IgG4-related disease: results from a multicenter Spanish registry

IgG4-related disease (IgG4-RD) is a rare entity consisting of inflammation and fibrosis that has been described in multiple organs. Concrete diagnostic criteria have been established recently and there is a lack of large series of patients.To describe the clinical presentation, histopathological characteristics, treatment and evolution of a series of IgG4-RD Spanish patients.A retrospective multicenter study was performed. Twelve hospitals across Spain included patients meeting the current 2012 consensus criteria on IgG4-RD diagnosis.Fifty-five patients were included in the study, 38 of whom (69.1%) were male. Median age at diagnosis was 53 years. Thirty (54.5%) patients were included in the Histologically Highly Suggestive IgG4-RD group and 25 (45.5%) in the probable IgG4-RD group. Twenty-six (47.3%) patients had more than 1 organ affected at presentation. The most frequently affected organs were: retroperitoneum, orbital pseudotumor, pancreas, salivary and lachrymal glands, and maxillary sinuses.Corticosteroids were the mainstay of treatment (46 patients, 83.6%). Eighteen patients (32.7%) required additional immunosuppressive agents. Twenty-four (43.6%) patients achieved a complete response and 26 (43.7%) presented a partial response (<50% of regression) after 22 months of follow-up. No deaths were attributed directly to IgG4-RD and malignancy was infrequent.This is the largest IgG4-RD series reported in Europe. Patients were middle-aged males, with histologically probable IgG4-RD. The systemic form of the disease was frequent, involving mainly sites of the head and abdomen. Corticosteroids were an effective first line treatment, sometimes combined with immunosuppressive agents. Neither fatalities nor malignancies were attributed to IgG4-RD

Estimating the Prevalence of Cardiac Amyloidosis in Old Patients with Heart Failure—Barriers and Opportunities for Improvement: The PREVAMIC Study

Background: Cardiac amyloidosis (CA) could be a common cause of heart failure (HF). The objective of the study was to estimate the prevalence of CA in patients with HF. Methods: Observational, prospective, and multicenter study involving 30 Spanish hospitals. A total of 453 patients >= 65 years with HF and an interventricular septum or posterior wall thickness > 12 mm were included. All patients underwent a Tc-99m-DPD/PYP/HMDP scintigraphy and monoclonal bands were studied, following the current criteria for non-invasive diagnosis. In inconclusive cases, biopsies were performed. Results: The vast majority of CA were diagnosed non-invasively. The prevalence was 20.1%. Most of the CA were transthyretin (ATTR-CM, 84.6%), with a minority of cardiac light-chain amyloidosis (AL-CM, 2.2%). The remaining (13.2%) was untyped. The prevalence was significantly higher in men (60.1% vs 39.9%, p = 0.019). Of the patients with CA, 26.5% had a left ventricular ejection fraction less than 50%. Conclusions: CA was the cause of HF in one out of five patients and should be screened in the elderly with HF and myocardial thickening, regardless of sex and LVEF. Few transthyretin-gene-sequencing studies were performed in older patients. In many patients, it was not possible to determine the amyloid subtype

Ethnicity and Clinical Outcomes in Patients Hospitalized for COVID-19 in Spain: Results from the Multicenter SEMI-COVID-19 Registry

Background: This work aims to analyze clinical outcomes according to ethnic groups in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 in Spain. (2) Methods: This nationwide, retrospective, multicenter, observational study analyzed hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19 in 150 Spanish hospitals (SEMI-COVID-19 Registry) from 1 March 2020 to 31 December 2021. Clinical outcomes were assessed according to ethnicity (Latin Americans, Sub-Saharan Africans, Asians, North Africans, Europeans). The outcomes were in-hospital mortality (IHM), intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and the use of invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). Associations between ethnic groups and clinical outcomes adjusted for patient characteristics and baseline Charlson Comorbidity Index values and wave were evaluated using logistic regression. (3) Results: Of 23,953 patients (median age 69.5 years, 42.9% women), 7.0% were Latin American, 1.2% were North African, 0.5% were Asian, 0.5% were Sub-Saharan African, and 89.7% were European. Ethnic minority patients were significantly younger than European patients (median (IQR) age 49.1 (40.5-58.9) to 57.1 (44.1-67.1) vs. 71.5 (59.5-81.4) years, p < 0.001). The unadjusted IHM was higher in European (21.6%) versus North African (11.4%), Asian (10.9%), Latin American (7.1%), and Sub-Saharan African (3.2%) patients. After further adjustment, the IHM was lower in Sub-Saharan African (OR 0.28 (0.10-0.79), p = 0.017) versus European patients, while ICU admission rates were higher in Latin American and North African versus European patients (OR (95%CI) 1.37 (1.17-1.60), p < 0.001) and (OR (95%CI) 1.74 (1.26-2.41), p < 0.001). Moreover, Latin American patients were 39% more likely than European patients to use IMV (OR (95%CI) 1.43 (1.21-1.71), p < 0.001). (4) Conclusion: The adjusted IHM was similar in all groups except for Sub-Saharan Africans, who had lower IHM. Latin American patients were admitted to the ICU and required IMV more often

Use of glucocorticoids megadoses in SARS-CoV-2 infection in a spanish registry: SEMI-COVID-19

Objective To describe the impact of different doses of corticosteroids on the evolution of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, based on the potential benefit of the non-genomic mechanism of these drugs at higher doses. Methods Observational study using data collected from the SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. We evaluated the epidemiological, radiological and analytical scenario between patients treated with megadoses therapy of corticosteroids vs low-dose of corticosteroids and the development of complications. The primary endpoint was all-cause in-hospital mortality according to use of corticosteroids megadoses. Results Of a total of 14,921 patients, corticosteroids were used in 5,262 (35.3%). Of them, 2,216 (46%) specifically received megadoses. Age was a factor that differed between those who received megadoses therapy versus those who did not in a significant manner (69 years [IQR 59-79] vs 73 years [IQR 61-83]; p < .001). Radiological and analytical findings showed a higher use of megadoses therapy among patients with an interstitial infiltrate and elevated inflammatory markers associated with COVID-19. In the univariate study it appears that steroid use is associated with increased mortality (OR 2.07 95% CI 1.91-2.24 p < .001) and megadose use with increased survival (OR 0.84 95% CI 0.75-0.96, p 0.011), but when adjusting for possible confounding factors, it is observed that the use of megadoses is also associated with higher mortality (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.32-1.80; p < .001). There is no difference between megadoses and low-dose (p.298). Although, there are differences in the use of megadoses versus low-dose in terms of complications, mainly infectious, with fewer pneumonias and sepsis in the megadoses group (OR 0.82 95% CI 0.71-0.95; p < .001 and OR 0.80 95% CI 0.65-0.97; p < .001) respectively. Conclusion There is no difference in mortality with megadoses versus low-dose, but there is a lower incidence of infectious complications with glucocorticoid megadoses

Prognostic Value of D-dimer to Lymphocyte Ratio (DLR) in Hospitalized Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Patients: A Validation Study in a National Cohort

Background: This study aimed to validate the role of the D-dimer to lymphocyte ratio (DLR) for mortality prediction in a large national cohort of hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. Methods: A retrospective, multicenter, observational study that included hospitalized patients due to SARS-CoV-2 infection in Spain was conducted from March 2020 to March 2022. All biomarkers and laboratory indices analyzed were measured once at admission. Results: A total of 10,575 COVID-19 patients were included in this study. The mean age of participants was 66.9 (+/- 16) years, and 58.6% (6202 patients) of them were male. The overall mortality rate was 16.3% (n = 1726 patients). Intensive care unit admission was needed in 10.5% (n = 1106 patients), non-invasive mechanical ventilation was required in 8.8% (n = 923 patients), and orotracheal intubation was required in 7.5% (789 patients). DLR presented a c-statistic of 0.69 (95% CI, 0.68-0.71) for in-hospital mortality with an optimal cut-off above 1. Multivariate analysis showed an independent association for in-hospital mortality for DLR > 1 (adjusted OR 2.09, 95% CI 1.09-4.04; p = 0.03); in the same way, survival analysis showed a higher mortality risk for DLR > 1 (HR 2.24; 95% CI 2.03-2.47; p < 0.01). Further, no other laboratory indices showed an independent association for mortality in multivariate analysis. Conclusions: This study confirmed the usefulness of DLR as a prognostic biomarker for mortality associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection, being an accessible, cost-effective, and easy-to-use biomarker in daily clinical practice

Gender-Based Differences by Age Range in Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19: A Spanish Observational Cohort Study

There is some evidence that male gender could have a negative impact on the prognosis and severity of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. The aim of the present study was to compare the characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) between hospitalized men and women with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. This multicenter, retrospective, observational study is based on the SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. We analyzed the differences between men and women for a wide variety of demographic, clinical, and treatment variables, and the sex distribution of the reported COVID-19 deaths, as well as intensive care unit (ICU) admission by age subgroups. This work analyzed 12,063 patients (56.8% men). The women in our study were older than the men, on average (67.9 vs. 65.7 years; p < 001). Bilateral condensation was more frequent among men than women (31.8% vs. 29.9%; p = 0.007). The men needed non-invasive and invasive mechanical ventilation more frequently (5.6% vs. 3.6%, p < 0.001, and 7.9% vs. 4.8%, p < 0.001, respectively). The most prevalent complication was acute respiratory distress syndrome, with severe cases in 19.9% of men (p < 0.001). In men, intensive care unit admission was more frequent (10% vs. 6.1%; p < 0.001) and the mortality rate was higher (23.1% vs. 18.9%; p < 0.001). Regarding mortality, the differences by gender were statistically significant in the age groups from 55 years to 89 years of age. A multivariate analysis showed that female sex was significantly and independently associated with a lower risk of mortality in our study. Male sex appears to be related to worse progress in COVID-19 patients and is an independent prognostic factor for mortality. In order to fully understand its prognostic impact, other factors associated with sex must be considered

Fundamentos clínicos del consejo genético en cáncer hereditario

Describimos como se aplican a la asistencia sanitaria los conocimientos en cáncer hereditario dentro. El Consejo Genético es el proceso de información llevado a cabo en Unidades de Consejo Genético en las que se estima el riesgo individual de mutación y de cáncer, se realizan pruebas genéticas autorizadas mediante Consentimiento Informado, se entrega el resultado y se recomiendan medidas de seguimiento y reducción de riesgo. El test genético se ofrecerá si existe un gen susceptible de estudio, y es posible interpretar su resultado para ayudar al diagnóstico del síndrome hereditario así como para el manejo medico-quirúrgico del individuo en riesgo. Es imprescindible que se haga en el contexto del Consejo Genético antes y después de la prueba.We describe the Genetic Counseling as the translation of the hereditary cancer knowledge to the clinical practice. Genetic counseling is a process for information, which takes place at the Genetic Counseling Units, where individual cancer risk and mutation risk are estimated, genetic tests are performed authorized through the Informed Consent Document, the genetic test?s results are discussed, and screening and risk reducing strategies are recommended. The genetic test is offered when there is a suitable gene for the study, with meaningful results for the diagnosis of the hereditay syndrome and for the medical and surgical management of individuals at risk. It is essential that the genetic test be done within the Genetic Counseling before and after the test

Effects of noise type on speech understanding

abstractpublished_or_final_versionSpeech and Hearing SciencesMasterMaster of Science in Audiolog

WHO Ordinal Scale and Inflammation Risk Categories in COVID-19

Background: The WHO ordinal severity scale has been used to predict mortality and guide trials in COVID-19. However, it has its limitations. Objective The present study aims to compare three classificatory and predictive models: the WHO ordinal severity scale, the model based on inflammation grades, and the hybrid model. Design Retrospective cohort study with patient data collected and followed up from March 1, 2020, to May 1, 2021, from the nationwide SEMI-COVID-19 Registry. The primary study outcome was in-hospital mortality. As this was a hospital-based study, the patients included corresponded to categories 3 to 7 of the WHO ordinal scale. Categories 6 and 7 were grouped in the same category. Key Results A total of 17,225 patients were included in the study. Patients classified as high risk in each of the WHO categories according to the degree of inflammation were as follows: 63.8% vs. 79.9% vs. 90.2% vs. 95.1% (p<0.001). In-hospital mortality for WHO ordinal scale categories 3 to 6/7 was as follows: 0.8% vs. 24.3% vs. 45.3% vs. 34% (p<0.001). In-hospital mortality for the combined categories of ordinal scale 3a to 5b was as follows: 0.4% vs. 1.1% vs. 11.2% vs. 27.5% vs. 35.5% vs. 41.1% (p<0.001). The predictive regression model for in-hospital mortality with our proposed combined ordinal scale reached an AUC=0.871, superior to the two models separately. Conclusions The present study proposes a new severity grading scale for COVID-19 hospitalized patients. In our opinion, it is the most informative, representative, and predictive scale in COVID-19 patients to date