Outcome Prediction in Cerebral Venous Thrombosis: The IN-REvASC Score.

BACKGROUND We identified risk factors, derived and validated a prognostic score for poor neurological outcome and death for use in cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT). METHODS We performed an international multicenter retrospective study including consecutive patients with CVT from January 2015 to December 2020. Demographic, clinical, and radiographic characteristics were collected. Univariable and multivariable logistic regressions were conducted to determine risk factors for poor outcome, mRS 3-6. A prognostic score was derived and validated. RESULTS A total of 1,025 patients were analyzed with median 375 days (interquartile range [IQR], 180 to 747) of follow-up. The median age was 44 (IQR, 32 to 58) and 62.7% were female. Multivariable analysis revealed the following factors were associated with poor outcome at 90- day follow-up: active cancer (odds ratio [OR], 11.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.62 to 27.14; P<0.001), age (OR, 1.02 per year; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.04; P=0.039), Black race (OR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.10 to 4.27; P=0.025), encephalopathy or coma on presentation (OR, 2.71; 95% CI, 1.39 to 5.30; P=0.004), decreased hemoglobin (OR, 1.16 per g/dL; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.31; P=0.014), higher NIHSS on presentation (OR, 1.07 per point; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.11; P=0.002), and substance use (OR, 2.34; 95% CI, 1.16 to 4.71; P=0.017). The derived IN-REvASC score outperformed ISCVT-RS for the prediction of poor outcome at 90-day follow-up (area under the curve [AUC], 0.84 [95% CI, 0.79 to 0.87] vs. AUC, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.66 to 0.76], χ2 P<0.001) and mortality (AUC, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.78 to 0.90] vs. AUC, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.66 to 0.79], χ2 P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS Seven factors were associated with poor neurological outcome following CVT. The INREvASC score increased prognostic accuracy compared to ISCVT-RS. Determining patients at highest risk of poor outcome in CVT could help in clinical decision making and identify patients for targeted therapy in future clinical trials

Consensus statements on vaccination in patients with haemophilia-Results from the Italian haemophilia and vaccinations (HEVA) project

Vaccination against communicable diseases is crucial for disease prevention, but this practice poses challenges to healthcare professionals in patients with haemophilia. Poor knowledge of the vaccination requirements for these patients and safety concerns often result in vaccination delay or avoidance. In order to address this issue, a panel of 11 Italian haemophilia and immunization experts conducted a Delphi consensus process to identify the main concerns regarding the safe use of vaccines in patients with haemophilia. The consensus was based on a literature search of the available evidence, which was used by the experts to design 27 consensus statements. A group of clinicians then rated these statements using the 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree). The main issues identified by the expert panel included vaccination schedule for haemophilic patients; protocol and optimal route of vaccine administration; vaccination of haemophilic patients with antibodies inhibiting coagulation factor VIII (inhibitors); and vaccination and risk of inhibitor development. This manuscript discusses these controversial areas in detail supported by the available literature evidence and provides evidence- and consensus-based recommendations. Overall, participants agreed on most statements, except those addressing the potential role of vaccination in inhibitor formation. Participants agreed that patients with haemophilia should receive vaccinations according to the institutional schedule for individuals without bleeding disorders; however, vaccination of patients with haemophilia requires comprehensive planning, taking into account disease severity, type and route of vaccination, and bleeding risk. Data also suggest vaccination timing does not need to take into consideration when the patient received factor VIII replacement

Frequency of Left Ventricular Hypertrophy in Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation

Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) is significantly related to adverse clinical outcomes in patients at high risk of cardiovascular events. In patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), data on LVH, that is, prevalence and determinants, are inconsistent mainly because of different definitions and heterogeneity of study populations. We determined echocardiographic-based LVH prevalence and clinical factors independently associated with its development in a prospective cohort of patients with non-valvular (NV) AF. From the "Atrial Fibrillation Registry for Ankle-brachial Index Prevalence Assessment: Collaborative Italian Study" (ARAPACIS) population, 1,184 patients with NVAF (mean age 72 \ub1 11 years; 56% men) with complete data to define LVH were selected. ARAPACIS is a multicenter, observational, prospective, longitudinal on-going study designed to estimate prevalence of peripheral artery disease in patients with NVAF. We found a high prevalence of LVH (52%) in patients with NVAF. Compared to those without LVH, patients with AF with LVH were older and had a higher prevalence of hypertension, diabetes, and previous myocardial infarction (MI). A higher prevalence of ankle-brachial index 640.90 was seen in patients with LVH (22 vs 17%, p = 0.0392). Patients with LVH were at significantly higher thromboembolic risk, with CHA2DS2-VASc 652 seen in 93% of LVH and in 73% of patients without LVH (p <0.05). Women with LVH had a higher prevalence of concentric hypertrophy than men (46% vs 29%, p = 0.0003). Logistic regression analysis demonstrated that female gender (odds ratio [OR] 2.80, p <0.0001), age (OR 1.03 per year, p <0.001), hypertension (OR 2.30, p <0.001), diabetes (OR 1.62, p = 0.004), and previous MI (OR 1.96, p = 0.001) were independently associated with LVH. In conclusion, patients with NVAF have a high prevalence of LVH, which is related to female gender, older age, hypertension, and previous MI. These patients are at high thromboembolic risk and deserve a holistic approach to cardiovascular prevention