Aspectos clínicos de la angustia

Disposición para la angustia: Los accesos emocionales, entre ellos la angustia, tienen su asiento, según Fenichel, en factores biológicos y filogenéticos. Entendemos por el enunciado anterior la existencia de estructuras glandulares y nerviosas, de funcionamientos anclados sobre reacciones neuro-hormonales y bioquímicas, y de predisposiciones congénitamente adquiridas. Sobre lo anatómico y funcional nada podemos decir aquí; ese campo corresponde a la neurofisiología

Dendritic cell deficiencies persist seven months after SARS-CoV-2 infection

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (SARS-CoV)-2 infection induces an exacerbated inflammation driven by innate immunity components. Dendritic cells (DCs) play a key role in the defense against viral infections, for instance plasmacytoid DCs (pDCs), have the capacity to produce vast amounts of interferon-alpha (IFN-α). In COVID-19 there is a deficit in DC numbers and IFN-α production, which has been associated with disease severity. In this work, we described that in addition to the DC deficiency, several DC activation and homing markers were altered in acute COVID-19 patients, which were associated with multiple inflammatory markers. Remarkably, previously hospitalized and nonhospitalized patients remained with decreased numbers of CD1c+ myeloid DCs and pDCs seven months after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Moreover, the expression of DC markers such as CD86 and CD4 were only restored in previously nonhospitalized patients, while no restoration of integrin β7 and indoleamine 2,3-dyoxigenase (IDO) levels were observed. These findings contribute to a better understanding of the immunological sequelae of COVID-19

Consenso mexicano sobre dolor torácico no cardiaco

Introducción: Dolor torácico no cardíaco (DTNC) se define como un síndrome clínico caracte-rizado por dolor retroesternal semejante a la angina de pecho, pero de origen no cardiaco ygenerado por enfermedades esofágicas, osteomusculares, pulmonares o psiquiátricas.Objetivo: Presentar una revisión consensuada basada en evidencias sobre definición, epidemio-logía, fisiopatología, diagnóstico y opciones terapéuticas para pacientes con DTNC.Métodos: Tres coordinadores generales realizaron una revisión bibliográfica de todas las publi-caciones en inglés y espa˜nol sobre el tema y elaboraron 38 enunciados iniciales divididosen tres categorías principales: 1) definiciones, epidemiología y fisiopatología; 2) diagnóstico,y 3) tratamiento. Los enunciados fueron votados (3 rondas) utilizando el sistema Delphi, y losque alcanzaron un acuerdo > 75% fueron considerados y calificados de acuerdo con el sistemaGRADE. Resultados y conclusiones: El consenso final incluyó 29 enunciados Todo paciente que debutacon dolor torácico debe ser inicialmente evaluado por un cardiólogo. La causa más común deDTNC es la enfermedad por reflujo gastroesofágico (ERGE). Como abordaje inicial, si no existensíntomas de alarma, se puede dar una prueba terapéutica con inhibidor de bomba de pro-tones (IBP) por 2-4 semanas. Si hay disfagia o síntomas de alarma, se recomienda hacer unaendoscopia. La manometría de alta resolución es el mejor método para descartar trastornosmotores espásticos y acalasia. La pHmetría ayuda a demostrar exposición esofágica anormal alácido. El tratamiento debe ser dirigido al mecanismo fisiopatológico, y puede incluir IBP, neu-romoduladores y/o relajantes de músculo liso, intervención psicológica y/o terapia cognitiva,y ocasionalmente cirugía o terapia endoscópica. ABSTRACT Introduction: Non-cardiac chest pain is defined as a clinical syndrome characterized by retros-ternal pain similar to that of angina pectoris, but of non-cardiac origin and produced byesophageal, musculoskeletal, pulmonary, or psychiatric diseases.Aim: To present a consensus review based on evidence regarding the definition, epidemiology,pathophysiology, and diagnosis of non-cardiac chest pain, as well as the therapeutic options forthose patients. Methods: Three general coordinators carried out a literature review of all articles published inEnglish and Spanish on the theme and formulated 38 initial statements, dividing them into 3 maincategories: (i) definitions, epidemiology, and pathophysiology; (ii) diagnosis, and (iii) treatment.The statements underwent 3 rounds of voting, utilizing the Delphi system. The final statementswere those that reached > 75% agreement, and they were rated utilizing the GRADE system.Results and conclusions: The final consensus included 29 statements. All patients presentingwith chest pain should initially be evaluated by a cardiologist. The most common cause ofnon-cardiac chest pain is gastroesophageal reflux disease. If there are no alarm symptoms, the initial approach should be a therapeutic trial with a proton pump inhibitor for 2-4 weeks. Ifdysphagia or alarm symptoms are present, endoscopy is recommended. High-resolution mano-metry is the best method for ruling out spastic motor disorders and achalasia and pH monitoringaids in demonstrating abnormal esophageal acid exposure. Treatment should be directed at thepathophysiologic mechanism. It can include proton pump inhibitors, neuromodulators and/orsmooth muscle relaxants, psychologic intervention and/or cognitive therapy, and occasionallysurgery or endoscopic therapy

The Mexican consensus on non-cardiac chest pain

Introduction: Non-cardiac chest pain is defined as a clinical syndrome characterized by ret-rosternal pain similar to that of angina pectoris, but of non-cardiac origin and produced byesophageal, musculoskeletal, pulmonary, or psychiatric diseases. Aim: To present a consensus review based on evidence regarding the definition, epidemiology,pathophysiology, and diagnosis of non-cardiac chest pain, as well as the therapeutic options forthose patients. Methods Three general coordinators carried out a literature review of all articles published inEnglish and Spanish on the theme and formulated 38 initial statements, dividing them into 3 maincategories: 1) definitions, epidemiology, and pathophysiology, 2) diagnosis, and 3) treatment.The statements underwent 3 rounds of voting, utilizing the Delphi system. The final statementswere those that reached > 75% agreement, and they were rated utilizing the GRADE system. Results and conclusions The final consensus included 29 statements. All patients presentingwith chest pain should initially be evaluated by a cardiologist. The most common cause of non-cardiac chest pain is gastroesophageal reflux disease. If there are no alarm symptoms, the initialapproach should be a therapeutic trial with a proton pump inhibitor for 2-4 weeks. If dysphagiaor alarm symptoms are present, endoscopy is recommended. High-resolution manometry isthe best method for ruling out spastic motor disorders and achalasia and pH monitoring aidsin demonstrating abnormal esophageal acid exposure. Treatment should be directed at thepathophysiologic mechanism. It can include proton pump inhibitors, neuromodulators and/orsmooth muscle relaxants, psychologic intervention and/or cognitive therapy, and occasionallysurgery or endoscopic therapy

Risk profiles and one-year outcomes of patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation in India: Insights from the GARFIELD-AF Registry.

BACKGROUND: The Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF) is an ongoing prospective noninterventional registry, which is providing important information on the baseline characteristics, treatment patterns, and 1-year outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). This report describes data from Indian patients recruited in this registry. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 52,014 patients with newly diagnosed AF were enrolled globally; of these, 1388 patients were recruited from 26 sites within India (2012-2016). In India, the mean age was 65.8 years at diagnosis of NVAF. Hypertension was the most prevalent risk factor for AF, present in 68.5% of patients from India and in 76.3% of patients globally (P < 0.001). Diabetes and coronary artery disease (CAD) were prevalent in 36.2% and 28.1% of patients as compared with global prevalence of 22.2% and 21.6%, respectively (P < 0.001 for both). Antiplatelet therapy was the most common antithrombotic treatment in India. With increasing stroke risk, however, patients were more likely to receive oral anticoagulant therapy [mainly vitamin K antagonist (VKA)], but average international normalized ratio (INR) was lower among Indian patients [median INR value 1.6 (interquartile range {IQR}: 1.3-2.3) versus 2.3 (IQR 1.8-2.8) (P < 0.001)]. Compared with other countries, patients from India had markedly higher rates of all-cause mortality [7.68 per 100 person-years (95% confidence interval 6.32-9.35) vs 4.34 (4.16-4.53), P < 0.0001], while rates of stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding were lower after 1 year of follow-up. CONCLUSION: Compared to previously published registries from India, the GARFIELD-AF registry describes clinical profiles and outcomes in Indian patients with AF of a different etiology. The registry data show that compared to the rest of the world, Indian AF patients are younger in age and have more diabetes and CAD. Patients with a higher stroke risk are more likely to receive anticoagulation therapy with VKA but are underdosed compared with the global average in the GARFIELD-AF. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION-URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01090362

Seguimiento de las guías españolas para el manejo del asma por el médico de atención primaria: un estudio observacional ambispectivo

Objetivo Evaluar el grado de seguimiento de las recomendaciones de las versiones de la Guía española para el manejo del asma (GEMA 2009 y 2015) y su repercusión en el control de la enfermedad. Material y métodos Estudio observacional y ambispectivo realizado entre septiembre del 2015 y abril del 2016, en el que participaron 314 médicos de atención primaria y 2.864 pacientes. Resultados Utilizando datos retrospectivos, 81 de los 314 médicos (25, 8% [IC del 95%, 21, 3 a 30, 9]) comunicaron seguir las recomendaciones de la GEMA 2009. Al inicio del estudio, 88 de los 314 médicos (28, 0% [IC del 95%, 23, 4 a 33, 2]) seguían las recomendaciones de la GEMA 2015. El tener un asma mal controlada (OR 0, 19, IC del 95%, 0, 13 a 0, 28) y presentar un asma persistente grave al inicio del estudio (OR 0, 20, IC del 95%, 0, 12 a 0, 34) se asociaron negativamente con tener un asma bien controlada al final del seguimiento. Por el contrario, el seguimiento de las recomendaciones de la GEMA 2015 se asoció de manera positiva con una mayor posibilidad de que el paciente tuviera un asma bien controlada al final del periodo de seguimiento (OR 1, 70, IC del 95%, 1, 40 a 2, 06). Conclusiones El escaso seguimiento de las guías clínicas para el manejo del asma constituye un problema común entre los médicos de atención primaria. Un seguimiento de estas guías se asocia con un control mejor del asma. Existe la necesidad de actuaciones que puedan mejorar el seguimiento por parte de los médicos de atención primaria de las guías para el manejo del asma. Objective: To assess the degree of compliance with the recommendations of the 2009 and 2015 versions of the Spanish guidelines for managing asthma (Guía Española para el Manejo del Asma [GEMA]) and the effect of this compliance on controlling the disease. Material and methods: We conducted an observational ambispective study between September 2015 and April 2016 in which 314 primary care physicians and 2864 patients participated. Results: Using retrospective data, we found that 81 of the 314 physicians (25.8%; 95% CI 21.3–30.9) stated that they complied with the GEMA2009 recommendations. At the start of the study, 88 of the 314 physicians (28.0%; 95% CI 23.4–33.2) complied with the GEMA2015 recommendations. Poorly controlled asthma (OR, 0.19; 95% CI 0.13–0.28) and persistent severe asthma at the start of the study (OR, 0.20; 95% CI 0.12–0.34) were negatively associated with having well-controlled asthma by the end of the follow-up. In contrast, compliance with the GEMA2015 recommendations was positively associated with a greater likelihood that the patient would have well-controlled asthma by the end of the follow-up (OR, 1.70; 95% CI 1.40–2.06). Conclusions: Low compliance with the clinical guidelines for managing asthma is a common problem among primary care physicians. Compliance with these guidelines is associated with better asthma control. Actions need to be taken to improve primary care physician compliance with the asthma management guidelines

Aspectos clínicos de la angustia

Disposición para la angustia: Los accesos emocionales, entre ellos la angustia, tienen su asiento, según Fenichel, en factores biológicos y filogenéticos. Entendemos por el enunciado anterior la existencia de estructuras glandulares y nerviosas, de funcionamientos anclados sobre reacciones neuro-hormonales y bioquímicas, y de predisposiciones congénitamente adquiridas. Sobre lo anatómico y funcional nada podemos decir aquí; ese campo corresponde a la neurofisiología

Genetic Architecture of Ischaemic Strokes after COVID-19 Shows Similarities with Large Vessel Strokes

We aimed to analyse whether patients with ischaemic stroke (IS) occurring within eight days after the onset of COVID-19 (IS-COV) are associated with a specific aetiology of IS. We used SUPERGNOVA to identify genome regions that correlate between the IS-COV cohort (73 IS-COV cases vs. 701 population controls) and different aetiological subtypes. Polygenic risk scores (PRSs) for each subtype were generated and tested in the IS-COV cohort using PRSice-2 and PLINK to find genetic associations. Both analyses used the IS-COV cohort and GWAS from MEGASTROKE (67,162 stroke patients vs. 454,450 population controls), GIGASTROKE (110,182 vs. 1,503,898), and the NINDS Stroke Genetics Network (16,851 vs. 32,473). Three genomic regions were associated (p -value < 0.05) with large artery atherosclerosis (LAA) and cardioembolic stroke (CES). We found four loci targeting the genes PITX2 (rs10033464, IS-COV beta = 0.04, p -value = 2.3 × 10 −2, se = 0.02), previously associated with CES, HS6ST1 (rs4662630, IS-COV beta = −0.04, p -value = 1.3 × 10 −3, se = 0.01), TMEM132E (rs12941838 IS-COV beta = 0.05, p -value = 3.6 × 10 −4, se = 0.01), and RFFL (rs797989 IS-COV beta = 0.03, p -value = 1.0 × 10 −2, se = 0.01). A statistically significant PRS was observed for LAA. Our results suggest that IS-COV cases are genetically similar to LAA and CES subtypes. Larger cohorts are needed to assess if the genetic factors in IS-COV cases are shared with the general population or specific to viral infection