included length of hospital and ICU stay, safety and adverse events, primary chest closure, and a cost comparison. RESULTS The PCC4 reversal protocol showed a significant reduction in total blood volume received with an overall decrease of 1.76L (4.20L pre-protocol, 2.45L post-protocol, P=0.037), total units of blood products infused (20 units pre, 12 units post, P=0.033), and units of packed red blood cells (7 units pre, 3 units post, P=0.033). All heart transplant recipients were listed Status 1A with the primary indication being infection (n=12; 52%). Baseline characteristics, survival, and cost were not different between the two groups. There were no thrombotic events or patient that experienced serious reactions to PCC4. Secondary outcomes were only significant to time to INR reversal. CONCLUSIONS Patients treated with the PCC4 protocol demonstrated a significant decrease in volume of blood and units of blood products required prior to chest closure for heart transplant patients. PCC4 was found to be a safe and beneficial agent in anticoagulation reversal for patients on anticoagulation prior to heart transplantation.

Management of Right Ventricular Failure in Pulmonary Hypertension (and After LVAD Implantation).

OPINION STATEMENT: Right ventricular failure (RVF) is increasingly recognized as a complicating feature of a number of disease states, including pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) and advanced heart failure. It not only contributes to symptoms and complicates management, but also dramatically impacts prognosis. In PAH, early disease detection and institution of PAH therapy can prevent or delay RVF. Once established, therapy for RVF focuses on optimizing afterload reduction with PAH therapy, controlling volume, and judiciously using inotropic support when needed. In patients undergoing implantation of a LVAD, preoperative assessment and management of RVF is critical. Risk factors for the development of RVF after LVAD have been described, and may identify a population best managed with biventricular support. Postoperative management of RVF focuses on supportive therapy, judicious use of inotropes and volume management. Ongoing research may yield insights into specific therapies to prevent or reverse RVF.