66 research outputs found

    Ten-year outcomes after off-pump versus on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting:Insights from the Arterial Revascularization Trial

    Get PDF
    Objective We performed a post hoc analysis of the Arterial Revascularization Trial to compare 10-year outcomes after off-pump versus on-pump surgery. Methods Among 3102 patients enrolled, 1252 (40% of total) and 1699 patients received off-pump and on-pump surgery (151 patients were excluded because of other reasons); 2792 patients (95%) completed 10-year follow-up. Propensity matching and mixed-effect Cox model were used to compare long-term outcomes. Interaction term analysis was used to determine whether bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting was a significant effect modifier. Results One thousand seventy-eight matched pairs were selected for comparison. A total of 27 patients (2.5%) in the off-pump group required conversion to on-pump surgery. The off-pump and on-pump groups received a similar number of grafts (3.2 ± 0.89 vs 3.1 ± 0.8; P = .88). At 10 years, when compared with on-pump, there was no significant difference in death (adjusted hazard ratio for off-pump, 1.1; 95% confidence interval, 0.84-1.4; P = .54) or the composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and repeat revascularization (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.72-1.2; P = .47). However, off-pump surgery performed by low volume off-pump surgeons was associated with a significantly lower number of grafts, increased conversion rates, and increased cardiovascular death (hazard ratio, 2.39; 95% confidence interval, 1.28-4.47; P = .006) when compared with on-pump surgery performed by on–pump-only surgeons. Conclusions The findings showed that in the Arterial Revascularization Trial, off-pump and on-pump techniques achieved comparable long-term outcomes. However, when off-pump surgery was performed by low-volume surgeons, it was associated with a lower number of grafts, increased conversion, and a higher risk of cardiovascular death.</p

    Tai Chi on psychological well-being: systematic review and meta-analysis

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Physical activity and exercise appear to improve psychological health. However, the quantitative effects of Tai Chi on psychological well-being have rarely been examined. We systematically reviewed the effects of Tai Chi on stress, anxiety, depression and mood disturbance in eastern and western populations.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Eight English and 3 Chinese databases were searched through March 2009. Randomized controlled trials, non-randomized controlled studies and observational studies reporting at least 1 psychological health outcome were examined. Data were extracted and verified by 2 reviewers. The randomized trials in each subcategory of health outcomes were meta-analyzed using a random-effects model. The quality of each study was assessed.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Forty studies totaling 3817 subjects were identified. Approximately 29 psychological measurements were assessed. Twenty-one of 33 randomized and nonrandomized trials reported that 1 hour to 1 year of regular Tai Chi significantly increased psychological well-being including reduction of stress (effect size [ES], 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.23 to 1.09), anxiety (ES, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.29 to 1.03), and depression (ES, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.31 to 0.80), and enhanced mood (ES, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.69) in community-dwelling healthy participants and in patients with chronic conditions. Seven observational studies with relatively large sample sizes reinforced the beneficial association between Tai Chi practice and psychological health.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Tai Chi appears to be associated with improvements in psychological well-being including reduced stress, anxiety, depression and mood disturbance, and increased self-esteem. Definitive conclusions were limited due to variation in designs, comparisons, heterogeneous outcomes and inadequate controls. High-quality, well-controlled, longer randomized trials are needed to better inform clinical decisions.</p

    Value of hospital antimicrobial stewardship programs [ASPs]:a systematic review

    Get PDF
    Abstract Background Hospital antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) aim to promote judicious use of antimicrobials to combat antimicrobial resistance. For ASPs to be developed, adopted, and implemented, an economic value assessment is essential. Few studies demonstrate the cost-effectiveness of ASPs. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the economic and clinical impact of ASPs. Methods An update to the Dik et al. systematic review (2000–2014) was conducted on EMBASE and Medline using PRISMA guidelines. The updated search was limited to primary research studies in English (30 September 2014–31 December 2017) that evaluated patient and/or economic outcomes after implementation of hospital ASPs including length of stay (LOS), antimicrobial use, and total (including operational and implementation) costs. Results One hundred forty-six studies meeting inclusion criteria were included. The majority of these studies were conducted within the last 5 years in North America (49%), Europe (25%), and Asia (14%), with few studies conducted in Africa (3%), South America (3%), and Australia (3%). Most studies were conducted in hospitals with 500–1000 beds and evaluated LOS and change in antibiotic expenditure, the majority of which showed a decrease in LOS (85%) and antibiotic expenditure (92%). The mean cost-savings varied by hospital size and region after implementation of ASPs. Average cost savings in US studies were 732perpatient(range:732 per patient (range: 2.50 to $2640), with similar trends exhibited in European studies. The key driver of cost savings was from reduction in LOS. Savings were higher among hospitals with comprehensive ASPs which included therapy review and antibiotic restrictions. Conclusions Our data indicates that hospital ASPs have significant value with beneficial clinical and economic impacts. More robust published data is required in terms of implementation, LOS, and overall costs so that decision-makers can make a stronger case for investing in ASPs, considering competing priorities. Such data on ASPs in lower- and middle-income countries is limited and requires urgent attention

    The impact of viral mutations on recognition by SARS-CoV-2 specific T cells.

    Get PDF
    We identify amino acid variants within dominant SARS-CoV-2 T cell epitopes by interrogating global sequence data. Several variants within nucleocapsid and ORF3a epitopes have arisen independently in multiple lineages and result in loss of recognition by epitope-specific T cells assessed by IFN-γ and cytotoxic killing assays. Complete loss of T cell responsiveness was seen due to Q213K in the A∗01:01-restricted CD8+ ORF3a epitope FTSDYYQLY207-215; due to P13L, P13S, and P13T in the B∗27:05-restricted CD8+ nucleocapsid epitope QRNAPRITF9-17; and due to T362I and P365S in the A∗03:01/A∗11:01-restricted CD8+ nucleocapsid epitope KTFPPTEPK361-369. CD8+ T cell lines unable to recognize variant epitopes have diverse T cell receptor repertoires. These data demonstrate the potential for T cell evasion and highlight the need for ongoing surveillance for variants capable of escaping T cell as well as humoral immunity.This work is supported by the UK Medical Research Council (MRC); Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences(CAMS) Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences (CIFMS), China; National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, and UK Researchand Innovation (UKRI)/NIHR through the UK Coro-navirus Immunology Consortium (UK-CIC). Sequencing of SARS-CoV-2 samples and collation of data wasundertaken by the COG-UK CONSORTIUM. COG-UK is supported by funding from the Medical ResearchCouncil (MRC) part of UK Research & Innovation (UKRI),the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR),and Genome Research Limited, operating as the Wellcome Sanger Institute. T.I.d.S. is supported by a Well-come Trust Intermediate Clinical Fellowship (110058/Z/15/Z). L.T. is supported by the Wellcome Trust(grant number 205228/Z/16/Z) and by theUniversity of Liverpool Centre for Excellence in Infectious DiseaseResearch (CEIDR). S.D. is funded by an NIHR GlobalResearch Professorship (NIHR300791). L.T. and S.C.M.are also supported by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Medical Countermeasures Initiative contract75F40120C00085 and the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (HPRU) inEmerging and Zoonotic Infections (NIHR200907) at University of Liverpool inpartnership with Public HealthEngland (PHE), in collaboration with Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine and the University of Oxford.L.T. is based at the University of Liverpool. M.D.P. is funded by the NIHR Sheffield Biomedical ResearchCentre (BRC – IS-BRC-1215-20017). ISARIC4C is supported by the MRC (grant no MC_PC_19059). J.C.K.is a Wellcome Investigator (WT204969/Z/16/Z) and supported by NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centreand CIFMS. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR or MRC

    Ten-year outcomes after off-pump versus on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting: Insights from the Arterial Revascularization Trial

    No full text
    Objective We performed a post hoc analysis of the Arterial Revascularization Trial to compare 10-year outcomes after off-pump versus on-pump surgery. Methods Among 3102 patients enrolled, 1252 (40% of total) and 1699 patients received off-pump and on-pump surgery (151 patients were excluded because of other reasons); 2792 patients (95%) completed 10-year follow-up. Propensity matching and mixed-effect Cox model were used to compare long-term outcomes. Interaction term analysis was used to determine whether bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting was a significant effect modifier. Results One thousand seventy-eight matched pairs were selected for comparison. A total of 27 patients (2.5%) in the off-pump group required conversion to on-pump surgery. The off-pump and on-pump groups received a similar number of grafts (3.2 ± 0.89 vs 3.1 ± 0.8; P = .88). At 10 years, when compared with on-pump, there was no significant difference in death (adjusted hazard ratio for off-pump, 1.1; 95% confidence interval, 0.84-1.4; P = .54) or the composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and repeat revascularization (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.72-1.2; P = .47). However, off-pump surgery performed by low volume off-pump surgeons was associated with a significantly lower number of grafts, increased conversion rates, and increased cardiovascular death (hazard ratio, 2.39; 95% confidence interval, 1.28-4.47; P = .006) when compared with on-pump surgery performed by on–pump-only surgeons. Conclusions The findings showed that in the Arterial Revascularization Trial, off-pump and on-pump techniques achieved comparable long-term outcomes. However, when off-pump surgery was performed by low-volume surgeons, it was associated with a lower number of grafts, increased conversion, and a higher risk of cardiovascular death.</p
    corecore