Quel rôle peut-on imputer aux banques à charte canadiennes dans la transmission des chocs monétaires des années quatre-vingt?

Cette recherche s’inscrit dans la foulée de nombreux travaux entrepris suite aux publications de Bernanke et Blinder (1988, 1992) ayant remis à l’avant-plan le rôle joué par le système bancaire dans la transmission de la politique monétaire. Nous proposons d’examiner la dynamique inhérente à certains postes du bilan des banques à charte canadiennes suite aux mouvement des principaux taux d’intérêt, habituellement jugés révélateurs des conditions monétaires du moment. Pour ce faire, nous avons recours à un modèle VAR hebdomadaire comportant à la fois, des éléments de l’actif et du passif des banques ainsi que les taux de rendement associés à divers instruments financiers. Cependant, dans le but de bien encadrer cette analyse, nous développons un modèle formel du comportement d’une banque où les seuls changements aux postes de son bilan suite aux mouvements de taux d’intérêt sont dictés par des ajustements de portefeuille visant à tirer avantage des écarts se creusant entre ceux-ci. Ce modèle théorique est soumis aux variations de taux d’intérêt issues du modèle empirique VAR. Les mouvements observés aux postes du bilan de cette banque « témoin » fournissent un guide utile permettant d’interpréter de façon éclairée les résultats empiriques obtenus. À cet égard, l’exercice proposé montre qu’il est possible d’établir un parallèle assez étroit entre l’évolution des postes du bilan de la banque hypothétique et celle captée par le modèle VAR et ainsi apporte un certain support à l’approche traditionnelle sur le rôle joué par les banques dans la transmission des chocs monétaires.This paper can be seen as a contribution to a growing literature initiated by Bernanke and Blinder (1988, 1992) which have examined the role played by the banking system in the transmission of monetary policy. We propose to study the dynamic behaviour of the balance sheet of Canadian chartered banks following a shock to some key interest rates which are good indicators of the prevailing monetary conditions. More specifically, we estimate a weekly VAR model which comprises key asset and liabilities elements as well as rates of return on major financial instruments. However, to guide this empirical inquiry, we set up a model of a representative bank which adjusts its balance sheet elements according to the interest rate spreads arising in the financial markets. This theoretical model is then subjected to the same interest rate shocks than those imposed on the VAR model: the adjustments observed in this laboratory will prove quite useful to assess the significance of the empirical results uncovered by the VAR model. Overall, we find that both approaches give rise to quite similar dynamic responses which tends to support the traditional role of the banking sector in the transmission of monetary policy

Incidence of thrombotic complications and overall survival in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in the second and first wave

INTRODUCTION: In the first wave, thrombotic complications were common in COVID-19 patients. It is unknown whether state-of-the-art treatment has resulted in less thrombotic complications in the second wave. METHODS: We assessed the incidence of thrombotic complications and overall mortality in COVID-19 patients admitted to eight Dutch hospitals between September 1st and November 30th 2020. Follow-up ended at discharge, transfer to another hospital, when they died, or on November 30th 2020, whichever came first. Cumulative incidences were estimated, adjusted for competing risk of death. These were compared to those observed in 579 patients admitted in the first wave, between February 24th and April 26th 2020, by means of Cox regression techniques adjusted for age, sex and weight. RESULTS: In total 947 patients with COVID-19 were included in this analysis, of whom 358 patients were admitted to the ICU; 144 patients died (15%). The adjusted cumulative incidence of all thrombotic complications after 10, 20 and 30 days was 12% (95% confidence interval (CI) 9.8-15%), 16% (13-19%) and 21% (17-25%), respectively. Patient characteristics between the first and second wave were comparable. The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for overall mortality in the second wave versus the first wave was 0.53 (95%CI 0.41-0.70). The adjusted HR for any thrombotic complication in the second versus the first wave was 0.89 (95%CI 0.65-1.2). CONCLUSIONS: Mortality was reduced by 47% in the second wave, but the thrombotic complication rate remained high, and comparable to the first wave. Careful attention to provision of adequate thromboprophylaxis is invariably warranted

Incidence of thrombotic complications and overall survival in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in the second and first wave

INTRODUCTION: In the first wave, thrombotic complications were common in COVID-19 patients. It is unknown whether state-of-the-art treatment has resulted in less thrombotic complications in the second wave. METHODS: We assessed the incidence of thrombotic complications and overall mortality in COVID-19 patients admitted to eight Dutch hospitals between September 1st and November 30th 2020. Follow-up ended at discharge, transfer to another hospital, when they died, or on November 30th 2020, whichever came first. Cumulative incidences were estimated, adjusted for competing risk of death. These were compared to those observed in 579 patients admitted in the first wave, between February 24th and April 26th 2020, by means of Cox regression techniques adjusted for age, sex and weight. RESULTS: In total 947 patients with COVID-19 were included in this analysis, of whom 358 patients were admitted to the ICU; 144 patients died (15%). The adjusted cumulative incidence of all thrombotic complications after 10, 20 and 30 days was 12% (95% confidence interval (CI) 9.8-15%), 16% (13-19%) and 21% (17-25%), respectively. Patient characteristics between the first and second wave were comparable. The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for overall mortality in the second wave versus the first wave was 0.53 (95%CI 0.41-0.70). The adjusted HR for any thrombotic complication in the second versus the first wave was 0.89 (95%CI 0.65-1.2). CONCLUSIONS: Mortality was reduced by 47% in the second wave, but the thrombotic complication rate remained high, and comparable to the first wave. Careful attention to provision of adequate thromboprophylaxis is invariably warranted

Efficacy and Safety of Outpatient Treatment Based on the Hestia Clinical Decision Rule with or without N-Terminal Pro-Brain Natriuretic Peptide Testing in Patients with Acute Pulmonary Embolism A Randomized Clinical Trial: American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine

Rationale: Outpatient treatment ofpulmonary embolism (PE) maylead to improved patient satisfaction and reduced healthcare costs. However, trials to assess its safety and the optimal method for patient selection are scarce. Objectives: To validate the utility and safety of selecting patients with PE for outpatient treatment by the Hestia criteria and to compare the safety of the Hestia criteria alone with the Hestia criteria combined with N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) testing. Methods: We performed a randomized noninferiority trial in 17 Dutch hospitals. We randomized patients with PE without any of the Hestia criteria to direct discharge or additional NT-proBNP testing. We discharged the latter patients as well if NT-proBNP did not exceed 500 ng/L or admitted them if NT-proBNP was greater than 500 ng/L. The primary endpoint was 30-day adverse outcome defined as PE- or bleeding-related mortality, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, or intensive care unit admission. The noninferiority margin for the primary endpoint was 3.4%. Measurements and Main Results: We randomized 550 patients. In the NT-proBNP group, 34 of 275 (12%) had elevated NT-proBNP values and were managed as inpatients. No patient (0 of 34) with an elevated NT-proBNP level treated in hospital (0%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0-10.2%), versus no patient (0 of 23) with apost hoc-determined elevated NT-proBNP level from the direct discharge group (0%; 95% CI, 0-14.8%), experienced the primary endpoint. In both trial cohorts, the primary endpoint occurred in none of the 275 patients (0%; 95% CI, 0-1.3%) subjected to NT-proBNP testing, versus in 3 of 275 patients (1.1%; 95% CI, 02-3.2%) in the direct discharge group (P = 0.25). During the 3-month follow-up, recurrent venous thromboembolism occurred in two patients (0.73%; 95% CI, 0.1-2.6%) in the NT-proBNP group versus three patients (1.1%; 95% CI, 0.2-3.2%) in the direct discharge group (P = 0.65). Conclusions: Outpatient treatment of patients with PE selected on the basis of the Hestia criteria alone was associated with a low risk of adverse events. Given the low number of patients with elevated NT-proBNP levels, this trial was unable to draw definite conclusions regarding the incremental value of NT-proBNP testing in patients who fulfill the Hestia criteria

Circulating adipokine levels and COVID-19 severity in hospitalized patients

BACKGROUND: Obesity is a risk factor for adverse outcomes in COVID-19, potentially driven by chronic inflammatory state due to dysregulated secretion of adipokines and cytokines. We investigated the association between plasma adipokines and COVID-19 severity, systemic inflammation, clinical parameters, and outcome of COVID-19 patients. METHODS: In this multi-centre prospective cross-sectional study, we collected blood samples and clinical data from COVID-19 patients. The severity of COVID-19 was classified as mild (no hospital admission), severe (ward admission), and critical (ICU admission). ICU non-COVID-19 patients were also included and plasma from healthy age, sex, and BMI-matched individuals obtained from Lifelines. Multi-analyte profiling of plasma adipokines (Leptin, Adiponectin, Resistin, Visfatin) and inflammatory markers (IL-6, TNFα, IL-10) were determined using Luminex multiplex assays. RESULTS: Between March and December 2020, 260 SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals (age: 65 [56-74] BMI 27.0 [24.4-30.6]) were included: 30 mild, 159 severe, and 71 critical patients. Circulating leptin levels were reduced in critically ill patients with a high BMI yet this decrease was absent in patients that were administered dexamethasone. Visfatin levels were higher in critical COVID-19 patients compared to non-COVID-ICU, mild and severe patients (4.7 vs 3.4, 3.0, and 3.72 ng/mL respectively, p < 0.05). Lower Adiponectin levels, but higher Resistin levels were found in severe and critical patients, compared to those that did not require hospitalization (3.65, 2.7 vs 7.9 µg/mL, p < 0.001, and 18.2, 22.0 vs 11.0 ng/mL p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Circulating adipokine levels are associated with COVID-19 hospitalization, i.e., the need for oxygen support (general ward), or the need for mechanical ventilation and other organ support in the ICU, but not mortality

Ruling out Pulmonary Embolism in Patients with (Suspected) COVID-19-A Prospective Cohort Study

Background Diagnostic strategies for suspected pulmonary embolism (PE) have not been prospectively evaluated in COVID-19 patients. Methods Prospective, multicenter, outcome study in 707 patients with both (suspected) COVID-19 and suspected PE in 14 hospitals. Patients on chronic anticoagulant therapy were excluded. Informed consent was obtained by opt-out approach. Patients were managed by validated diagnostic strategies for suspected PE. We evaluated the safety (3-month failure rate) and efficiency (number of computed tomography pulmonary angiographies [CTPAs] avoided) of the applied strategies. Results Overall PE prevalence was 28%. YEARS was applied in 36%, Wells rule in 4.2%, and “CTPA only” in 52%; 7.4% was not tested because of hemodynamic or respiratory instability. Within YEARS, PE was considered excluded without CTPA in 29%, of which one patient developed nonfatal PE during follow-up (failure rate 1.4%, 95% CI 0.04–7.8). One-hundred seventeen patients (46%) managed according to YEARS had a negative CTPA, of whom 10 were diagnosed with nonfatal venous thromboembolism (VTE) during follow-up (failure rate 8.8%, 95% CI 4.3–16). In patients managed by CTPA only, 66% had an initial negative CTPA, of whom eight patients were diagnosed with a nonfatal VTE during follow-up (failure rate 3.6%, 95% CI 1.6–7.0). Conclusion Our results underline the applicability of YEARS in (suspected) COVID-19 patients with suspected PE. CTPA could be avoided in 29% of patients managed by YEARS, with a low failure rate. The failure rate after a negative CTPA, used as a sole test or within YEARS, was non-negligible and reflects the high thrombotic risk in these patients, warranting ongoing vigilance

Efficacy and safety of outpatient treatment based on the hestia clinical decision rule with or without N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide testing in patients with acute pulmonary embolism: A randomized clinical trial

Afdeling Klinische Chemie en Laboratoriumgeneeskunde (AKCL

Efficacy and Safety of Outpatient Treatment Based on the Hestia Clinical Decision Rule with or without N-Terminal Pro-Brain Natriuretic Peptide Testing in Patients with Acute Pulmonary Embolism A Randomized Clinical Trial

Thrombosis and Hemostasi

Lupus anticoagulant associates with thrombosis in patients with COVID-19 admitted to intensive care units: A retrospective cohort study

Background: Thrombosis is a frequent and severe complication in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). Lupus anticoagulant (LA) is a strong acquired risk factor for thrombosis in various diseases and is frequently observed in patients with COVID-19. Whether LA is associated with thrombosis in patients with severe COVID-19 is currently unclear. Objective: To investigate if LA is associated with thrombosis in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Patients/Methods: The presence of LA and other antiphospholipid antibodies was assessed in patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU. LA was determined with dilute Russell's viper venom time (dRVVT) and LA-sensitive activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) reagents. Results: Of 169 patients with COVID-19, 116 (69%) tested positive for at least one antiphospholipid antibody upon admission to the ICU. Forty (24%) patients tested positive for LA; of whom 29 (17%) tested positive with a dRVVT, 19 (11%) tested positive with an LA-sensitive aPTT, and 8 (5%) tested positive on both tests. Fifty-eight (34%) patients developed thrombosis after ICU admission. The odds ratio (OR) for thrombosis in patients with LA based on a dRVVT was 2.5 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1–5.7), which increased to 4.5 (95% CI, 1.4–14.3) in patients at or below the median age in this study (64 years). LA positivity based on a dRVVT or LA-sensitive aPTT was only associated with thrombosis in patients aged less than 65 years (OR, 3.8; 95% CI, 1.3–11.4) and disappeared after adjustment for C-reactive protein. Conclusion: Lupus anticoagulant on admission is strongly associated with thrombosis in critically ill patients with COVID-19, especially in patients aged less than 65 years

Lupus anticoagulant associates with thrombosis in patients with COVID-19 admitted to intensive care units: A retrospective cohort study

Background: Thrombosis is a frequent and severe complication in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). Lupus anticoagulant (LA) is a strong acquired risk factor for thrombosis in various diseases and is frequently observed in patients with COVID-19. Whether LA is associated with thrombosis in patients with severe COVID-19 is currently unclear. Objective: To investigate if LA is associated with thrombosis in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Patients/Methods: The presence of LA and other antiphospholipid antibodies was assessed in patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU. LA was determined with dilute Russell's viper venom time (dRVVT) and LA-sensitive activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) reagents. Results: Of 169 patients with COVID-19, 116 (69%) tested positive for at least one antiphospholipid antibody upon admission to the ICU. Forty (24%) patients tested positive for LA; of whom 29 (17%) tested positive with a dRVVT, 19 (11%) tested positive with an LA-sensitive aPTT, and 8 (5%) tested positive on both tests. Fifty-eight (34%) patients developed thrombosis after ICU admission. The odds ratio (OR) for thrombosis in patients with LA based on a dRVVT was 2.5 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1–5.7), which increased to 4.5 (95% CI, 1.4–14.3) in patients at or below the median age in this study (64 years). LA positivity based on a dRVVT or LA-sensitive aPTT was only associated with thrombosis in patients aged less than 65 years (OR, 3.8; 95% CI, 1.3–11.4) and disappeared after adjustment for C-reactive protein. Conclusion: Lupus anticoagulant on admission is strongly associated with thrombosis in critically ill patients with COVID-19, especially in patients aged less than 65 years