Los «Decretos de Cortes» en relación con la Corona en la Constitución de 1812

Las dos primeras partes de este trabajo se dirigen afirmar el carácter «singular» de la «Monarquía moderada» proclamada por la Constitución de 1812. En este contexto, la preeminencia de las Cortes y la configuración del Rey como poder constituido, exige la creación de una nueva fuente del Derecho: los «decretos de Cortes». Los «decretos de Cortes» serán normas que tienen el mismo rango que las leyes, pero, al no ser leyes formales, no necesitan de sanción por el Rey. Esta nueva fuente del Derecho será mediante la que las Cortes deben de adoptar sus decisiones en relación con la Corona. La tercera parte del trabajo dedica su estudio a tres decisiones de Cortes en relación con la Corona: la Dotación de la Corona; la abdicación del Rey y las dudas de sucesión.The first two parts of this work are directed to affirm the «uniqueness» of the «Moderate Monarchy» proclaimed in the Constitution of 1812. In this context, the primacy of Parliament and the configuration of the King as constituted power, requires the creation of a new source of law: the «decrees of parliament». The «decrees of the parliament» will be rules that have the same status as laws, but, not being formal laws do not require the sanction of the King. This new source of law shall be by which the Parliament has to take decisions in relation to the Crown. The third part of this work is devoted to the study of three decisions of the parliament in relation to the Crown: the provision of the Royal Family (budget of the Crown), the abdication of the King and the succession question

Role of age and comorbidities in mortality of patients with infective endocarditis

[Purpose]: The aim of this study was to analyse the characteristics of patients with IE in three groups of age and to assess the ability of age and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) to predict mortality. [Methods]: Prospective cohort study of all patients with IE included in the GAMES Spanish database between 2008 and 2015.Patients were stratified into three age groups:<65 years,65 to 80 years,and ≥ 80 years.The area under the receiver-operating characteristic (AUROC) curve was calculated to quantify the diagnostic accuracy of the CCI to predict mortality risk. [Results]: A total of 3120 patients with IE (1327 < 65 years;1291 65-80 years;502 ≥ 80 years) were enrolled.Fever and heart failure were the most common presentations of IE, with no differences among age groups.Patients ≥80 years who underwent surgery were significantly lower compared with other age groups (14.3%,65 years; 20.5%,65-79 years; 31.3%,≥80 years). In-hospital mortality was lower in the <65-year group (20.3%,<65 years;30.1%,65-79 years;34.7%,≥80 years;p < 0.001) as well as 1-year mortality (3.2%, <65 years; 5.5%, 65-80 years;7.6%,≥80 years; p = 0.003).Independent predictors of mortality were age ≥ 80 years (hazard ratio [HR]:2.78;95% confidence interval [CI]:2.32–3.34), CCI ≥ 3 (HR:1.62; 95% CI:1.39–1.88),and non-performed surgery (HR:1.64;95% CI:11.16–1.58).When the three age groups were compared,the AUROC curve for CCI was significantly larger for patients aged <65 years(p < 0.001) for both in-hospital and 1-year mortality. [Conclusion]: There were no differences in the clinical presentation of IE between the groups. Age ≥ 80 years, high comorbidity (measured by CCI),and non-performance of surgery were independent predictors of mortality in patients with IE.CCI could help to identify those patients with IE and surgical indication who present a lower risk of in-hospital and 1-year mortality after surgery, especially in the <65-year group

Role of age and comorbidities in mortality of patients with infective endocarditis.

The aim of this study was to analyse the characteristics of patients with IE in three groups of age and to assess the ability of age and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) to predict mortality. Prospective cohort study of all patients with IE included in the GAMES Spanish database between 2008 and 2015.Patients were stratified into three age groups: A total of 3120 patients with IE (1327  There were no differences in the clinical presentation of IE between the groups. Age ≥ 80 years, high comorbidity (measured by CCI),and non-performance of surgery were independent predictors of mortality in patients with IE.CCI could help to identify those patients with IE and surgical indication who present a lower risk of in-hospital and 1-year mortality after surgery, especially in th

Contemporary use of cefazolin for MSSA infective endocarditis: analysis of a national prospective cohort

Objectives: This study aimed to assess the real use of cefazolin for methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) infective endocarditis (IE) in the Spanish National Endocarditis Database (GAMES) and to compare it with antistaphylococcal penicillin (ASP). Methods: Prospective cohort study with retrospective analysis of a cohort of MSSA IE treated with cloxacillin and/or cefazolin. Outcomes assessed were relapse; intra-hospital, overall, and endocarditis-related mortality; and adverse events. Risk of renal toxicity with each treatment was evaluated separately. Results: We included 631 IE episodes caused by MSSA treated with cloxacillin and/or cefazolin. Antibiotic treatment was cloxacillin, cefazolin, or both in 537 (85%), 57 (9%), and 37 (6%) episodes, respectively. Patients treated with cefazolin had significantly higher rates of comorbidities (median Charlson Index 7, P <0.01) and previous renal failure (57.9%, P <0.01). Patients treated with cloxacillin presented higher rates of septic shock (25%, P = 0.033) and new-onset or worsening renal failure (47.3%, P = 0.024) with significantly higher rates of in-hospital mortality (38.5%, P = 0.017). One-year IE-related mortality and rate of relapses were similar between treatment groups. None of the treatments were identified as risk or protective factors. Conclusion: Our results suggest that cefazolin is a valuable option for the treatment of MSSA IE, without differences in 1-year mortality or relapses compared with cloxacillin, and might be considered equally effective

Prosthetic Valve Candida spp. Endocarditis: New Insights Into Long-term Prognosis—The ESCAPE Study

International audienceBackground: Prosthetic valve endocarditis caused by Candida spp. (PVE-C) is rare and devastating, with international guidelines based on expert recommendations supporting the combination of surgery and subsequent azole treatment.Methods: We retrospectively analyzed PVE-C cases collected in Spain and France between 2001 and 2015, with a focus on management and outcome.Results: Forty-six cases were followed up for a median of 9 months. Twenty-two patients (48%) had a history of endocarditis, 30 cases (65%) were nosocomial or healthcare related, and 9 (20%) patients were intravenous drug users. "Induction" therapy consisted mainly of liposomal amphotericin B (L-amB)-based (n = 21) or echinocandin-based therapy (n = 13). Overall, 19 patients (41%) were operated on. Patients <66 years old and without cardiac failure were more likely to undergo cardiac surgery (adjusted odds ratios [aORs], 6.80 [95% confidence interval [CI], 1.59-29.13] and 10.92 [1.15-104.06], respectively). Surgery was not associated with better survival rates at 6 months. Patients who received L-amB alone had a better 6-month survival rate than those who received an echinocandin alone (aOR, 13.52; 95% CI, 1.03-838.10). "Maintenance" fluconazole therapy, prescribed in 21 patients for a median duration of 13 months (range, 2-84 months), led to minor adverse effects.Conclusion: L-amB induction treatment improves survival in patients with PVE-C. Medical treatment followed by long-term maintenance fluconazole may be the best treatment option for frail patients

Predictors of embolism and death in left-sided infective endocarditis: the European Society of Cardiology EURObservational Research Programme European Infective Endocarditis registry

International audienceBackground and Aims Even though vegetation size in infective endocarditis (IE) has been associated with embolic events (EEs) and mortality risk, it is unclear whether vegetation size associated with these potential outcomes is different in left-sided IE (LSIE). This study aimed to seek assessing the vegetation cut-off size as predictor of EE or 30-day mortality for LSIE and to determine risk predictors of these outcomes. Methods The European Society of Cardiology EURObservational Research Programme European Infective Endocarditis is a prospective, multicentre registry including patients with definite or possible IE throughout 2016–18. Cox multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to assess variables associated with EE or 30-day mortality. Results There were 2171 patients with LSIE (women 31.5%). Among these affected patients, 459 (21.1%) had a new EE or died in 30 days. The cut-off value of vegetation size for predicting EEs or 30-day mortality was &gt;10 mm [hazard ratio (HR) 1.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13–1.69, P = .0015]. Other adjusted predictors of risk of EE or death were as follows: EE on admission (HR 1.89, 95% CI 1.54–2.33, P &lt; .0001), history of heart failure (HR 1.53, 95% CI 1.21–1.93, P = .0004), creatinine &gt;2 mg/dL (HR 1.59, 95% CI 1.25–2.03, P = .0002), Staphylococcus aureus (HR 1.36, 95% CI 1.08–1.70, P = .008), congestive heart failure (HR 1.40, 95% CI 1.12–1.75, P = .003), presence of haemorrhagic stroke (HR 4.57, 95% CI 3.08–6.79, P &lt; .0001), alcohol abuse (HR 1.45, 95% CI 1.04–2.03, P = .03), presence of cardiogenic shock (HR 2.07, 95% CI 1.29–3.34, P = .003), and not performing left surgery (HR 1.30 95% CI 1.05–1.61, P = .016) (C-statistic = .68). Conclusions Prognosis after LSIE is determined by multiple factors, including vegetation size

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field