Early diagnosis is associated with improved clinical outcomes in benign esophageal perforation: an individual patient data meta‑analysis

Background Time of diagnosis (TOD) of benign esophageal perforation is regarded as an important risk factor for clinical outcome, although convincing evidence is lacking. The aim of this study is to assess whether time between onset of perforation and diagnosis is associated with clinical outcome in patients with iatrogenic esophageal perforation (IEP) and Boerhaave’s syndrome (BS). Methods We searched MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane library through June 2018 to identify studies. Authors were invited to share individual patient data and a meta-analysis was performed (PROSPERO: CRD42018093473). Patients were subdivided in early (≤ 24 h) and late (> 24 h) TOD and compared with mixed effects multivariable analysis while adjusting age, gender, location of perforation, initial treatment and center. Primary outcome was overall mortality. Secondary outcomes were length of hospital stay, re-interventions and ICU admission. Results Our meta-analysis included IPD of 25 studies including 576 patients with IEP and 384 with BS. In IEP, early TOD was not associated with overall mortality (8% vs. 13%, OR 2.1, 95% CI 0.8–5.1), but was associated with a 23% decrease in ICU admissions (46% vs. 69%, OR 3.0, 95% CI 1.2–7.2), a 22% decrease in re-interventions (23% vs. 45%, OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.2–6.7) and a 36% decrease in length of hospital stay (14 vs. 22 days, p < 0.001), compared with late TOD. In BS, no associations between TOD and outcomes were found. When combining IEP and BS, early TOD was associated with a 6% decrease in overall mortality (10% vs. 16%, OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.1–3.9), a 19% decrease in re-interventions (26% vs. 45%, OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.1–3.2) and a 35% decrease in mean length of hospital stay (16 vs. 22 days, p = 0.001), compared with late TOD. Conclusions This individual patient data meta-analysis confirms the general opinion that an early (≤ 24 h) compared to a late diagnosis (> 24 h) in benign esophageal perforations, particularly in IEP, is associated with improved clinical outcome.publishedVersio

The Role of Host Genetics in Susceptibility to Influenza: A Systematic Review

Background: The World Health Organization has identified studies of the role of host genetics on susceptibility to severe influenza as a priority. A systematic review was conducted to summarize the current state of evidence on the role of host genetics in susceptibility to influenza (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42011001380). Methods and Findings: PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and OpenSIGLE were searched using a pre-defined strategy for all entries up to the date of the search. Two reviewers independently screened the title and abstract of 1,371 unique articles, and 72 full text publications were selected for inclusion. Mouse models clearly demonstrate that host genetics plays a critical role in susceptibility to a range of human and avian influenza viruses. The Mx genes encoding interferon inducible proteins are the best studied but their relevance to susceptibility in humans is unknown. Although the MxA gene should be considered a candidate gene for further study in humans, over 100 other candidate genes have been proposed. There are however no data associating any of these candidate genes to susceptibility in humans, with the only published study in humans being under-powered. One genealogy study presents moderate evidence of a heritable component to the risk of influenza-associated death, and while the marked familial aggregation of H5N1 cases is suggestive of host genetic factors, this remains unproven. Conclusion: The fundamental question ‘‘Is susceptibility to severe influenza in humans heritable?’ ’ remains unanswered. No

Early diagnosis is associated with improved clinical outcomes in benign esophageal perforation: an individual patient data meta-analysis.

To access publisher's full text version of this article, please click on the hyperlink in Additional Links field or click on the hyperlink at the top of the page marked DownloadBackground: Time of diagnosis (TOD) of benign esophageal perforation is regarded as an important risk factor for clinical outcome, although convincing evidence is lacking. The aim of this study is to assess whether time between onset of perforation and diagnosis is associated with clinical outcome in patients with iatrogenic esophageal perforation (IEP) and Boerhaave's syndrome (BS). Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane library through June 2018 to identify studies. Authors were invited to share individual patient data and a meta-analysis was performed (PROSPERO: CRD42018093473). Patients were subdivided in early (≤ 24 h) and late (> 24 h) TOD and compared with mixed effects multivariable analysis while adjusting age, gender, location of perforation, initial treatment and center. Primary outcome was overall mortality. Secondary outcomes were length of hospital stay, re-interventions and ICU admission. Results: Our meta-analysis included IPD of 25 studies including 576 patients with IEP and 384 with BS. In IEP, early TOD was not associated with overall mortality (8% vs. 13%, OR 2.1, 95% CI 0.8-5.1), but was associated with a 23% decrease in ICU admissions (46% vs. 69%, OR 3.0, 95% CI 1.2-7.2), a 22% decrease in re-interventions (23% vs. 45%, OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.2-6.7) and a 36% decrease in length of hospital stay (14 vs. 22 days, p < 0.001), compared with late TOD. In BS, no associations between TOD and outcomes were found. When combining IEP and BS, early TOD was associated with a 6% decrease in overall mortality (10% vs. 16%, OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.1-3.9), a 19% decrease in re-interventions (26% vs. 45%, OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.1-3.2) and a 35% decrease in mean length of hospital stay (16 vs. 22 days, p = 0.001), compared with late TOD. Conclusions: This individual patient data meta-analysis confirms the general opinion that an early (≤ 24 h) compared to a late diagnosis (> 24 h) in benign esophageal perforations, particularly in IEP, is associated with improved clinical outcome. Keywords: Esophageal rupture; Individual patient data meta-analysis; Time of diagnosis

Early diagnosis is associated with improved clinical outcomes in benign esophageal perforation: an individual patient data meta-anal

Background: Time of diagnosis (TOD) of benign esophageal perforation is regarded as an important risk factor for clinical outcome, although convincing evidence is lacking. The aim of this study is to assess whether time between onset of perforation and diagnosis is associated with clinical outcome in patients with iatrogenic esophageal perforation (IEP) and Boerhaave’s syndrome (BS). Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane library through June 2018 to identify studies. Authors were invited to share individual patient data and a meta-analysis was performed (PROSPERO: CRD42018093473). Patients were subdivided in early (≤ 24 h) and late (> 24 h) TOD and compared with mixed effects multivariable analysis while adjusting age, gender, location of perforation, initial treatment and center. Primary outcome was overall mortality. Secondary outcomes were length of hospital stay, re-interventions and ICU admission. Results: Our meta-analysis included IPD of 25 studies including 576 patients with IEP and 384 with BS. In IEP, early TOD was not associated with overall mortality (8% vs. 13%, OR 2.1, 95% CI 0.8–5.1), but was associated with a 23% decrease in ICU admissions (46% vs. 69%, OR 3.0, 95% CI 1.2–7.2), a 22% decrease in re-interventions (23% vs. 45%, OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.2–6.7) and a 36% decrease in length of hospital stay (14 vs. 22 days, p 24 h) in benign esophageal perforations, particularly in IEP, is associated with improved clinical outcome

Analysing debate on infrastructures using abstract argumentation

Infrastructure projects induce various impacts on stakeholders, which can lead to a strong opposition to the project. In order to support urban planning, we propose a method called AFORI (Argumentation for Formalizing and analysing Opinions on Infrastructure project) based on the AIPA abstract argumentation model, to collect, formalize and analyse the views of the different stakeholders on the project. AFORI permits to collect data from various sources (newspaper, social media…), to formalize the pros and cons of argumentation relating to an infrastructure project and to provide an easier understanding of the debate. The structured formalization of the argumentation facilitates the understanding of the different points of view and their interdependence. AFORI was applied to a real case study in order to illustrate its functioning and interest