44 research outputs found

    Fate of the Aortic Arch Following Surgery on Aortic Root and Ascending Aorta in Bicuspid Aortic Valve.

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Recent guidelines support more aggressive surgery for aneurysms of the ascending aorta and root in patients with bicuspid aortic valve. However, the fate of the arch after surgery of the root and ascending aorta is unknown. We set out to assess outcomes following root and ascending aortic surgery and subsequent growth of the arch. METHODS: Between 2005 and 2016, 536 consecutive patients underwent surgery for aneurysm of the root and ascending aorta. 168 had bicuspid aortic valve. Patients with dissection were excluded. Arch diameter was measured before and after surgery, at six months and then annually. RESULTS: Of 168 patients, 127 (75.6%) had aortic root replacement and 41 (24.4%) had ascending replacement. Mean age was 57±12.8 years, 82.7% were males and five operations were performed during pregnancy. There was one (0.6%) hospital death. One (0.6%) patient had a stroke and one (0.6%) had re-sternotomy for bleeding. Median ICU and hospital stays were 1 and 6 days respectively. Follow-up was complete for 94% at a median of 5.9 years (1-139 months). Aortic arch diameter was 2.9 cm preoperatively and 3.0 cm at follow-up. There was 97% freedom from reoperation and none of the patients required surgery on the arch. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic arch replacement during aortic root and ascending aortic surgery in patients with bicuspid aortic valve is not supported. Our data does not support long term surveillance of the rest of the aorta in this population

    IntAct—open source resource for molecular interaction data

    Get PDF
    IntAct is an open source database and software suite for modeling, storing and analyzing molecular interaction data. The data available in the database originates entirely from published literature and is manually annotated by expert biologists to a high level of detail, including experimental methods, conditions and interacting domains. The database features over 126 000 binary interactions extracted from over 2100 scientific publications and makes extensive use of controlled vocabularies. The web site provides tools allowing users to search, visualize and download data from the repository. IntAct supports and encourages local installations as well as direct data submission and curation collaborations. IntAct source code and data are freely available from

    Splenic trauma : WSES classification and guidelines for adult and pediatric patients

    Get PDF
    Spleen injuries are among the most frequent trauma-related injuries. At present, they are classified according to the anatomy of the injury. The optimal treatment strategy, however, should keep into consideration the hemodynamic status, the anatomic derangement, and the associated injuries. The management of splenic trauma patients aims to restore the homeostasis and the normal physiopathology especially considering the modern tools for bleeding management. Thus, the management of splenic trauma should be ultimately multidisciplinary and based on the physiology of the patient, the anatomy of the injury, and the associated lesions. Lastly, as the management of adults and children must be different, children should always be treated in dedicated pediatric trauma centers. In fact, the vast majority of pediatric patients with blunt splenic trauma can be managed non-operatively. This paper presents the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) classification of splenic trauma and the management guidelines.Peer reviewe

    Tegumentary leishmaniasis and coinfections other than HIV

    Get PDF
    <div><p>Background</p><p>Tegumentary leishmaniasis (TL) is a disease of skin and/or mucosal tissues caused by <i>Leishmania</i> parasites. TL patients may concurrently carry other pathogens, which may influence the clinical outcome of TL.</p><p>Methodology and principal findings</p><p>This review focuses on the frequency of TL coinfections in human populations, interactions between <i>Leishmania</i> and other pathogens in animal models and human subjects, and implications of TL coinfections for clinical practice. For the purpose of this review, TL is defined as all forms of cutaneous (localised, disseminated, or diffuse) and mucocutaneous leishmaniasis. Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) coinfection, superinfection with skin bacteria, and skin manifestations of visceral leishmaniasis are not included. We searched MEDLINE and other databases and included 73 records: 21 experimental studies in animals and 52 studies about human subjects (mainly cross-sectional and case studies). Several reports describe the frequency of <i>Trypanosoma cruzi</i> coinfection in TL patients in Argentina (about 41%) and the frequency of helminthiasis in TL patients in Brazil (15% to 88%). Different hypotheses have been explored about mechanisms of interaction between different microorganisms, but no clear answers emerge. Such interactions may involve innate immunity coupled with regulatory networks that affect quality and quantity of acquired immune responses. Diagnostic problems may occur when concurrent infections cause similar lesions (e.g., TL and leprosy), when different pathogens are present in the same lesions (e.g., <i>Leishmania</i> and <i>Sporothrix schenckii</i>), or when similarities between phylogenetically close pathogens affect accuracy of diagnostic tests (e.g., serology for leishmaniasis and Chagas disease). Some coinfections (e.g., helminthiasis) appear to reduce the effectiveness of antileishmanial treatment, and drug combinations may cause cumulative adverse effects.</p><p>Conclusions and significance</p><p>In patients with TL, coinfection is frequent, it can lead to diagnostic errors and delays, and it can influence the effectiveness and safety of treatment. More research is needed to unravel how coinfections interfere with the pathogenesis of TL.</p></div

    Ventilation and outcomes following robotic-assisted abdominal surgery: an international, multicentre observational study

    Get PDF
    Background: International data on the epidemiology, ventilation practice, and outcomes in patients undergoing abdominal robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) are lacking. The aim of the study was to assess the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs), and to describe ventilator management after abdominal RAS. Methods: This was an international, multicentre, prospective study in 34 centres in nine countries. Patients ≥18 yr of age undergoing abdominal RAS were enrolled between April 2017 and March 2019. The Assess Respiratory Risk in Surgical Patients in Catalonia (ARISCAT) score was used to stratify for higher risk of PPCs (≥26). The primary outcome was the incidence of PPCs. Secondary endpoints included the preoperative risk for PPCs and ventilator management. Results: Of 1167 subjects screened, 905 abdominal RAS patients were included. Overall, 590 (65.2%) patients were at increased risk for PPCs. Meanwhile, 172 (19%) patients sustained PPCs, which occurred more frequently in 132 (22.4%) patients at increased risk, compared with 40 (12.7%) patients at lower risk of PPCs (absolute risk difference: 12.2% [95% confidence intervals (CI), 6.8–17.6%]; P&lt;0.001). Plateau and driving pressures were higher in patients at increased risk, compared with patients at low risk of PPCs, but no ventilatory variables were independently associated with increased occurrence of PPCs. Development of PPCs was associated with a longer hospital stay. Conclusions: One in five patients developed one or more PPCs (chiefly unplanned oxygen requirement), which was associated with a longer hospital stay. No ventilatory variables were independently associated with PPCs. Clinical trial registration: NCT02989415

    Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial

    Get PDF
    SummaryBackground Azithromycin has been proposed as a treatment for COVID-19 on the basis of its immunomodulatoryactions. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of azithromycin in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.Methods In this randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19Therapy [RECOVERY]), several possible treatments were compared with usual care in patients admitted to hospitalwith COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 176 hospitals in the UK. Eligible and consenting patients wererandomly allocated to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus azithromycin 500 mg once perday by mouth or intravenously for 10 days or until discharge (or allocation to one of the other RECOVERY treatmentgroups). Patients were assigned via web-based simple (unstratified) randomisation with allocation concealment andwere twice as likely to be randomly assigned to usual care than to any of the active treatment groups. Participants andlocal study staff were not masked to the allocated treatment, but all others involved in the trial were masked to theoutcome data during the trial. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treatpopulation. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936.Findings Between April 7 and Nov 27, 2020, of 16 442 patients enrolled in the RECOVERY trial, 9433 (57%) wereeligible and 7763 were included in the assessment of azithromycin. The mean age of these study participants was65·3 years (SD 15·7) and approximately a third were women (2944 [38%] of 7763). 2582 patients were randomlyallocated to receive azithromycin and 5181 patients were randomly allocated to usual care alone. Overall,561 (22%) patients allocated to azithromycin and 1162 (22%) patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days(rate ratio 0·97, 95% CI 0·87–1·07; p=0·50). No significant difference was seen in duration of hospital stay (median10 days [IQR 5 to >28] vs 11 days [5 to >28]) or the proportion of patients discharged from hospital alive within 28 days(rate ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·98–1·10; p=0·19). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, nosignificant difference was seen in the proportion meeting the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilationor death (risk ratio 0·95, 95% CI 0·87–1·03; p=0·24).Interpretation In patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, azithromycin did not improve survival or otherprespecified clinical outcomes. Azithromycin use in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 should be restrictedto patients in whom there is a clear antimicrobial indication
    corecore