A first update on mapping the human genetic architecture of COVID-19

peer reviewe

Effectiveness of remote monitoring of {CIEDs} in detection and treatment of clinical and device-related cardiovascular events in daily practice: the {HomeGuide} Registry

The HomeGuide Registry was a prospective study (NCT01459874), implementing a model for remote monitoring of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) in daily clinical practice, to estimate effectiveness in major cardiovascular event detection and management.The workflow for remote monitoring [Biotronik Home Monitoring (HM)] was based on primary nursing: each patient was assigned to an expert nurse for management and to a responsible physician for medical decisions. In-person visits were scheduled once a year. Seventy-five Italian sites enrolled 1650 patients [27 pacemakers, 27 single-chamber implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs), 22 dual-chamber ICDs, 24 ICDs with cardiac resynchronization therapy]. Population resembled the expected characteristics of CIED patients. During a 20 13 month follow-up, 2471 independently adjudicated events were collected in 838 patients (51): 2033 (82) were detected during HM sessions; 438 (18) during in-person visits. Sixty were classified as false-positive, with generalized estimating equation-adjusted sensitivity and positive predictive value of 84.3 [confidence interval (CI), 82.586.0] and 97.4 (CI, 96.598.2), respectively. Overall, 95 of asymptomatic and 73 of actionable events were detected during HM sessions. Median reaction time was 3 days [interquartile range (IQR), 114 days]. Generalized estimating equation-adjusted incremental utility, calculated according to four properties of major clinical interest, was in favour of the HM sessions: 0.56 (CI, 0.530.58), P 0.0001. Resource consumption: 3364 HM sessions performed (76 by nurses), median committed monthly manpower of 55.5 (IQR, 22.0107.0) min health personnel/100 patients.Home Monitoring was highly effective in detecting and managing clinical events in CIED patients in daily practice with remarkably low manpower and resource consumption

A mobile app for improving the compliance with remote management of patients with cardiac implantable devices: a multicenter evaluation in clinical practice

Background: The remote device management (RM) is recommended for patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). RM underutilization is frequently driven by the lack of correct system activation. The MyLATITUDE Patient App (Boston Scientific) has been developed to encourage patient compliance with RM by providing information on communicator setup, troubleshooting, and connection status of the communicator. Methods: At 14 centers, patients with CIEDs were invited to download and install the App on a mobile device. After 3 months, patients were asked to complete an ad hoc questionnaire to evaluate their experience. Results: The App was proposed to 242 consecutive patients: 81 before RM activation, and 161 during follow-up. The App was successfully installed by 177 (73%) patients. The time required for activation of the communicator and the need for additional support were similar between patients who followed the indications provided by the App and those who underwent standard in-clinic training. During follow-up, notifications of lack of connection were received by 20 (11%) patients and missed transmission by 22 (12%). The median time from notification to resolution was 2 days. After 3 months, 175 (99%) communicators of the 177 patients who installed the App were in "Monitored" status versus 113 (94%) of 120 patients without the App installed (p=0.033). The use of the app made 84% of patients feel reassured. Conclusions: The App was well accepted by CIED patients and offered support for communicator management and installation. Its use enabled patients to remain connected with greater continuity during follow-up

Multiparametric Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Algorithm for Heart Failure Risk Stratification and Management: An Analysis in Clinical Practice

BACKGROUND: The HeartLogic algorithm combines multiple implantable cardioverter-defibrillator sensors to identify patients at risk of heart failure (HF) events. We sought to evaluate the risk stratification ability of this algorithm in clinical practice. We also analyzed the alert management strategies adopted in the study group and their association with the occurrence of HF events.METHODS: The HeartLogic feature was activated in 366 implantable cardioverter-defibrillator and cardiac resynchronization therapy implantable cardioverter-defibrillator patients at 22 centers. The median follow-up was 11 months [25th-75th percentile: 6-16]. The HeartLogic algorithm calculates a daily HF index and identifies periods IN alert state on the basis of a configurable threshold.RESULTS: The HeartLogic index crossed the threshold value 273 times (0.76 alerts/patient-year) in 150 patients. The time IN alert state was 11% of the total observation period. Patients experienced 36 HF hospitalizations, and 8 patients died of HF during the observation period. Thirty-five events were associated with the IN alert state (0.92 events/patient-year versus 0.03 events/patient-year in the OUT of alert state). The hazard ratio in the IN/OUT of alert state comparison was (hazard ratio, 24.53 [95% CI, 8.55-70.38], P<0.001), after adjustment for baseline clinical confounders. Alerts followed by clinical actions were associated with less HF events (hazard ratio, 0.37 [95% CI, 0.14-0.99], P=0.047). No differences in event rates were observed between in-office and remote alert management.CONCLUSIONS: This multiparametric algorithm identifies patients during periods of significantly increased risk of HF events. The rate of HF events seemed lower when clinical actions were undertaken in response to alerts. Extra in-office visits did not seem to be required to effectively manage HeartLogic alerts. Registration: URL: ; Unique identifier: NCT02275637

Timing of Cholecystectomy After Moderate and Severe Acute Biliary Pancreatitis

IMPORTANCE Considering the lack of equipoise regarding the timing of cholecystectomy in patients with moderately severe and severe acute biliary pancreatitis (ABP), it is critical to assess this issue.OBJECTIVE To assess the outcomes of early cholecystectomy (EC) in patients with moderately severe and severe ABP.DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS This cohort study retrospectively analyzed real-life data from the MANCTRA-1 (Compliance With Evidence-Based Clinical Guidelines in the Management of Acute Biliary Pancreatitis) data set, assessing 5304 consecutive patients hospitalized between January 1, 2019, and December 31, 2020, for ABP from 42 countries. A total of 3696 patients who were hospitalized for ABP and underwent cholecystectomy were included in the analysis; of these, 1202 underwent EC, defined as a cholecystectomy performed within 14 days of admission. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify prognostic factors of mortality and morbidity. Data analysis was performed from January to February 2023.MAIN OUTCOMES Mortality and morbidity after EC.RESULTS Of the 3696 patients (mean [SD] age, 58.5 [17.8] years; 1907 [51.5%] female) included in the analysis, 1202 (32.5%) underwent EC and 2494 (67.5%) underwent delayed cholecystectomy (DC). Overall, EC presented an increased risk of postoperative mortality (1.4% vs 0.1%, P <.001) and morbidity (7.7% vs 3.7%, P < .001) compared with DC. On the multivariable analysis, moderately severe and severe ABP were associated with increased mortality (odds ratio [OR], 361.46; 95% CI, 2.28-57 212.31; P = .02) and morbidity (OR, 2.64; 95% CI, 1.35-5.19; P = .005). In patients with moderately severe and severe ABP (n = 108), EC was associated with an increased risk of mortality (16 [15.6%] vs 0 [0%], P < .001), morbidity (30 [30.3%] vs 57 [5.5%], P < .001), bile leakage (2 [2.4%] vs 4 [0.4%], P = .02), and infections (12 [14.6%] vs 4 [0.4%], P < .001) compared with patients with mild ABP who underwent EC. In patients with moderately severe and severe ABP (n = 108), EC was associated with higher mortality (16 [15.6%] vs 2 [1.2%], P < .001), morbidity (30 [30.3%] vs 17 [10.3%], P < .001), and infections (12 [14.6%] vs 2 [1.3%], P < .001) compared with patients with moderately severe and severe ABP who underwent DC. On the multivariable analysis, the patient's age (OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.02-1.36; P = .03) and American Society of Anesthesiologists score (OR, 5.91; 95% CI, 1.06-32.78; P = .04) were associated with mortality; severe complications of ABP were associated with increased mortality (OR, 50.04; 95% CI, 2.37-1058.01; P = .01) and morbidity (OR, 33.64; 95% CI, 3.19-354.73; P = .003).CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This cohort study's findings suggest that EC should be considered carefully in patients with moderately severe and severe ABP, as it was associated with increased postoperative mortality and morbidity. However, older and more fragile patients manifesting severe complications related to ABP should most likely not be considered for EC

COVID-19 Host Genetics Initiative. A first update on mapping the human genetic architecture of COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic continues to pose a major public health threat, especially in countries with low vaccination rates. To better understand the biological underpinnings of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 severity, we formed the COVID-19 Host Genetics Initiative1. Here we present a genome-wide association study meta-analysis of up to 125,584 cases and over 2.5 million control individuals across 60 studies from 25 countries, adding 11 genome-wide significant loci compared with those previously identified2. Genes at new loci, including SFTPD, MUC5B and ACE2, reveal compelling insights regarding disease susceptibility and severity.</p

Effects of hospital facilities on patient outcomes after cancer surgery: an international, prospective, observational study

© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 licenseBackground: Early death after cancer surgery is higher in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) compared with in high-income countries, yet the impact of facility characteristics on early postoperative outcomes is unknown. The aim of this study was to examine the association between hospital infrastructure, resource availability, and processes on early outcomes after cancer surgery worldwide. Methods: A multimethods analysis was performed as part of the GlobalSurg 3 study—a multicentre, international, prospective cohort study of patients who had surgery for breast, colorectal, or gastric cancer. The primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and 30-day major complication rates. Potentially beneficial hospital facilities were identified by variable selection to select those associated with 30-day mortality. Adjusted outcomes were determined using generalised estimating equations to account for patient characteristics and country-income group, with population stratification by hospital. Findings: Between April 1, 2018, and April 23, 2019, facility-level data were collected for 9685 patients across 238 hospitals in 66 countries (91 hospitals in 20 high-income countries; 57 hospitals in 19 upper-middle-income countries; and 90 hospitals in 27 low-income to lower-middle-income countries). The availability of five hospital facilities was inversely associated with mortality: ultrasound, CT scanner, critical care unit, opioid analgesia, and oncologist. After adjustment for case-mix and country income group, hospitals with three or fewer of these facilities (62 hospitals, 1294 patients) had higher mortality compared with those with four or five (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 3·85 [95% CI 2·58–5·75]; p<0·0001), with excess mortality predominantly explained by a limited capacity to rescue following the development of major complications (63·0% vs 82·7%; OR 0·35 [0·23–0·53]; p<0·0001). Across LMICs, improvements in hospital facilities would prevent one to three deaths for every 100 patients undergoing surgery for cancer. Interpretation: Hospitals with higher levels of infrastructure and resources have better outcomes after cancer surgery, independent of country income. Without urgent strengthening of hospital infrastructure and resources, the reductions in cancer-associated mortality associated with improved access will not be realised. Funding: National Institute for Health and Care Research