Risk Factors for Acute Kidney Injury Following Cardiac Surgery and Performance of Leicester Score in a Spanish Cohort

The incidence of acute kidney injury following cardiac surgery (CSA-AKI) is up to 30%, and it places patients at an increased risk of death. The Leicester score (LS) is a new score that predicts CSA-AKI of any stage with better discrimination compared to previous scores. The aim of this study was to identify risk factors for CSA-AKI and to assess the performance of LS. A unicentric retrospective study of patients that required cardiac surgery with cardio-pulmonary bypass (CPB) in 2015 was performed. The inclusion criteria were patients over 18 years old who were operated on for cardiac surgery (valve substitution (VS), Coronary Artery Bypass Graft (CABG), or a combination of both procedures and requiring CPB). CSA-AKI was defined with the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) criteria. In the multivariate analysis, hypertension (odds ratio 1.883), estimated glomerular filtration rate (EGFR) <60 mL/min (2.365), and peripheral vascular disease (4.66) were associated with the outcome. Both discrimination and calibration were better when the LS was used compared to the Cleveland Clinic Score and Euroscore II, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.721. In conclusion, preoperative hypertension in patients with CKD with or without peripheral vasculopathy can identify patients who are at risk of CSA-AKI. The LS was proven to be a valid score that could be used to identify patients who are at risk and who could benefit from intervention studies

Table_1_Impact of cardiac surgery associated acute kidney injury on 1-year major adverse kidney events.docx

BackgroundThe incidence of acute kidney injury following cardiac surgery (CSA-AKI) is up to 30%, and the risk of chronic kidney disease (CKD) has been found to be higher in these patients compared to the AKI-free population. The aim of our study was to assess the risk of major adverse kidney events (MAKE) [25% or greater decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), new hemodialysis, and death] after cardiac surgery in a Spanish cohort and to evaluate the utility of the score developed by Legouis D et al. (CSA-CKD score) in predicting the occurrence of MAKE.MethodsThis was a single-center retrospective study of patients who required cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) during 2015, with a 1-year follow-up after the intervention. The inclusion criteria were patients over 18 years old who had undergone cardiac surgery [i.e., valve substitution (VS), coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), or a combination of both procedures].ResultsThe number of patients with CKD (eGFR ConclusionAny-stage CSA-AKI is associated with a risk of MAKE after 1 year. Further research into new measures that identify at-risk patients is needed so that appropriate patient follow-up can be carried out.</p

Effects of pre-operative isolation on postoperative pulmonary complications after elective surgery: an international prospective cohort study an international prospective cohort study

We aimed to determine the impact of pre-operative isolation on postoperative pulmonary complications after elective surgery during the global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. We performed an international prospective cohort study including patients undergoing elective surgery in October 2020. Isolation was defined as the period before surgery during which patients did not leave their house or receive visitors from outside their household. The primary outcome was postoperative pulmonary complications, adjusted in multivariable models for measured confounders. Pre-defined sub-group analyses were performed for the primary outcome. A total of 96,454 patients from 114 countries were included and overall, 26,948 (27.9%) patients isolated before surgery. Postoperative pulmonary complications were recorded in 1947 (2.0%) patients of which 227 (11.7%) were associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Patients who isolated pre-operatively were older, had more respiratory comorbidities and were more commonly from areas of high SARS-CoV-2 incidence and high-income countries. Although the overall rates of postoperative pulmonary complications were similar in those that isolated and those that did not (2.1% vs 2.0%, respectively), isolation was associated with higher rates of postoperative pulmonary complications after adjustment (adjusted OR 1.20, 95%CI 1.05–1.36, p = 0.005). Sensitivity analyses revealed no further differences when patients were categorised by: pre-operative testing; use of COVID-19-free pathways; or community SARS-CoV-2 prevalence. The rate of postoperative pulmonary complications increased with periods of isolation longer than 3 days, with an OR (95%CI) at 4–7 days or ≥ 8 days of 1.25 (1.04–1.48), p = 0.015 and 1.31 (1.11–1.55), p = 0.001, respectively. Isolation before elective surgery might be associated with a small but clinically important increased risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. Longer periods of isolation showed no reduction in the risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. These findings have significant implications for global provision of elective surgical care. We aimed to determine the impact of pre-operative isolation on postoperative pulmonary complications after elective surgery during the global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. We performed an international prospective cohort study including patients undergoing elective surgery in October 2020. Isolation was defined as the period before surgery during which patients did not leave their house or receive visitors from outside their household. The primary outcome was postoperative pulmonary complications, adjusted in multivariable models for measured confounders. Pre-defined sub-group analyses were performed for the primary outcome. A total of 96,454 patients from 114 countries were included and overall, 26,948 (27.9%) patients isolated before surgery. Postoperative pulmonary complications were recorded in 1947 (2.0%) patients of which 227 (11.7%) were associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Patients who isolated pre-operatively were older, had more respiratory comorbidities and were more commonly from areas of high SARS-CoV-2 incidence and high-income countries. Although the overall rates of postoperative pulmonary complications were similar in those that isolated and those that did not (2.1% vs 2.0%, respectively), isolation was associated with higher rates of postoperative pulmonary complications after adjustment (adjusted OR 1.20, 95%CI 1.05–1.36, p = 0.005). Sensitivity analyses revealed no further differences when patients were categorised by: pre-operative testing; use of COVID-19-free pathways; or community SARS-CoV-2 prevalence. The rate of postoperative pulmonary complications increased with periods of isolation longer than 3 days, with an OR (95%CI) at 4–7 days or ≥ 8 days of 1.25 (1.04–1.48), p = 0.015 and 1.31 (1.11–1.55), p = 0.001, respectively. Isolation before elective surgery might be associated with a small but clinically important increased risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. Longer periods of isolation showed no reduction in the risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. These findings have significant implications for global provision of elective surgical care

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field