Prediction of the survival and functional ability of severe stroke patients after ICU therapeutic intervention

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>This study evaluated the benefits and impact of ICU therapeutic interventions on the survival and functional ability of severe cerebrovascular accident (CVA) patients.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Sixty-two ICU patients suffering from severe ischemic/haemorrhagic stroke were evaluated for CVA severity using APACHE II and the Glasgow coma scale (GCS). Survival was determined using Kaplan-Meier survival tables and survival prediction factors were determined by Cox multivariate analysis. Functional ability was assessed using the stroke impact scale (SIS-16) and Karnofsky score. Risk factors, life support techniques and neurosurgical interventions were recorded. One year post-CVA dependency was investigated using multivariate analysis based on linear regression.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The study cohort constituted 6% of all CVA (37.8% haemorrhagic/62.2% ischemic) admissions. Patient mean(SD) age was 65.8(12.3) years with a 1:1 male: female ratio. During the study period 16 patients had died within the ICU and seven in the year following hospital release.</p> <p>The mean(SD) APACHE II score at hospital admission was 14.9(6.0) and ICU mean duration of stay was 11.2(15.4) days. Mechanical ventilation was required in 37.1% of cases. Risk ratios were; GCS at admission 0.8(0.14), (p = 0.024), APACHE II 1.11(0.11), (p = 0.05) and duration of mechanical ventilation 1.07(0.07), (p = 0.046). Linear coefficients were: type of CVA – haemorrhagic versus ischemic: -18.95(4.58) (p = 0.007), GCS at hospital admission: -6.83(1.08), (p = 0.001), and duration of hospital stay -0.38(0.14), (p = 0.40).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>To ensure a better prognosis CVA patients require ICU therapeutic interventions. However, as we have shown, where tests can determine the worst affected patients with a poor vital and functional outcome should treatment be withheld?</p

Pharmacologic prophylaxis for atrial fibrillation following cardiac surgery: a systematic review

Atrial Fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia occurring after cardiac surgery. Its incidence varies depending on type of surgery. Postoperative AF may cause hemodynamic deterioration, predispose to stroke and increase mortality. Effective treatment for prophylaxis of postoperative AF is vital as reduces hospitalization and overall morbidity. Beta - blockers, have been proved to prevent effectively atrial fibrillation following cardiac surgery and should be routinely used if there are no contraindications. Sotalol may be more effective than standard b-blockers for the prevention of AF without causing an excess of side effects. Amiodarone is useful when beta-blocker therapy is not possible or as additional prophylaxis in high risk patients. Other agents such as magnesium, calcium channels blocker or non-antiarrhythmic drugs as glycose-insulin - potassium, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, corticosteroids, N-acetylcysteine and statins have been studied as alternative treatment for postoperative AF prophylaxis

Amiodarone for postoperative atrial fibrillation [5] (multiple letters)

PubMed ID: 14752462[No abstract available

A cost-effectiveness analysis of first-line induction and maintenance treatment sequences in patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer in France

Kaisa Taipale,1 Katherine B Winfree,2 Mark Boye,2 Mickael Basson,3 Ghassan Sleilaty,4 James Eaton,5 Rachel Evans,5 Christos Chouaid6 1Global Patient Outcomes and Real World Evidence International, Oy Eli Lilly Finland AB, Helsinki, Finland; 2Global Patient Outcomes and Real World Evidence, Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA; 3Corporate Affairs, Lilly France, Neuilly-sur-Seine, 4Bio-Medicines Medical Affairs, Lilly France, Neuilly-sur-Seine, France; 5ICON Health Economics and Epidemiology, ICON Plc, Milton Park, UK; 6Thoracic Oncology, Service de Pneumologie, Centre Hospitalier Intercommunal Cr&eacute;teil, Cr&eacute;teil, France Background: Comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness data for induction&ndash;maintenance (I&ndash;M) sequences for the treatment of patients with nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (nsqNSCLC) are limited because of a lack of direct evidence. This analysis aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of I&ndash;M pemetrexed with those of other I&ndash;M regimens used for the treatment of patients with advanced nsqNSCLC in the French health-care setting. Materials and methods: A previously developed global partitioned survival model was adapted to the France-only setting by restricting treatment sequences to include 12 I&ndash;M regimens most relevant to France, and incorporating French costs and resource-use data. Following a systematic literature review, network meta-analyses were performed to obtain hazard ratios for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) relative to gemcitabine + cisplatin (induction sequences) or best supportive care (BSC) (maintenance sequences). Modeled health-care benefits were expressed as life-years (LYs) and quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs) (estimated using French EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire tariffs). The study was conducted from the payer perspective (National Health Insurance). Cost- and benefit-model inputs were discounted at an annual rate of 4%. Results: Base-case results showed pemetrexed + cisplatin induction followed by (&rarr;) pemetrexed maintenance had the longest mean OS and PFS and highest LYs and QALYs. Costs ranged from &euro;12,762 for paclitaxel + carboplatin &rarr; BSC to &euro;35,617 for pemetrexed + cisplatin &rarr; pemetrexed (2015 values). Gemcitabine + cisplatin &rarr; BSC, pemetrexed + cisplatin &rarr; BSC, and pemetrexed + cisplatin &rarr; pemetrexed were associated with fully incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of &euro;16,593, &euro;80,656, and &euro;102,179, respectively, per QALY gained versus paclitaxel + carboplatin &rarr; BSC. All other treatment sequences were either dominated (ie, another sequence had lower costs and better/equivalent outcomes) or extendedly dominated (ie, the comparator had a higher ICER than a more effective comparator) in the model. Sensitivity analyses showed the model to be relatively insensitive to plausible changes in the main assumptions, with none increasing or decreasing the ICER by more than ~&euro;20,000 per QALY gained. Conclusion: In the absence of direct comparative trial evidence, this cost-effectiveness analysis indicated that of a large number of I&ndash;M sequences used for the treatment of patients with nsqNSCLC in France, pemetrexed + cisplatin &rarr; pemetrexed achieved the best clinical outcomes (0.28 incremental QALYs gained) versus paclitaxel + carboplatin &rarr; BSC. Keywords: advanced nonsquamous NSCLC, cost-effectiveness, France, induction&ndash;maintenance, pemetrexed, quality-adjusted life-year