9 research outputs found
Risk of severe SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases in Qatar: a cohort matched study
Background: It remains unclear whether patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (ARDs) are at a higher risk of poor outcomes from a SARS-CoV-2 infection. We evaluated whether patients with an ARDs infected with SARS-CoV-2 were at a higher risk of a poorer outcome than those without an ARDs. Methods: Patients with an ARDs infected with SARSCoV-2 were matched to control patients without a known ARDs. Matching was performed according to age (6 years) and sex at a case-to-control ratio of 1:3. Demographic and clinical data were extracted from the databases and were compared between the two groups. Severe SARS-CoV-2 infection was the primary outcome and was defined as the requirement for oxygen therapy support, the need for invasive or noninvasive mechanical ventilation, or the use of glucocorticoids. Results: A total of 141 patients with an ARDs were matched to 398 patients who formed the control group. The mean ages (SD) of the ARDs and nonARDs groups were 44.4 years (11.4) and 43.4 years (12.2). Women accounted for 58.8% of the ARDs group and 56.3% of the control group (p = 0.59). Demographics and comorbidities were balanced between the groups. ARDs included connective tissue disease in 43 (30.3%) patients, inflammatory arthritis in 92 (65.2%), and other ARDs in 8 (5.7%). ARDs medications included biological/targeted synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (b/tsDMARDs) in 28 (15.6%) patients, conventional synthetic DMARDs in 95 (67.4%), and immunosuppressive antimetabolites in 13 (9.2%). The ARDs group had more respiratory and gastrointestinal symptoms related to SARS-CoV-2 infection than the control group (24.8% and 20.6% vs. 10% and 5.3%, respectively; p, 0.001 for both). Severe SARS-CoV2 infection was more common in the ARDs group than in the control group (14.9% vs. 5.8%; p, 0.001). Conclusions: In this single-center matched cohort study, patients with an ARDs experienced more respiratory and gastrointestinal symptoms related to SARS-CoV-2 infection and had more severe infection than those from the control group. Therefore, patients with an ARDs require close observation during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic
Clinical utility of ANA-ELISA vs ANA-immunofluorescence in connective tissue diseases
We investigated the performance of ANA-ELISA for CTDs screening and diagnosis and comparing it to the conventional ANA-IIF. ANA-ELISA is a solid-phase immune assay includes 17 ANA-targeted recombinant antigens; dsDNA, Sm-D, Rib-P, PCNA, U1-RNP (70, A, C), SS-A/Ro (52 and 60), SS-B/La, Centromere B, Scl-70, Fibrillarin, RNA Polymerase III, Jo-1, Mi-2, and PM-Scl. During the period between March till December 2016 all requests for ANA from primary, secondary, and tertiary care centers were processed with both techniques; ANA-IIF and ANA-ELISA. The electronic medical record of these patients was reviewed looking for CTD diagnosis documented by the Senior rheumatologist. SPSS 22 is used for analysis. Between March and December 2016, a total of 12,439 ANA tests were requested. 1457 patients were assessed by the rheumatologist and included in the analysis. At a cut-off ratio ≥ 1.0 for ANA-ELISA and a dilutional titre ≥ 1:80 for ANA-IIF, the sensitivity of ANA-IIF and ANA-ELISA for all CTDs were 63.3% vs 74.8% respectively. For the SLE it was 64.3% vs 76.9%, Sjogren’s Syndrome was 50% vs 76.9% respectively. The overall specificity of ANA-ELISA was 89.05%, which was slightly better than ANA-IIF 86.72%. The clinical performance of ANA-ELISA for CTDs screening showed better sensitivity and specificity as compared to the conventional ANA-IIF in our cohort.Other Information Published in: Scientific Reports License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0See article on publisher's website: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-87366-w</p
Increased Fracture Risk After Bariatric Surgery: a Case-Controlled Study with a Long-Term Follow-Up
Purpose Bariatric surgeries are common procedures due to the high prevalence of obesity. This study aimed to investigate whether bariatric surgery increases fracture risk. Material and Methods It was a case-controlled study. Patients who underwent bariatric surgery during 2011 and 2012 were matched for age (± 5 years) and gender to patients on medical weight management during the same period with a ratio of 1:2. The index date was defined as the date of bariatric surgery for both groups. The subject’s electronic medical records were reviewed retrospectively to identify fractures documented by radiology during January 2020. Results Randomly selected 403 cases were matched to 806 controls with a median age of 36.0 years (IQR 14.0) and 37.0 years (IQR 14.0), respectively. Seventy per cent of the cohort were females. Eighty per cent received sleeve gastrectomy, and the remaining (17%) underwent gastric bypass. The mean duration of follow-up was 8.6 years. The fracture rate was higher in the surgical group as compared to the controls (9.4% vs 3.5%) with a crude odds ratio of 2.71 (95% CI 1.69–4.36). The median duration for time to fracture was 4.17 years for the surgical group and 6.09 years for controls (p-value = 0.097). The most common site of fractures was feet, followed by hands. Apart from a few wrist fractures, there was no typical osteoporotic sites fracture. Conclusion Subjects who underwent bariatric procedures had more non-typical osteoporotic site fractures affecting mainly feet and hands, and fractures tend to occur earlier as compared to controls.Other Information Published in: Obesity Surgery License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0See article on publisher's website: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11695-021-05655-9</p
Adaptation of the 2015 American College of Rheumatology treatment guideline for rheumatoid arthritis for the Eastern Mediterranean Region: an exemplar of the GRADE Adolopment
Abstract Background It has been hypothesized that adaptation of health practice guidelines to the local setting is expected to improve their uptake and implementation while cutting on required resources. We recently adapted the published American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) treatment guideline to the Eastern Mediterranean Region (EMR). The objective of this paper is to describe the process used for the adaptation of the 2015 ACR guideline on the treatment of RA for the EMR. Methods We used the GRADE-Adolopment methodology for the guideline adaptation process. We describe in detail how adolopment enhanced the efficiency of the following steps of the guideline adaptation process: (1) groups and roles, (2) selecting guideline topics, (3) identifying and training guideline panelists, (4) prioritizing questions and outcomes, (5) identifying, updating or conducting systematic reviews, (6) preparing GRADE evidence tables and EtD frameworks, (7) formulating and grading strength of recommendations, (8) using the GRADEpro-GDT software. Results The adolopment process took 6 months from January to June 2016 with a project coordinator dedicating 40% of her time, and the two co-chairs dedicating 5% and 10% of their times respectively. In addition, a research assistant worked 60% of her time over the last 3 months of the project. We held our face-to-face panel meeting in Qatar. Our literature update included five newly published trials. The certainty of the evidence of three of the eight recommendations changed: one from moderate to very low and two from low to very low. The factors that justified a very low certainty of the evidence in the three recommendations were: serious risk of bias and very serious imprecision. The strength of five of the recommendations changed from strong to conditional. The factors that justified the conditional strength of these 5 recommendations were: cost (n = 5 [100%]), impact on health equities (n = 4 [80%]), the balance of benefits and harms (n = 1 [20%]) and acceptability (n = 1 [20%]). Conclusion This project confirmed the feasibility of GRADE-Adolopment. It also highlighted the value of collaboration with the organization that had originally developed the treatment guideline. We discuss the implications for both guideline adaptation and future research to advance the field
Prevalence and clinical significance of antiphospholipid antibodies in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 admitted to intensive care units: a prospective observational study
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) increases the risk of coagulopathy. Although the presence of antiphospholipid antibodies (aPLs) has been proposed as a possible mechanism of COVID-19-induced coagulopathy, its clinical significance remains uncertain. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the prevalence and clinical significance of aPLs among critically ill patients with COVID-19. This prospective observational study included 60 patients with COVID-19 admitted to intensive care units (ICU). The study outcomes included prevalence of aPLs, and a primary composite outcome of all-cause mortality and arterial or venous thrombosis between antiphospholipid-positive and antiphospholipid-negative patients during their ICU stay. Multiple logistic regression was used to assess the influence of aPLs on the primary composite outcome of mortality and thrombosis. A total of 60 critically ill patients were enrolled. Among them, 57 (95%) were men, with a mean age of 52.8 ± 12.2 years, and the majority were from Asia (68%). Twenty-two patients (37%) were found be antiphospholipid-positive; 21 of them were positive for lupus anticoagulant, whereas one patient was positive for anti-β2-glycoprotein IgG/IgM. The composite outcome of mortality and thrombosis during their ICU stay did not differ between antiphospholipid-positive and antiphospholipid-negative patients (4 [18%] vs. 6 [16%], adjusted odds ratio 0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.1–6.7; p value = 0.986). The presence of aPLs does not seem to affect the outcomes of critically ill patients with COVID-19 in terms of all-cause mortality and thrombosis. Therefore, clinicians may not screen critically ill patients with COVID-19 for aPLs unless deemed clinically appropriate.Other Information Published in: Rheumatology International License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0See article on publisher's website: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00296-021-04875-7</p
Adding colchicine to tocilizumab in hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia: An open-label randomized controlled trial
Introduction: Colchicine acts upstream in the cytokines cascade by inhibiting the nod-like receptor protein 3 (NLRP3) inflammasome while interleukin 6 (IL-6) receptor antagonists, such as tocilizumab, block the end result of the cytokines cascade. Hence, adding colchicine to tocilizumab with the aim of blocking the early and end products of the cytokines cascade, might reduce the risk of developing cytokine storm. Methods and analysis: We aim to conduct an open-label randomized controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of adding colchicine to tocilizumab among patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia to reduce the rate of invasive mechanical ventilation and mortality. We will include patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia who received tocilizumab according to our local guidelines. Enrolled patients will be then randomized in 1:1 to colchicine versus no colchicine. Patients will be followed up for 30 days. The primary outcome is the rate of invasive mechanical ventilation and will be determined using Cox proportional hazard model. Discussion: Given colchicine's ease of use, low cost, good safety profile, and having different anti-inflammatory mechanism of action than other IL-6 blockade, colchicine might serve as a potential anti-inflammatory agent among patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. This study will provide valuable insights on the use of colchicine in severe COVID-19 when added to IL-6 antagonists. Ethics and dissemination: The Medical Research Center and Institutional Review Board at Hamad Medical Corporation in Qatar approved the study protocol (MRC-01-21-299). Results of the analysis will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. 2022 Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. All rights reserved.Scopu