Experiência de uma consulta de cardio-oncologia num hospital universitário terciário em Portugal: estudo observacional

© 2022 Sociedade Portuguesa de Cardiologia. Published by Elsevier Espa ̃na, S.L.U. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)Introduction: Heart disease and cancer are the two leading causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Advances in cancer screening and management have led to longer survival and better quality of life. Despite this progress, many cancer patients experience cardiovascular complications during and after cancer treatment. This study describes the experience of a cardio-oncology program at tertiary academic hospital. Methods: In this retrospective observational study, cancer patients referred to the CHULN cardio-oncology consultation (COC) between January 2016 and December of 2019 were included. Data collected included: patient demographics, cancer type, reason for referral, cardiovascular risk factors, cardiac and oncologic treatments and clinical outcomes. Results: A total of 520 patients (mean age: 65 ± 14 years; 65% women) were referred to the COC. The main reasons for referral were suspected heart failure (26%), pre-high risk chemotherapy assessment (20%) and decreased LVEF (15%). Pre-existing cardiovascular risk factors were common (79%) and 309 (59%) were taking cardiac medications. The most common type of malignancy was breast cancer (216, 41%) followed by gastrointestinal (139, 27%). More than half received anthracycline-based regimens (303, 58%). Most patients (401; 77%) successfully completed cancer therapy. At the time of last data collection, the majority of patients were alive (430, 83%). Cardiac-related mortality was observed in 16%. Conclusions: The close collaboration between cardiology and oncology teams and timely cardiac monitoring was the key to the majority of patients to completing their prescribed cancer therapy.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Late Onset Neuromyelitis Optica Spectrum Disorders (LONMOSD) from a Nationwide Portuguese Study: Anti-AQP4 Positive, Anti-MOG Positive and Seronegative Subgroups

Introduction: Several neuroimmunological disorders have distinct phenotypes according to the age of onset, as in multiple sclerosis or myasthenia gravis. It is also described that late onset NMOSD (LONMOSD) has a different phenotype. Objective: To describe the clinical/demographic characteristics of the LONMOSD and distinguish them from those with early onset (EONMOSD). Methods: From a nationwide Portuguese NMOSD study we analyzed the clinical/demographic characteristics of the LONMOSD. Results: From the 180 Portuguese patients 45 had disease onset after 50 years old, 80% were female. 23 had anti-AQP4 antibodies (51.1%), 13 anti-MOG antibodies (28.9%) and 9 were double seronegative (20.0%). The most common presenting phenotypes in LONMOSD were transverse myelitis (53.3%) and optic neuritis (26.7%), without difference from EONMOSD (p = 0.074). The mean EDSS for LONMOSD was 6.0 (SD=2.8), after a mean follow-up time of 4.58 (SD=4.47) years, which was significantly greater than the mean EDSS of EONMOSD (3.25, SD=1.80)(p = 0.022). Anti-AQP4 antibodies positive LONMOSD patients had increased disability compared to anti-MOG antibodies positive LONMOSD (p = 0.022). The survival analysis showed a reduced time to use a cane for LONMOSD, irrespective of serostatus (p<0.001). Conclusions: LONMOSD has increased disability and faster progression, despite no differences in the presenting clinical phenotype were seen in our cohort.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Neuromyelitis Optica Spectrum Disorders: a Nationwide Portuguese Clinical Epidemiological Study

Introduction: Neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD) is a rare disorder in which astrocyte damage and/or demyelination often cause severe neurological deficits. Objective: To identify Portuguese patients with NMOSD and assess their epidemiological/clinical characteristics. Methods: This was a nationwide multicenter study. Twenty-four Portuguese adult and 3 neuropediatric centers following NMOSD patients were included. Results: A total of 180 patients met the 2015 Wingerchuk NMOSD criteria, 77 were AQP4-antibody positive (Abs+), 67 MOG-Abs+, and 36 seronegative. Point prevalence on December 31, 2018 was 1.71/100,000 for NMOSD, 0.71/100,000 for AQP4-Abs+, 0.65/100,000 for MOG-Abs+, and 0.35/100,000 for seronegative NMOSD. A total of 44 new NMOSD cases were identified during the two-year study period (11 AQP4-Abs+, 27 MOG-Abs+, and 6 seronegative). The annual incidence rate in that period was 0.21/100,000 person-years for NMOSD, 0.05/100,000 for AQP4-Abs+, 0.13/100,000 for MOG-Abs+, and 0.03/100,000 for seronegative NMOSD. AQP4-Abs+ predominated in females and was associated with autoimmune disorders. Frequently presented with myelitis. Area postrema syndrome was exclusive of this subtype, and associated with higher morbidity/mortality than other forms of NMOSD. MOG-Ab+ more often presented with optic neuritis, required less immunosuppression, and had better outcome. Conclusion: Epidemiological/clinical NMOSD profiles in the Portuguese population are similar to other European countries.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Characterisation of microbial attack on archaeological bone

As part of an EU funded project to investigate the factors influencing bone preservation in the archaeological record, more than 250 bones from 41 archaeological sites in five countries spanning four climatic regions were studied for diagenetic alteration. Sites were selected to cover a range of environmental conditions and archaeological contexts. Microscopic and physical (mercury intrusion porosimetry) analyses of these bones revealed that the majority (68%) had suffered microbial attack. Furthermore, significant differences were found between animal and human bone in both the state of preservation and the type of microbial attack present. These differences in preservation might result from differences in early taphonomy of the bones. © 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved

Respiratory support in patients with severe COVID-19 in the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection (ISARIC) COVID-19 study: a prospective, multinational, observational study

Background: Up to 30% of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 require advanced respiratory support, including high-flow nasal cannulas (HFNC), non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIV), or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). We aimed to describe the clinical characteristics, outcomes and risk factors for failing non-invasive respiratory support in patients treated with severe COVID-19 during the first two years of the pandemic in high-income countries (HICs) and low middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: This is a multinational, multicentre, prospective cohort study embedded in the ISARIC-WHO COVID-19 Clinical Characterisation Protocol. Patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection who required hospital admission were recruited prospectively. Patients treated with HFNC, NIV, or IMV within the first 24 h of hospital admission were included in this study. Descriptive statistics, random forest, and logistic regression analyses were used to describe clinical characteristics and compare clinical outcomes among patients treated with the different types of advanced respiratory support. Results: A total of 66,565 patients were included in this study. Overall, 82.6% of patients were treated in HIC, and 40.6% were admitted to the hospital during the first pandemic wave. During the first 24 h after hospital admission, patients in HICs were more frequently treated with HFNC (48.0%), followed by NIV (38.6%) and IMV (13.4%). In contrast, patients admitted in lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs) were less frequently treated with HFNC (16.1%) and the majority received IMV (59.1%). The failure rate of non-invasive respiratory support (i.e. HFNC or NIV) was 15.5%, of which 71.2% were from HIC and 28.8% from LMIC. The variables most strongly associated with non-invasive ventilation failure, defined as progression to IMV, were high leukocyte counts at hospital admission (OR [95%CI]; 5.86 [4.83-7.10]), treatment in an LMIC (OR [95%CI]; 2.04 [1.97-2.11]), and tachypnoea at hospital admission (OR [95%CI]; 1.16 [1.14-1.18]). Patients who failed HFNC/NIV had a higher 28-day fatality ratio (OR [95%CI]; 1.27 [1.25-1.30]). Conclusions: In the present international cohort, the most frequently used advanced respiratory support was the HFNC. However, IMV was used more often in LMIC. Higher leucocyte count, tachypnoea, and treatment in LMIC were risk factors for HFNC/NIV failure. HFNC/NIV failure was related to worse clinical outcomes, such as 28-day mortality. Trial registration This is a prospective observational study; therefore, no health care interventions were applied to participants, and trial registration is not applicable

Respiratory support in patients with severe COVID-19 in the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection (ISARIC) COVID-19 study: a prospective, multinational, observational study

Background: Up to 30% of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 require advanced respiratory support, including high-flow nasal cannulas (HFNC), non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIV), or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). We aimed to describe the clinical characteristics, outcomes and risk factors for failing non-invasive respiratory support in patients treated with severe COVID-19 during the first two years of the pandemic in high-income countries (HICs) and low middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: This is a multinational, multicentre, prospective cohort study embedded in the ISARIC-WHO COVID-19 Clinical Characterisation Protocol. Patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection who required hospital admission were recruited prospectively. Patients treated with HFNC, NIV, or IMV within the first 24 h of hospital admission were included in this study. Descriptive statistics, random forest, and logistic regression analyses were used to describe clinical characteristics and compare clinical outcomes among patients treated with the different types of advanced respiratory support. Results: A total of 66,565 patients were included in this study. Overall, 82.6% of patients were treated in HIC, and 40.6% were admitted to the hospital during the first pandemic wave. During the first 24 h after hospital admission, patients in HICs were more frequently treated with HFNC (48.0%), followed by NIV (38.6%) and IMV (13.4%). In contrast, patients admitted in lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs) were less frequently treated with HFNC (16.1%) and the majority received IMV (59.1%). The failure rate of non-invasive respiratory support (i.e. HFNC or NIV) was 15.5%, of which 71.2% were from HIC and 28.8% from LMIC. The variables most strongly associated with non-invasive ventilation failure, defined as progression to IMV, were high leukocyte counts at hospital admission (OR [95%CI]; 5.86 [4.83–7.10]), treatment in an LMIC (OR [95%CI]; 2.04 [1.97–2.11]), and tachypnoea at hospital admission (OR [95%CI]; 1.16 [1.14–1.18]). Patients who failed HFNC/NIV had a higher 28-day fatality ratio (OR [95%CI]; 1.27 [1.25–1.30]). Conclusions: In the present international cohort, the most frequently used advanced respiratory support was the HFNC. However, IMV was used more often in LMIC. Higher leucocyte count, tachypnoea, and treatment in LMIC were risk factors for HFNC/NIV failure. HFNC/NIV failure was related to worse clinical outcomes, such as 28-day mortality. Trial registration This is a prospective observational study; therefore, no health care interventions were applied to participants, and trial registration is not applicable

Thrombotic and hemorrhagic complications of COVID-19 in adults hospitalized in high-income countries compared with those in adults hospitalized in low- and middle-income countries in an international registry

Background: COVID-19 has been associated with a broad range of thromboembolic, ischemic, and hemorrhagic complications (coagulopathy complications). Most studies have focused on patients with severe disease from high-income countries (HICs). Objectives: The main aims were to compare the frequency of coagulopathy complications in developing countries (low- and middle-income countries [LMICs]) with those in HICs, delineate the frequency across a range of treatment levels, and determine associations with in-hospital mortality. Methods: Adult patients enrolled in an observational, multinational registry, the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infections COVID-19 study, between January 1, 2020, and September 15, 2021, met inclusion criteria, including admission to a hospital for laboratory-confirmed, acute COVID-19 and data on complications and survival. The advanced-treatment cohort received care, such as admission to the intensive care unit, mechanical ventilation, or inotropes or vasopressors; the basic-treatment cohort did not receive any of these interventions. Results: The study population included 495,682 patients from 52 countries, with 63% from LMICs and 85% in the basic treatment cohort. The frequency of coagulopathy complications was higher in HICs (0.76%-3.4%) than in LMICs (0.09%-1.22%). Complications were more frequent in the advanced-treatment cohort than in the basic-treatment cohort. Coagulopathy complications were associated with increased in-hospital mortality (odds ratio, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.52-1.64). The increased mortality associated with these complications was higher in LMICs (58.5%) than in HICs (35.4%). After controlling for coagulopathy complications, treatment intensity, and multiple other factors, the mortality was higher among patients in LMICs than among patients in HICs (odds ratio, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.39-1.51). Conclusion: In a large, international registry of patients hospitalized for COVID-19, coagulopathy complications were more frequent in HICs than in LMICs (developing countries). Increased mortality associated with coagulopathy complications was of a greater magnitude among patients in LMICs. Additional research is needed regarding timely diagnosis of and intervention for coagulation derangements associated with COVID-19, particularly for limited-resource settings