Feasibility of bioelectrical impedance analysis in children with a severe generalized cerebral palsy

Objective: The need is strong for an accurate and easy-to-perform test to evaluate the nutritional state of children who have a severe generalized cerebral palsy, defined as a severe motor handicap and an intellectual disability. For that purpose, we determined the feasibility of bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) in these children and evaluated their nutritional state. Methods: BIA recordings were done in 35 children who had a severe generalized cerebral palsy using a single-frequency BIA device. In addition, arm span and body weight were determined. Components of feasibility were whether the children tolerated the recording and felt comfortable and whether the recording could be performed in a reproducible way (prescribed body position and stable resistance and reactance values). All recordings were performed at specialized children's daycare centers or schools. Results: One child (3%) did not tolerate the recording, whereas the remaining 34 children (71%) felt comfortable. Most children (74%) could be placed in the prescribed position, but stability of resistance values was low. Stability of resistance values was positively influenced by older age, a quiet location for the recording, feeling comfortable, and a small number of people in the room. For 29 children, we were able to calculate values for total body water and fat-free mass. Compared with age-matched reference values, these values were significantly decreased in all age groups. Conclusions: The present pilot study has demonstrated that BIA recording is a feasible nutritional assessment method in children who have severe generalized cerebral palsy. Because the test procedure was well tolerated by most children, its value for use in this specific population deserves further investigation

Adherence to all steps of a pain management protocol in intensive care patients after cardiac surgery is hard to achieve

Copyrigh

Colorectal liver metastases: Surgery versus thermal ablation (COLLISION) - a phase III single-blind prospective randomized controlled trial

Background: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and microwave ablation (MWA) are widely accepted techniques to eliminate small unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). Although previous studies labelled thermal ablation inferior to surgical resection, the apparent selection bias when comparing patients with unresectable disease to surgical candidates, the superior safety profile, and the competitive overall survival results for the more recent reports mandate the setup of a randomized controlled trial. The objective of the COLLISION trial is to prove non-inferiority of thermal ablation compared to hepatic resection in patients with at least one resectable and ablatable CRLM and no extrahepatic disease. Methods: In this two-arm, single-blind multi-center phase-III clinical trial, six hundred and eighteen patients with at least one CRLM (≤3cm) will be included to undergo either surgical resection or thermal ablation of appointed target lesion(s) (≤3cm). Primary endpoint is OS (overall survival, intention-to-treat analysis). Main secondary endpoints are overall disease-free survival (DFS), time to progression (TTP), time to local progression (TTLP), primary and assisted technique efficacy (PTE, ATE), procedural morbidity and mortality, length of hospital stay, assessment of pain and quality of life (QoL), cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and quality-adjusted life years (QALY). Discussion: If thermal ablation proves to be non-inferior in treating lesions ≤3cm, a switch in treatment-method may lead to a reduction of the post-procedural morbidity and mortality, length of hospital stay and incremental costs without compromising oncological outcome for patients with CRLM. Trial registration:NCT03088150 , January 11th 2017

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

Procedural pain does not raise plasma levels of cortisol or catecholamines in adult intensive care patients after cardiac surgery

The gold standard for quantification of pain is a person's self-report. However, we need objective parameters for pain measurement when intensive care patients, for example, are not able to report pain themselves. An increase in pain is currently thought to coincide with an increase in stress hormones. This observational study investigated whether procedure-related pain is associated with an increase of plasma cortisol, adrenaline, and noradrenaline. In 59 patients receiving intensive care after cardiac surgery, cortisol, adrenaline, and noradrenaline plasma levels were measured immediately before and immediately after patients were turned for washing, either combined with the removal of chest tubes or not. Numeric rating scale scores were obtained before, during, and after the procedure. Unacceptably severe pain (numeric rating scale ≥ 4) was reported by seven (12%), 26 (44%), and nine (15%) patients, before, during and after the procedure, respectively. There was no statistically significant association between numeric rating scale scores and change in cortisol, adrenaline, and noradrenaline plasma levels during the procedure. Despite current convictions that pain coincides with an increase in stress hormones, procedural pain was not associated with a significant increase in plasma stress hormone levels in patients who had undergone cardiac surgery. Thus, plasma levels of cortisol, adrenaline, and noradrenaline seem unsuitable for further research on the measurement of procedural pain

Colorectal liver metastases: Surgery versus thermal ablation (COLLISION) - a phase III single-blind prospective randomized controlled trial

Background: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and microwave ablation (MWA) are widely accepted techniques to eliminate small unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). Although previous studies labelled thermal ablation inferior to surgical resection, the apparent selection bias when comparing patients with unresectable disease to surgical candidates, the superior safety profile, and the competitive overall survival results for the more recent reports mandate the setup of a randomized controlled trial. The objective of the COLLISION trial is to prove non-inferiority of thermal ablation compared to hepatic resection in patients with at least one resectable and ablatable CRLM and no extrahepatic disease. Methods: In this two-arm, single-blind multi-center phase-III clinical trial, six hundred and eighteen patients with at least one CRLM (≤3cm) will be included to undergo either surgical resection or thermal ablation of appointed target lesion(s) (≤3cm). Primary endpoint is OS (overall survival, intention-to-treat analysis). Main secondary endpoints are overall disease-free survival (DFS), time to progression (TTP), time to local progression (TTLP), primary and assisted technique efficacy (PTE, ATE), procedural morbidity and mortality, length of hospital stay, assessment of pain and quality of life (QoL), cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and quality-adjusted life years (QALY). Discussion: If thermal ablation proves to be non-inferior in treating lesions ≤3cm, a switch in treatment-method may lead to a reduction of the post-procedural morbidity and mortality, length of hospital stay and incremental costs without compromising oncological outcome for patients with CRLM. Trial registration:NCT03088150 , January 11th 2017

Colorectal liver metastases: surgery versus thermal ablation (COLLISION) – a phase III single-blind prospective randomized controlled trial

Abstract Background Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and microwave ablation (MWA) are widely accepted techniques to eliminate small unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). Although previous studies labelled thermal ablation inferior to surgical resection, the apparent selection bias when comparing patients with unresectable disease to surgical candidates, the superior safety profile, and the competitive overall survival results for the more recent reports mandate the setup of a randomized controlled trial. The objective of the COLLISION trial is to prove non-inferiority of thermal ablation compared to hepatic resection in patients with at least one resectable and ablatable CRLM and no extrahepatic disease. Methods In this two-arm, single-blind multi-center phase-III clinical trial, six hundred and eighteen patients with at least one CRLM (≤3 cm) will be included to undergo either surgical resection or thermal ablation of appointed target lesion(s) (≤3 cm). Primary endpoint is OS (overall survival, intention-to-treat analysis). Main secondary endpoints are overall disease-free survival (DFS), time to progression (TTP), time to local progression (TTLP), primary and assisted technique efficacy (PTE, ATE), procedural morbidity and mortality, length of hospital stay, assessment of pain and quality of life (QoL), cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and quality-adjusted life years (QALY). Discussion If thermal ablation proves to be non-inferior in treating lesions ≤3 cm, a switch in treatment-method may lead to a reduction of the post-procedural morbidity and mortality, length of hospital stay and incremental costs without compromising oncological outcome for patients with CRLM. Trial registration NCT03088150, January 11th 2017

Search for the standard model Higgs boson at LEP

The four LEP Collaborations, ALEPH, DELPHI, L3 and OPAL, have collected a total of 2461 pb(-1) of e(+)e(-) collision data at centre-of-mass energies between 189 and 209 GeV. The data are used to search for the Standard Model Higgs boson. The search results of the four Collaborations are combined and examined in a likelihood test for their consistency with two hypotheses: the background hypothesis and the signal plus background hypothesis. The corresponding confidences have been computed as functions of the hypothetical Higgs boson mass. A lower bound of 114.4 GeV/c(2) is established, at the 95% confidence level, on the mass of the Standard Model Higgs boson. The LEP data are also used to set upper bounds on the HZZ coupling for various assumptions concerning the decay of the Higgs boson. (C) 2003 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved

The value of open-source clinical science in pandemic response: lessons from ISARIC

International audienc