Interaction of hookworm 14-3-3 with the forkhead transcription factor DAF-16 requires intact Akt phosphorylation sites

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licens

Bicuspid and unicuspid aortic valves: Different phenotypes of the same disease? Insight from the GenTAC Registry

BackgroundUnicuspid aortic valve (UAV) is a rare disorder, often difficult to distinguish from bicuspid aortic valve (BAV). BAV and UAV share valve pathology such as the presence of a raphe, leaflet fusion, aortic stenosis, aortic regurgitation, and/or ascending aortic dilatation, but a comprehensive echocardiographic comparison of patients with UAV and BAV has not been previously performed.MethodsWe investigated UAV and BAV patients at an early stage of disease included in GenTAC, a national registry of genetically related aortic aneurysms and associated cardiac conditions. Clinical and echocardiographic data from the GenTAC Registry were compared between 17 patients with UAV and 17 matched‐controls with BAV.ResultsBaseline characteristics including demographics, clinical findings including family history of BAV and aortic aneurysm/coarctation, and echocardiographic variables were similar between BAV and UAV patients; aortic stenosis was more common and more severe in patients with UAV. This was evidenced by higher mean and peak gradient, smaller aortic valve area, and more advanced valvular degeneration (all P < .05). There were no significant differences in aortic dimensions, with a similar pattern of enlargement of the ascending aorta.ConclusionsThe similar baseline characteristics with more accelerated aortic valve degeneration and stenosis suggest that UAV represents an extreme in the spectrum of BAV syndromes. Therefore, it is reasonable to consider application of recommendations for the management of patients with BAV to those with the rarer UAV.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/139976/1/chd12520.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/139976/2/chd12520_am.pd

Impact of COVID-19 on cardiovascular testing in the United States versus the rest of the world

Objectives: This study sought to quantify and compare the decline in volumes of cardiovascular procedures between the United States and non-US institutions during the early phase of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the care of many non-COVID-19 illnesses. Reductions in diagnostic cardiovascular testing around the world have led to concerns over the implications of reduced testing for cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality. Methods: Data were submitted to the INCAPS-COVID (International Atomic Energy Agency Non-Invasive Cardiology Protocols Study of COVID-19), a multinational registry comprising 909 institutions in 108 countries (including 155 facilities in 40 U.S. states), assessing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on volumes of diagnostic cardiovascular procedures. Data were obtained for April 2020 and compared with volumes of baseline procedures from March 2019. We compared laboratory characteristics, practices, and procedure volumes between U.S. and non-U.S. facilities and between U.S. geographic regions and identified factors associated with volume reduction in the United States. Results: Reductions in the volumes of procedures in the United States were similar to those in non-U.S. facilities (68% vs. 63%, respectively; p = 0.237), although U.S. facilities reported greater reductions in invasive coronary angiography (69% vs. 53%, respectively; p < 0.001). Significantly more U.S. facilities reported increased use of telehealth and patient screening measures than non-U.S. facilities, such as temperature checks, symptom screenings, and COVID-19 testing. Reductions in volumes of procedures differed between U.S. regions, with larger declines observed in the Northeast (76%) and Midwest (74%) than in the South (62%) and West (44%). Prevalence of COVID-19, staff redeployments, outpatient centers, and urban centers were associated with greater reductions in volume in U.S. facilities in a multivariable analysis. Conclusions: We observed marked reductions in U.S. cardiovascular testing in the early phase of the pandemic and significant variability between U.S. regions. The association between reductions of volumes and COVID-19 prevalence in the United States highlighted the need for proactive efforts to maintain access to cardiovascular testing in areas most affected by outbreaks of COVID-19 infection

Sid Peterson Memorial Hospital, Kerrville, TX (Front)

1 picture postcard, see more at https://archives.library.tmc.edu/ic091-kerr-02.https://digitalcommons.library.tmc.edu/txhealthfacpostc/2003/thumbnail.jp

Sid Peterson Memorial Hospital, Kerrville, TX (Back)

1 picture postcard, see more at https://archives.library.tmc.edu/ic091-kerr-02.https://digitalcommons.library.tmc.edu/txhealthfacpostc/2004/thumbnail.jp

Direct Comparison of Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Veterans and Non-Veterans Using the Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to compare veterans and non-veterans undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) using data from the Society for Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy (STS/ACC TVT) registry. METHODS: Patients undergoing TAVR at George Washington University (GWU) and veterans treated at Washington DC Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC) who underwent TAVR at GWU from 2014-2020 were included. All patients were reported in the TVT registry. Emergency and valve-in-valve TAVR were excluded. Cohorts were divided based on veteran status. Operators were the same for both groups. Outcomes were compared at 30 days and 1 year. The primary outcome was mortality and secondary outcomes were morbidity metrics. RESULTS: A total of 299 patients (91 veterans, 208 non-veterans) were included. Veterans had higher rates of hypertension (87.9% vs 77.9%; P=.04), diabetes (46.7% vs 28.9%; P\u3c.01), and lung disease (2.4% vs 11.0%; P\u3c.001). Outcomes were not significantly different between veterans and non-veterans, including 30-day mortality (0% vs 2.9%, respectively; P=.18), 1-year mortality (9.8% vs 10.7%, respectively; P=.61), stroke incidence (0% vs 2.5%, respectively; P=.73), median intensive care unit stay (24 hours in both groups), and overall hospital stay (2 days in both groups). CONCLUSIONS: The affiliation between a VAMC and an academic medical center allowed for direct comparison between veterans and non-veterans undergoing TAVR by the same operators using the TVT registry. Despite significantly higher rates of comorbidities, veterans had equivalent outcomes compared with non-veterans. This may be in part due to the comprehensive care that veterans receive in the VAMC and this institution\u27s integrated heart center team