3 research outputs found

    Personal non-commercial use only

    Get PDF
    ABSTRACT. Objective. To determine the level of residual inflammation [synovitis, bone marrow edema (BME), tenosynovitis, and total inflammation] quantified by hand magnetic resonance imaging (h-MRI) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in remission according to 3 different definitions of clinical remission, and to compare these remission definitions. Methods. A cross-sectional study. To assess the level of residual MRI inflammation in remission, cutoff levels associated to remission and median scores of MRI residual inflammatory lesions were calculated. Data from an MRI register of patients with RA who have various levels of disease activity were used. These were used for the analyses: synovitis, BME according to the Rheumatoid Arthritis Magnetic Resonance Imaging Scoring system, tenosynovitis, total inflammation, and disease activity composite measures recorded at the time of MRI. Receiver-operating characteristic analysis was used to identify the best cutoffs associated with remission for each inflammatory lesion on h-MRI. Median values of each inflammatory lesion for each definition of remission were also calculated. Results. A total of 388 h-MRI sets of patients with RA with different levels of disease activity, 130 in remission, were included. Cutoff values associated with remission according to the Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI) ≤ 3.3 and the Boolean American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) definitions for BME and tenosynovitis (1 and 3, respectively) were lower than BME and tenosynovitis (2 and 5, respectively) for the Disease Activity Score on 28 joints (DAS28) ≤ 2.6. Median scores for synovitis, BME, and total inflammation were also lower for the SDAI and Boolean ACR/EULAR remission criteria compared with DAS28. Conclusion. Patients with RA in remission according to the SDAI and Boolean ACR/EULAR definitions showed lower levels of MRI-detected residual inflammation compared with DAS28

    Intraoperative positive end-expiratory pressure and postoperative pulmonary complications: a patient-level meta-analysis of three randomised clinical trials.

    No full text

    High PEEP with recruitment maneuvers versus Low PEEP During General Anesthesia for Surgery -a Bayesian individual patient data meta-analysis of three randomized clinical trials

    No full text
    Background: The influence of high positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) with recruitment maneuvers on the occurrence of postoperative pulmonary complications after surgery is still not definitively established. Bayesian analysis can help to gain further insights from the available data and provide a probabilistic framework that is easier to interpret. Our objective was to estimate the posterior probability that the use of high PEEP with recruitment maneuvers is associated with reduced postoperative pulmonary complications in patients with intermediate-to-high risk under neutral, pessimistic, and optimistic expectations regarding the treatment effect. Methods: Multilevel Bayesian logistic regression analysis on individual patient data from three randomized clinical trials carried out on surgical patients at Intermediate-to-High Risk for postoperative pulmonary complications. The main outcome was the occurrence of postoperative pulmonary complications in the early postoperative period. We studied the effect of high PEEP with recruitment maneuvers versus Low PEEP Ventilation. Priors were chosen to reflect neutral, pessimistic, and optimistic expectations of the treatment effect. Results: Using a neutral, pessimistic, or optimistic prior, the posterior mean odds ratio (OR) for High PEEP with recruitment maneuvers compared to Low PEEP was 0.85 (95% Credible Interval [CrI] 0.71 to 1.02), 0.87 (0.72 to 1.04), and 0.86 (0.71 to 1.02), respectively. Regardless of prior beliefs, the posterior probability of experiencing a beneficial effect exceeded 90%. Subgroup analysis indicated a more pronounced effect in patients who underwent laparoscopy (OR: 0.67 [0.50 to 0.87]) and those at high risk for PPCs (OR: 0.80 [0.53 to 1.13]). Sensitivity analysis, considering severe postoperative pulmonary complications only or applying a different heterogeneity prior, yielded consistent results. Conclusion: High PEEP with recruitment maneuvers demonstrated a moderate reduction in the probability of PPC occurrence, with a high posterior probability of benefit observed consistently across various prior beliefs, particularly among patients who underwent laparoscopy
    corecore