Adherence to antithrombotic therapy guidelines improves mortality among elderly patients with atrial fibrillation: insights from the REPOSI study

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with a substantial risk of thromboembolism and mortality, significantly reduced by oral anticoagulation. Adherence to guidelines may lower the risks for both all cause and cardiovascular (CV) deaths. Methods: Our objective was to evaluate if antithrombotic prophylaxis according to the 2012 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines is associated to a lower rate of adverse outcomes. Data were obtained from REPOSI; a prospective observational study enrolling inpatients aged ≥65 years. Patients enrolled in 2012 and 2014 discharged with an AF diagnosis were analysed. Results: Among 2535 patients, 558 (22.0 %) were discharged with a diagnosis of AF. Based on ESC guidelines, 40.9 % of patients were on guideline-adherent thromboprophylaxis, 6.8 % were overtreated, and 52.3 % were undertreated. Logistic analysis showed that increasing age (p = 0.01), heart failure (p = 0.04), coronary artery disease (p = 0.013), peripheral arterial disease (p = 0.03) and concomitant cancer (p = 0.003) were associated with non-adherence to guidelines. Specifically, undertreatment was significantly associated with increasing age (p = 0.001) and cancer (p < 0.001), and inversely associated with HF (p = 0.023). AF patients who were guideline adherent had a lower rate of both all-cause death (p = 0.007) and CV death (p = 0.024) compared to those non-adherent. Kaplan–Meier analysis showed that guideline-adherent patients had a lower cumulative risk for both all-cause (p = 0.002) and CV deaths (p = 0.011). On Cox regression analysis, guideline adherence was independently associated with a lower risk of all-cause and CV deaths (p = 0.019 and p = 0.006). Conclusions: Non-adherence to guidelines is highly prevalent among elderly AF patients, despite guideline-adherent treatment being independently associated with lower risk of all-cause and CV deaths. Efforts to improve guideline adherence would lead to better outcomes for elderly AF patient

Patterns of infections in older patients acutely admitted to medical wards: data from the REPOSI register

11N/Apartially_openopenRossio, Raffaella; Ardoino, Ilaria; Franchi, Carlotta; Nobili, Alessandro; Mannuccio Mannucci, Pier; Peyvandi, Flora; Biolo, G.; Zanetti, M.; Guadagni, M; Zaccari, M.; Chiuch, M.Rossio, Raffaella; Ardoino, Ilaria; Franchi, Carlotta; Nobili, Alessandro; Mannuccio Mannucci, Pier; Peyvandi, Flora; Biolo, G.; Zanetti, M.; Guadagni, M; Zaccari, M.; Chiuch, M

Minimally invasive esophagectomy for cancer in COVID hospitals and oncological hubs: are the outcomes different?

Introduction The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused significant delays in oncological care worldwide due to restriction of elective surgery and intensive care unit capacity. It has been hypothesized that COVID-free oncological hubs can provide safer elective cancer surgery compared to COVID hospitals. The primary aim of the present study was to analyze the outcomes of minimally invasive esophagectomy for cancer performed in both hospital settings by the same surgical staff. Methods All esophagectomies for cancer performed during the pandemic by a single team were reviewed and data were compared with control patients operated during the preceding year. Screening for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus type 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was performed prior to surgery, and special precautions were taken to mitigate hospital-related transmission of COVID-19 among patients and healthcare workers. Results Compared to the prepandemic period, the esophagectomy volume decreased by 64%. Comorbidities, time from onset of symptoms to first visit, waiting time between diagnosis and surgery, operative approach and technique, and the pathological staging were similar. None of the patients tested positive for COVID-19 during in-hospital stay, and esophagectomy was associated with similar outcomes compared to control patients. Conclusion Outcomes of minimally invasive esophagectomy for cancer performed in a COVID hospital after implementation of a COVID-free surgical pathway did not differ from those obtained in an oncological hub by the same surgical team

Revisional Therapy for Recurrent Symptoms After Heller Myotomy for Achalasia

Purpose: Symptom recurrence after initial surgical management of esophageal achalasia occurs in 10–25% of patients. The aim of this study was to analyze safety and efficacy of revisional therapy after failed Heller myotomy (HM). Methods: A retrospective review of a prospective database was performed searching for patients with recurrent symptoms after primary surgical therapy for achalasia. Patients with previously failed HM were considered for the final analysis. The Foregut questionnaire, and the Atkinson and Eckardt scales were used to assess severity of symptoms. Objective investigations routinely included upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and barium swallow study. Redo treatments consisted of endoscopic pneumatic dilation (PD), laparoscopic HM, hybrid Ivor Lewis esophagectomy, or stapled cardioplasty. A yearly clinical and endoscopic follow-up was scheduled in all patients. Results: Over a 20-year period, 26 patients with a median age of 66 years (IQR 19.5) underwent revisional therapy after failed HM for achalasia at a tertiary-care university hospital. The median time after index procedure was 10 years (IQR 21). Revisional therapy consisted of endoscopic pneumatic dilation (n=13), laparoscopic HM and fundoplication (n=10), esophagectomy (n=2), and stapled cardioplasty and fundoplication (n=1). Nine (34.6%) of these patients required further endoscopic or surgical treatments. There was no mortality, and the overall complication rate was 7.7%. At a median follow-up of 42 months (range 10–149), a significant decrease of dysphagia, regurgitation, chest pain, respiratory symptoms, and median Eckardt score (p&lt;0.05) was noted. Conclusion: In specialized and multidisciplinary centers, revisional therapy for achalasia is feasible, safe, and effective

Effect of body position on high-resolution esophageal manometry variables and final manometric diagnosis

Background/Aims According to the Chicago classification version 3.0, high-resolution manometry (HRM) should be performed in the supine position. However, with the patient in the upright/sitting position, the test could more closely simulate real-life behavior and may be better tolerated. We performed a systematic review of the literature to search whether the manometric variables and the final diagnosis are affected by positional changes. Methods A literature search was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. Studies published in English that compared HRM results in different body positions were included. Moreover, the change in diagnosis of esophageal motility disorders according to the shift of body position was investigated. Results Seventeen studies including 1714 patients and healthy volunteers met the inclusion criteria. Six studies showed a significant increase in lower esophageal sphincter basal pressure in the supine position. Integrated relaxation pressure was significantly higher in the supine position in 10 of 13 studies. Distal contractile index was higher in the supine position in 9 out of 10 studies. One hundred and fifty-one patients (16.4%) out of 922 with normal HRM in the supine position were diagnosed with ineffective esophageal motility (IEM) when the test was performed in the upright position (P &lt; 0.001). Conclusions Performing HRM in the upright position affects some variables and may change the final manometric diagnosis. Further studies to determine the normal values in the sitting position are needed

Toothpick ingestion complicated by cecal perforation : case report and literature review

Background: Diverticulitis and carcinoma represent the most common causes of colon perforation, but other causes, like ingestion of foreign bodies, should be taken into account. Case presentation: We report the case of a 64-year old man presenting in our Emergency Department with a 2 days history of right lower abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting and low grade fever. Physical examination evocated mild pain with positive rebound tenderness in the right lower abdominal quadrant, and positive right costovertebral angle tenderness. Routine blood tests, abdominal X-rays and CT scan were inconclusive for perforation. At explorative laparoscopy a cecal perforation with localized peritonitis was found, and a right colectomy was performed due to the suspicion of cancer. Histological examination confirmed the presence of a perforation caused by a piece of wood (toothpick) of 6 cm in length. Conclusions: Foreign body ingestion should be taken into account in the evaluation of acute abdominal pain. A detailed patient's history may be crucial for a correct diagnosis and treatment