Microbiological profile of asymptomatic bacteriuria in pregnancy

Background: Asymptomatic bacteriuria is the presence of actively multiplying bacteria within the urinary tract in the absence of any symptoms. Anatomical and physiological changes make women more susceptible to UTI in pregnancy. The objective of present study was to determine the percentage of pregnant women with asymptomatic bacteriuria and its microbiological profile.Methods: A total of 555 antenatal women who had no clinical features of urinary tract infection were recruited for this study over a period of one year. Clean catch mid-stream urine sample was collected and semi quantitatively cultured immediately. Significant bacteriuria was identified and antibiotic sensitivity found out by conventional methods.Results: Significant growth was observed in 26 samples. There was no association between age, parity, gravidity, period of gestation and asymptomatic bacteriuria. Gram stain was found to be the best screening test. Escherichia coli were the commonest organism isolated. Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus saprophyticus were the most resistant organisms.Conclusions: Escherichia coli, the most common organism isolated, was resistant to most of the commonly used antibiotics. Wet film examination, the most commonly used screening test in our set up, was less sensitive and specific. So culture has to be done in all antenatal cases for screening asymptomatic bacteriuria of pregnancy

Effect of remote ischaemic conditioning on clinical outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (CONDI-2/ERIC-PPCI): a single-blind randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Remote ischaemic conditioning with transient ischaemia and reperfusion applied to the arm has been shown to reduce myocardial infarct size in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI). We investigated whether remote ischaemic conditioning could reduce the incidence of cardiac death and hospitalisation for heart failure at 12 months. METHODS: We did an international investigator-initiated, prospective, single-blind, randomised controlled trial (CONDI-2/ERIC-PPCI) at 33 centres across the UK, Denmark, Spain, and Serbia. Patients (age >18 years) with suspected STEMI and who were eligible for PPCI were randomly allocated (1:1, stratified by centre with a permuted block method) to receive standard treatment (including a sham simulated remote ischaemic conditioning intervention at UK sites only) or remote ischaemic conditioning treatment (intermittent ischaemia and reperfusion applied to the arm through four cycles of 5-min inflation and 5-min deflation of an automated cuff device) before PPCI. Investigators responsible for data collection and outcome assessment were masked to treatment allocation. The primary combined endpoint was cardiac death or hospitalisation for heart failure at 12 months in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02342522) and is completed. FINDINGS: Between Nov 6, 2013, and March 31, 2018, 5401 patients were randomly allocated to either the control group (n=2701) or the remote ischaemic conditioning group (n=2700). After exclusion of patients upon hospital arrival or loss to follow-up, 2569 patients in the control group and 2546 in the intervention group were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. At 12 months post-PPCI, the Kaplan-Meier-estimated frequencies of cardiac death or hospitalisation for heart failure (the primary endpoint) were 220 (8·6%) patients in the control group and 239 (9·4%) in the remote ischaemic conditioning group (hazard ratio 1·10 [95% CI 0·91-1·32], p=0·32 for intervention versus control). No important unexpected adverse events or side effects of remote ischaemic conditioning were observed. INTERPRETATION: Remote ischaemic conditioning does not improve clinical outcomes (cardiac death or hospitalisation for heart failure) at 12 months in patients with STEMI undergoing PPCI. FUNDING: British Heart Foundation, University College London Hospitals/University College London Biomedical Research Centre, Danish Innovation Foundation, Novo Nordisk Foundation, TrygFonden

Schmidt's Syndrome: An Uncommon Cause of Spontaneous Hypoglycemia

Schmidt's syndrome, or autoimmune polyendocrine syndrome type 2 (APS-2), is an uncommon disorder characterized by the co-occurrence of autoimmune thyroiditis and adrenalitis. APS-2 is defined as a combination of Addison's disease, autoimmune thyroid disease, and/or type 1 diabetes mellitus. It is an autosomal dominantly inherited polygenic disorder with incomplete penetrance; the candidate genes include but are not limited to HLA-DR3, HLA-DR4, CTLA-4, PTPN22, and CD25-IL-2. Autoimmune thyroiditis, often Hashimoto's disease, results in hypothyroidism. Primary adrenal failure results in enhanced secretion of adrenocorticotrophic hormone melanocyte and co-secretion of melanocyte-stimulating hormone, contributing to hyperpigmentation. Mineralocorticoid deficiency results in salt wasting, fatigue and cramps, postural hypotension, and hyperkalemia. Cortisol, an insulin counter-regulatory hormone, plays a pivotal role in maintaining euglycemia; deficiency predisposes to the development of hypoglycemia. We here report a rare presentation of Schmidt's syndrome as hypoinsulinemic hypoglycemia in a middle-aged male patient. Management includes treatment of acute hypoglycemic episodes with glucose or glucagon, long-term glucocorticoids and mineralocorticoids for adrenal insufficiency, and thyroid hormone supplements for hypothyroidism. This case report and brief overview aim to contribute to the scientific understanding of Schmidt's syndrome/APS-2. Additionally, here we briefly outline the diagnostic challenges in hypoglycemia evaluation, including the utilization of Whipple's triad and the gold standard supervised 72-hour fast and evaluation for primary adrenal and thyroid insufficiencies

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field

Evaluation of a quality improvement intervention to reduce anastomotic leak following right colectomy (EAGLE): pragmatic, batched stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized trial in 64 countries

Background Anastomotic leak affects 8 per cent of patients after right colectomy with a 10-fold increased risk of postoperative death. The EAGLE study aimed to develop and test whether an international, standardized quality improvement intervention could reduce anastomotic leaks. Methods The internationally intended protocol, iteratively co-developed by a multistage Delphi process, comprised an online educational module introducing risk stratification, an intraoperative checklist, and harmonized surgical techniques. Clusters (hospital teams) were randomized to one of three arms with varied sequences of intervention/data collection by a derived stepped-wedge batch design (at least 18 hospital teams per batch). Patients were blinded to the study allocation. Low- and middle-income country enrolment was encouraged. The primary outcome (assessed by intention to treat) was anastomotic leak rate, and subgroup analyses by module completion (at least 80 per cent of surgeons, high engagement; less than 50 per cent, low engagement) were preplanned. Results A total 355 hospital teams registered, with 332 from 64 countries (39.2 per cent low and middle income) included in the final analysis. The online modules were completed by half of the surgeons (2143 of 4411). The primary analysis included 3039 of the 3268 patients recruited (206 patients had no anastomosis and 23 were lost to follow-up), with anastomotic leaks arising before and after the intervention in 10.1 and 9.6 per cent respectively (adjusted OR 0.87, 95 per cent c.i. 0.59 to 1.30; P = 0.498). The proportion of surgeons completing the educational modules was an influence: the leak rate decreased from 12.2 per cent (61 of 500) before intervention to 5.1 per cent (24 of 473) after intervention in high-engagement centres (adjusted OR 0.36, 0.20 to 0.64; P < 0.001), but this was not observed in low-engagement hospitals (8.3 per cent (59 of 714) and 13.8 per cent (61 of 443) respectively; adjusted OR 2.09, 1.31 to 3.31). Conclusion Completion of globally available digital training by engaged teams can alter anastomotic leak rates. Registration number: NCT04270721 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov)