Burnout among surgeons before and during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: an international survey

Background: SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has had many significant impacts within the surgical realm, and surgeons have been obligated to reconsider almost every aspect of daily clinical practice. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study reported in compliance with the CHERRIES guidelines and conducted through an online platform from June 14th to July 15th, 2020. The primary outcome was the burden of burnout during the pandemic indicated by the validated Shirom-Melamed Burnout Measure. Results: Nine hundred fifty-four surgeons completed the survey. The median length of practice was 10 years; 78.2% included were male with a median age of 37 years old, 39.5% were consultants, 68.9% were general surgeons, and 55.7% were affiliated with an academic institution. Overall, there was a significant increase in the mean burnout score during the pandemic; longer years of practice and older age were significantly associated with less burnout. There were significant reductions in the median number of outpatient visits, operated cases, on-call hours, emergency visits, and research work, so, 48.2% of respondents felt that the training resources were insufficient. The majority (81.3%) of respondents reported that their hospitals were included in the management of COVID-19, 66.5% felt their roles had been minimized; 41% were asked to assist in non-surgical medical practices, and 37.6% of respondents were included in COVID-19 management. Conclusions: There was a significant burnout among trainees. Almost all aspects of clinical and research activities were affected with a significant reduction in the volume of research, outpatient clinic visits, surgical procedures, on-call hours, and emergency cases hindering the training. Trial registration: The study was registered on clicaltrials.gov "NCT04433286" on 16/06/2020

Dose Comparison Study of Allogeneic Mesenchymal Stem Cells in Patients With Ischemic Cardiomyopathy (The TRIDENT Study)

RATIONALE: Cell dose and concentration play crucial roles in phenotypic responses to cell-based therapy for heart failure. OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety and efficacy of two doses of allogeneic bone marrow-derived human mesenchymal stem cells (hMSC) identically delivered in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM). METHODS AND RESULTS: Thirty patients with ICM received in a blinded manner either 20 million (20M, n=15) or 100 million (100M, n=15) allogeneic hMSCs via transendocardial injection (10 0.5 cc injections/patient). Patients were followed for 12-months for safety and efficacy endpoints. There were no treatment-emergent serious adverse events (SAE) at 30 days or treatment related SAEs at 12 months. The Major Adverse Cardiac Event rate was 20.0% (95% CI, 6.9%, 50.0%) in 20M and 13.3% (95% CI, 3.5%, 43.6%) in 100M (p=0.58). Worsening heart failure re-hospitalization was 20.0% (95% CI, 6.9%, 50.0%) in 20M and 7.1% (95% CI, 1.0%, 40.9%) in 100M (p=0.27). Whereas scar size reduced to a similar degree in both groups: 20M by −6.4g (IQR, −13.5g, −3.4g, p=0.001) and 100M by −6.1g (IQR, −8.1g, −4.6g, p=0.0002), the ejection fraction (EF) improved only with 100M by 3.7 units (IQR, 1.1, 6.1, p=0.04). NYHA class improved at 12 months in 35.7% (95% CI, 12.7%, 64.9%) in 20M and 42.9% (95% CI, 17.7%, 71.1%) in 100M. Importantly, pro-BNP increased at 12 months in 20M by 0.32 log pg/mL (95% CI, 0.02, 0.62, p=0.039), but not in 100M (−0.07 log pg/mL; 95% CI, −0.36, 0.23, p=0.65; between group p=0.07). CONCLUSION: Although both cell doses reduced scar size, only the 100M dose increased EF. This study highlights the crucial role of cell dose in the responses to cell therapy. Determining optimal dose and delivery is essential to advance the field, decipher mechanism(s) of action, and enhance planning of pivotal Phase III trials. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCTO2013674 [https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02013674

Randomized Comparison of Allogeneic Versus Autologous Mesenchymal Stem Cells for Nonischemic Dilated Cardiomyopathy

BACKGROUND: While human mesenchymal stem cells (hMSCs) have been tested in ischemic cardiomyopathy, few studies exist in chronic non-ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy (NIDCM). OBJECTIVES: The POSEIDON-DCM trial is a randomized comparison of safety and efficacy of autologous (auto) vs. allogeneic (allo) bone marrow-derived hMSCs in NIDCM. METHODS: Thirty-seven patients were randomized to either allo- or auto-hMSCs in a 1:1 ratio. Patients were recruited between December 2011 and July 2015 at the University of Miami Hospital. Patients (age: 55.8 ± 11.2; 32% female) received hMSCs (100 million) by transendocardial stem cell injection (TESI) in ten left ventricular sites by NOGA Catheter. Treated patients were evaluated at baseline, 30 days, 3-, 6-, and 12-months for safety: serious adverse events (SAE), and efficacy endpoints: Ejection Fraction (EF), Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ), Six Minute Walk Test (6MWT), MACE, and immune-biomarkers. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, #NCT01392625. RESULTS: There were no 30-day treatment-emergent (TE)-SAEs. 12-month SAE incidence was 28.2% (95% CI: 12.8, 55.1) in allo, and 63.5% (95% CI: 40.8, 85.7; p=0.1004) in auto. One allo-group patient developed an elevated donor specific cPRA. EF increased in allo by 8.0 units (95% Cl: 2.8, 13.2; p=0.004), and in auto: 5.4 units (95% Cl: −1.4, 12.1; p=0.116, allo vs. auto p=0.4887). 6MWT increased for allo: 37.0 meters (95% Cl: 2.0 to 72.0; p=0.04), but not auto: 7.3 meters (95% Cl: −47.8, 33.3; p=0.71, auto vs. allo p=0.0168). MLHFQ score decreased in allo (p=0.0022), and auto (p=0.463; p=0.172). The MACE rate was lower in allo vs. auto (p=0.0186). Tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) decreased (p=0.0001 for each), to a greater extent in allo vs. auto at six-months (p=0.05). CONCLUSION: These findings demonstrate safety and support greater, clinically meaningful efficacy of allo-hMSC vs. auto-hMSC in NIDCM patients. Pivotal trials of allo-hMSCs are warranted based on these results