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

Clinical Practice Guideline: Benign Paroxysmal Positional Vertigo (Update)

Objective This update of a 2008 guideline from the American Academy of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery Foundation provides evidence-based recommendations to benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV), defined as a disorder of the inner ear characterized by repeated episodes of positional vertigo. Changes from the prior guideline include a consumer advocate added to the update group; new evidence from 2 clinical practice guidelines, 20 systematic reviews, and 27 randomized controlled trials; enhanced emphasis on patient education and shared decision making; a new algorithm to clarify action statement relationships; and new and expanded recommendations for the diagnosis and management of BPPV. Purpose The primary purposes of this guideline are to improve the quality of care and outcomes for BPPV by improving the accurate and efficient diagnosis of BPPV, reducing the inappropriate use of vestibular suppressant medications, decreasing the inappropriate use of ancillary testing such as radiographic imaging, and increasing the use of appropriate therapeutic repositioning maneuvers. The guideline is intended for all clinicians who are likely to diagnose and manage patients with BPPV, and it applies to any setting in which BPPV would be identified, monitored, or managed. The target patient for the guideline is aged ‰¥18 years with a suspected or potential diagnosis of BPPV. The primary outcome considered in this guideline is the resolution of the symptoms associated with BPPV. Secondary outcomes considered include an increased rate of accurate diagnoses of BPPV, a more efficient return to regular activities and work, decreased use of inappropriate medications and unnecessary diagnostic tests, reduction in recurrence of BPPV, and reduction in adverse events associated with undiagnosed or untreated BPPV. Other outcomes considered include minimizing costs in the diagnosis and treatment of BPPV, minimizing potentially unnecessary return physician visits, and maximizing the health-related quality of life of individuals afflicted with BPPV. Action Statements The update group made strong recommendations that clinicians should (1) diagnose posterior semicircular canal BPPV when vertigo associated with torsional, upbeating nystagmus is provoked by the Dix-Hallpike maneuver, performed by bringing the patient from an upright to supine position with the head turned 45° to one side and neck extended 20° with the affected ear down, and (2) treat, or refer to a clinician who can treat, patients with posterior canal BPPV with a canalith repositioning procedure. The update group made a strong recommendation against postprocedural postural restrictions after canalith repositioning procedure for posterior canal BPPV. The update group made recommendations that the clinician should (1) perform, or refer to a clinician who can perform, a supine roll test to assess for lateral semicircular canal BPPV if the patient has a history compatible with BPPV and the Dix-Hallpike test exhibits horizontal or no nystagmus; (2) differentiate, or refer to a clinician who can differentiate, BPPV from other causes of imbalance, dizziness, and vertigo; (3) assess patients with BPPV for factors that modify management, including impaired mobility or balance, central nervous system disorders, a lack of home support, and/or increased risk for falling; (4) reassess patients within 1 month after an initial period of observation or treatment to document resolution or persistence of symptoms; (5) evaluate, or refer to a clinician who can evaluate, patients with persistent symptoms for unresolved BPPV and/or underlying peripheral vestibular or central nervous system disorders; and (6) educate patients regarding the impact of BPPV on their safety, the potential for disease recurrence, and the importance of follow-up. The update group made recommendations against (1) radiographic imaging for a patient who meets diagnostic criteria for BPPV in the absence of additional signs and/or symptoms inconsistent with BPPV that warrant imaging, (2) vestibular testing for a patient who meets diagnostic criteria for BPPV in the absence of additional vestibular signs and/or symptoms inconsistent with BPPV that warrant testing, and (3) routinely treating BPPV with vestibular suppressant medications such as antihistamines and/or benzodiazepines. The guideline update group provided the options that clinicians may offer (1) observation with follow-up as initial management for patients with BPPV and (2) vestibular rehabilitation, either self-administered or with a clinician, in the treatment of BPPV

Clinical Practice Guideline: Benign Paroxysmal Positional Vertigo (Update) Executive Summary

The American Academy of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery Foundation has published a supplement to this issue of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery featuring the \ Clinical Practice Guideline: Benign Paroxysmal Positional Vertigo (Update).\ To assist in implementing the guideline recommendations, this article summarizes the rationale, purpose, and key action statements. The 14 recommendations developed emphasize diagnostic accuracy and efficiency, reducing the inappropriate use of vestibular suppressant medications, decreasing the inappropriate use of ancillary testing, and increasing the appropriate therapeutic repositioning maneuvers. An updated guideline is needed due to new clinical trials, new systematic reviews, and the lack of consumer participation in the initial guideline development group

Thigh-length compression stockings and DVT after stroke

Controversy exists as to whether neoadjuvant chemotherapy improves survival in patients with invasive bladder cancer, despite randomised controlled trials of more than 3000 patients. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effect of such treatment on survival in patients with this disease

Clinical Consensus Statement: Balloon Dilation of the Eustachian Tube

To develop a clinical consensus statement on the use of balloon dilation of the eustachian tube (BDET). An expert panel of otolaryngologists was assembled with nominated representatives of general otolaryngology and relevant subspecialty societies. The target population was adults 18 years or older who are candidates for BDET because of obstructive eustachian tube dysfunction (OETD) in 1 or both ears for 3 months or longer that significantly affects quality of life or functional health status. A modified Delphi method was used to distill expert opinion into clinical statements that met a standardized definition of consensus. After 3 iterative Delphi method surveys, 28 statements met the predefined criteria for consensus, while 28 statements did not. The clinical statements were grouped into 3 categories for the purposes of presentation and discussion: (1) patient criteria, (2) perioperative considerations, and (3) outcomes. This panel reached consensus on several statements that clarify diagnosis and perioperative management of OETD. Lack of consensus on other statements likely reflects knowledge gaps regarding the role of BDET in managing OETD. Expert panel consensus may provide helpful information for the otolaryngologist considering the use of BDET for the management of patients with OETD

Clinical Practice Guideline: Evaluation of the Neck Mass in Adults Executive Summary

The American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation has published a supplement to this issue of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery featuring the "Clinical Practice Guideline: Evaluation of the Neck Mass in Adults." To assist in implementing the guideline recommendations, this article summarizes the rationale, purpose, and key action statements. The 12 recommendations developed emphasize reducing delays in diagnosis of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma; promoting appropriate testing, including imaging, pathologic evaluation, and empiric medical therapies; reducing inappropriate testing; and promoting appropriate physical examination when cancer is suspected

Clinical Practice Guideline: Evaluation of the Neck Mass in Adults

Objective Neck masses are common in adults, but often the underlying etiology is not easily identifiable. While infections cause most of the neck masses in children, most persistent neck masses in adults are neoplasms. Malignant neoplasms far exceed any other etiology of adult neck mass. Importantly, an asymptomatic neck mass may be the initial or only clinically apparent manifestation of head and neck cancer, such as squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), lymphoma, thyroid, or salivary gland cancer. Evidence suggests that a neck mass in the adult patient should be considered malignant until proven otherwise. Timely diagnosis of a neck mass due to metastatic HNSCC is paramount because delayed diagnosis directly affects tumor stage and worsens prognosis. Unfortunately, despite substantial advances in testing modalities over the last few decades, diagnostic delays are common. Currently, there is only 1 evidence-based clinical practice guideline to assist clinicians in evaluating an adult with a neck mass. Additionally, much of the available information is fragmented, disorganized, or focused on specific etiologies. In addition, although there is literature related to the diagnostic accuracy of individual tests, there is little guidance about rational sequencing of tests in the course of clinical care. This guideline strives to bring a coherent, evidence-based, multidisciplinary perspective to the evaluation of the neck mass with the intention to facilitate prompt diagnosis and enhance patient outcomes. Purpose The primary purpose of this guideline is to promote the efficient, effective, and accurate diagnostic workup of neck masses to ensure that adults with potentially malignant disease receive prompt diagnosis and intervention to optimize outcomes. Specific goals include reducing delays in diagnosis of HNSCC; promoting appropriate testing, including imaging, pathologic evaluation, and empiric medical therapies; reducing inappropriate testing; and promoting appropriate physical examination when cancer is suspected. The target patient for this guideline is anyone ≥18 years old with a neck mass. The target clinician for this guideline is anyone who may be the first clinician whom a patient with a neck mass encounters. This includes clinicians in primary care, dentistry, and emergency medicine, as well as pathologists and radiologists who have a role in diagnosing neck masses. This guideline does not apply to children. This guideline addresses the initial broad differential diagnosis of a neck mass in an adult. However, the intention is only to assist the clinician with a basic understanding of the broad array of possible entities. The intention is not to direct management of a neck mass known to originate from thyroid, salivary gland, mandibular, or dental pathology as management recommendations for these etiologies already exist. This guideline also does not address the subsequent management of specific pathologic entities, as treatment recommendations for benign and malignant neck masses can be found elsewhere. Instead, this guideline is restricted to addressing the appropriate work-up of an adult patient with a neck mass that may be malignant in order to expedite diagnosis and referral to a head and neck cancer specialist. The Guideline Development Group sought to craft a set of actionable statements relevant to diagnostic decisions made by a clinician in the workup of an adult patient with a neck mass. Furthermore, where possible, the Guideline Development Group incorporated evidence to promote high-quality and cost-effective care. Action Statements The development group made a strong recommendation that clinicians should order a neck computed tomography (or magnetic resonance imaging) with contrast for patients with a neck mass deemed at increased risk for malignancy. The development group made the following recommendations: (1) Clinicians should identify patients with a neck mass who are at increased risk for malignancy because the patient lacks a history of infectious etiology and the mass has been present for ≥2 weeks without significant fluctuation or the mass is of uncertain duration. (2) Clinicians should identify patients with a neck mass who are at increased risk for malignancy based on ≥1 of these physical examination characteristics: fixation to adjacent tissues, firm consistency, size >1.5 cm, or ulceration of overlying skin. (3) Clinicians should conduct an initial history and physical examination for patients with a neck mass to identify those with other suspicious findings that represent an increased risk for malignancy. (4) For patients with a neck mass who are not at increased risk for malignancy, clinicians or their designees should advise patients of criteria that would trigger the need for additional evaluation. Clinicians or their designees should also document a plan for follow-up to assess resolution or final diagnosis. (5) For patients with a neck mass who are deemed at increased risk for malignancy, clinicians or their designees should explain to the patient the significance of being at increased risk and explain any recommended diagnostic tests. (6) Clinicians should perform, or refer the patient to a clinician who can perform, a targeted physical examination (including visualizing the mucosa of the larynx, base of tongue, and pharynx) for patients with a neck mass deemed at increased risk for malignancy. (7) Clinicians should perform fine-needle aspiration (FNA) instead of open biopsy, or refer the patient to someone who can perform FNA, for patients with a neck mass deemed at increased risk for malignancy when the diagnosis of the neck mass remains uncertain. (8) For patients with a neck mass deemed at increased risk for malignancy, clinicians should continue evaluation of patients with a cystic neck mass, as determined by FNA or imaging studies, until a diagnosis is obtained and should not assume that the mass is benign. (9) Clinicians should obtain additional ancillary tests based on the patient's history and physical examination when a patient with a neck mass is deemed at increased risk for malignancy who does not have a diagnosis after FNA and imaging. (10) Clinicians should recommend evaluation of the upper aerodigestive tract under anesthesia, before open biopsy, for patients with a neck mass deemed at increased risk for malignancy and without a diagnosis or primary site identified with FNA, imaging, and/or ancillary tests. The development group recommended against clinicians routinely prescribing antibiotic therapy for patients with a neck mass unless there are signs and symptoms of bacterial infection