15 research outputs found

    SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Multiple Sclerosis

    Get PDF
    To understand COVID-19 characteristics in people with multiple sclerosis (MS) and identify high-risk individuals due to their immunocompromised state resulting from the use of disease-modifying treatments. Retrospective and multicenter registry in patients with MS with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis and available disease course (mild = ambulatory; severe = hospitalization; and critical = intensive care unit/death). Cases were analyzed for associations between MS characteristics and COVID-19 course and for identifying risk factors for a fatal outcome. Of the 326 patients analyzed, 120 were cases confirmed by real-time PCR, 34 by a serologic test, and 205 were suspected. Sixty-nine patients (21.3%) developed severe infection, 10 (3%) critical, and 7 (2.1%) died. Ambulatory patients were higher in relapsing MS forms, treated with injectables and oral first-line agents, whereas more severe cases were observed in patients on pulsed immunosuppressors and critical cases among patients with no therapy. Severe and critical infections were more likely to affect older males with comorbidities, with progressive MS forms, a longer disease course, and higher disability. Fifteen of 33 patients treated with rituximab were hospitalized. Four deceased patients have progressive MS, 5 were not receiving MS therapy, and 2 were treated (natalizumab and rituximab). Multivariate analysis showed age (OR 1.09, 95% CI, 1.04-1.17) as the only independent risk factor for a fatal outcome. This study has not demonstrated the presumed critical role of MS therapy in the course of COVID-19 but evidenced that people with MS with advanced age and disease, in progressive course, and those who are more disabled have a higher probability of severe and even fatal diseas

    Prognostic indicators and outcomes of hospitalised COVID-19 patients with neurological disease: An individual patient data meta-analysis.

    Get PDF
    BackgroundNeurological COVID-19 disease has been reported widely, but published studies often lack information on neurological outcomes and prognostic risk factors. We aimed to describe the spectrum of neurological disease in hospitalised COVID-19 patients; characterise clinical outcomes; and investigate factors associated with a poor outcome.MethodsWe conducted an individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis of hospitalised patients with neurological COVID-19 disease, using standard case definitions. We invited authors of studies from the first pandemic wave, plus clinicians in the Global COVID-Neuro Network with unpublished data, to contribute. We analysed features associated with poor outcome (moderate to severe disability or death, 3 to 6 on the modified Rankin Scale) using multivariable models.ResultsWe included 83 studies (31 unpublished) providing IPD for 1979 patients with COVID-19 and acute new-onset neurological disease. Encephalopathy (978 [49%] patients) and cerebrovascular events (506 [26%]) were the most common diagnoses. Respiratory and systemic symptoms preceded neurological features in 93% of patients; one third developed neurological disease after hospital admission. A poor outcome was more common in patients with cerebrovascular events (76% [95% CI 67-82]), than encephalopathy (54% [42-65]). Intensive care use was high (38% [35-41]) overall, and also greater in the cerebrovascular patients. In the cerebrovascular, but not encephalopathic patients, risk factors for poor outcome included breathlessness on admission and elevated D-dimer. Overall, 30-day mortality was 30% [27-32]. The hazard of death was comparatively lower for patients in the WHO European region.InterpretationNeurological COVID-19 disease poses a considerable burden in terms of disease outcomes and use of hospital resources from prolonged intensive care and inpatient admission; preliminary data suggest these may differ according to WHO regions and country income levels. The different risk factors for encephalopathy and stroke suggest different disease mechanisms which may be amenable to intervention, especially in those who develop neurological symptoms after hospital admission

    Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

    Get PDF
    Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

    InteracciĂłn genĂ©tico-ambiental en esclerosis mĂșltiple

    Get PDF
    Tesis inédita de la Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Facultad de Medicina, Departamento de Medicina, leída el 19-12-2013Depto. de MedicinaFac. de MedicinaTRUEunpu

    Guillain-Barré syndrome associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Comments after 16 published cases

    No full text
    Sin financiaciĂłn3.109 JCR (2020) Q3, 115/208 Clinical Neurology0.595 SJR (2020) Q2, 1138/2446 Medicine (miscellaneous)No data IDR 2020UE

    Data_Sheet_1_Prehospital qSOFA, mSOFA, and NEWS2 performance for sepsis prediction: A prospective, multi-center, cohort study.docx

    No full text
    BackgroundNowadays, there is no gold standard score for prehospital sepsis and sepsis-related mortality identification. The aim of the present study was to analyze the performance of qSOFA, NEWS2 and mSOFA as sepsis predictors in patients with infection-suspected in prehospital care. The second objective is to study the predictive ability of the aforementioned scores in septic-shock and in-hospital mortality.MethodsProspective, ambulance-based, and multicenter cohort study, developed by the emergency medical services, among patients (n = 535) with suspected infection transferred by ambulance with high-priority to the emergency department (ED). The study enrolled 40 ambulances and 4 ED in Spain between 1 January 2020, and 30 September 2021. All the variables used in the scores, in addition to socio-demographic data, standard vital signs, prehospital analytical parameters (glucose, lactate, and creatinine) were collected. For the evaluation of the scores, the discriminative power, calibration curve and decision curve analysis (DCA) were used.ResultsThe mSOFA outperformed the other two scores for mortality, presenting the following AUCs: 0.877 (95%CI 0.841–0.913), 0.761 (95%CI 0.706–0.816), 0.731 (95%CI 0.674–0.788), for mSOFA, NEWS, and qSOFA, respectively. No differences were found for sepsis nor septic shock, but mSOFA’s AUCs was higher than the one of the other two scores. The calibration curve and DCA presented similar results.ConclusionThe use of mSOFA could provide and extra insight regarding the short-term mortality and sepsis diagnostic, backing its recommendation in the prehospital scenario.</p
    corecore