5 research outputs found

    Circumstances, outcome and quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation by lifeboat crews

    Get PDF
    Background: Little is known regarding circumstances, outcomes and quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and the use of automated external defibrillators (AEDs) performed by operational lifeboat crews. Our aim is to evaluate circumstances, outcomes and quality of CPR performed by the Royal Dutch Lifeboat Institution (KNRM) in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Methods: The internal KNRM database has been used to identify and analyse all OHCA cases between July 2011 and December 2017. A limited set of AED data was available to study the quality of CPR. Results: In 37 patients the lifeboat crew members have performed CPR, of which 29 (78.4%) occurred under hostile conditions. The median response time to arrive at the location was 15 min. In 11 (29.7%) patients return of spontaneous circulation was achieved at any moment during CPR and 3 (8.1%) patients were still alive after one month. The lifeboat AED was used in 12 patients. Their recordings show a high median compression frequency (120, IQR 111–131) and prolonged median interruption periods (pre-analysis pause 11s (IQR 10–13), post-analysis pause 4s (IQR 3–8), pre-shock pause 24s (IQR 19–26), post-shock pause 6s (IQR 6–11), ventilation pause 6s (IQR 4–8) and other pauses 9s (IQR 4–17)). Conclusions: Compared to most out-of-hospital resuscitations, resuscitations by lifeboat crews have a low incidence, occur under difficult circumstances and in a younger population. AED's on lifeboats have not contributed to any of the survivals. Analysis of AED information can be used to study the quality of CPR and provide input for improving future training of lifeboat crews

    Accuracy of endoscopic staging and targeted biopsies for routine gastric intestinal metaplasia and gastric atrophy evaluation study protocol of a prospective, cohort study: The estimate study

    Get PDF
    Introduction Patients with chronic atrophic gastritis (CAG) and intestinal metaplasia (IM) are at risk of developing gastric adenocarcinoma. Their diagnosis and management currently rely on histopathological guidance after random endoscopic biopsy sampling (Sydney biopsy strategy). This approach has significant flaws such as under-diagnosis, poor reproducibility and poor correlation between endoscopy and histology. This prospective, international multicentre study aims to establish whether endoscopy-led risk stratification accurately and reproducibly predicts CAG and IM extent and disease stage. Methods and analysis Patients with CAG and/or IM on standard white light endoscopy (WLE) will be prospectively identified and invited to undergo a second endoscopy performed by an expert endoscopist using enhanced endoscopic imaging techniques with virtual chromoendoscopy. Extent of CAG/IM will be endoscopically staged with enhanced imaging and compared with standard WLE. Histopathological risk stratification through targeted biopsies will be compared with endoscopic disease staging and to random biopsy staging on WLE as a reference. At least 234 patients are required to show a 10% difference in sensitivity and accuracy between enhanced imaging endoscopy-led staging and the current biopsy-led staging protocol of gastric atrophy with a power (beta) of 80% and a 0.05 probability of a type I error (alpha). Ethics and dissemination The study was approved by the respective Institutional Review Boards (Netherlands: MEC-2018-078; UK: 19/LO/0089). The findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at scientific meetings. Trial registration number NTR7661; Pre-results

    Increasing incidence of colorectal cancer in young adults in Europe over the last 25 years

    Get PDF
    Objective The incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) declines among subjects aged 50 years and above. An opposite trend appears among younger adults. In Europe, data on CRC incidence among younger adults are lacking. We therefore aimed to analyse European trends in CRC incidence and mortality in subjects younger than 50 years. Design Data on age-related CRC incidence and mortality between 1990 and 2016 were retrieved from national and regional cancer registries. Trends were analysed by Joinpoint regression and expressed as annual percent change. Results We retrieved data on 143.7million people aged 20–49 years from 20 European countries. Of them, 187 918 (0.13%) were diagnosed with CRC. On average, CRC incidence increased with 7.9% per year among subjects aged 20–29 years from 2004 to 2016. The increase in the age group of 30–39 years was 4.9% per year from 2005 to 2016, the increase in the age group of 40–49 years was 1.6% per year from 2004 to 2016. This increase started earliest in subjects aged 20–29 years, and 10–20 years later in those aged 30–39 and 40–49 years. This is consistent with an age-cohort phenomenon. Although in most European countries the CRC incidence had risen, some heterogeneity was found between countries. CRC mortality did not significantly change among the youngest adults, but decreased with 1.1%per year between 1990 and 2016 and 2.4% per year between 1990 and 2009 among those aged 30–39 years and 40–49 years, respectively. Conclusion CRC incidence rises among young adults in Europe. The cause for this trend needs to be elucidated. Clinicians should be aware of this trend. If the trend continues, screening guidelines may need to be reconsidered

    Accuracy of upper endoscopies with random biopsies to identify patients with gastric premalignant lesions who can safely be exempt from surveillance

    Get PDF
    Introduction: Guidelines recommend endoscopy with biopsies to stratify patients with gastric premalignant lesions (GPL) to high and low progression risk. High-risk patients are recommended to undergo surveillance. We aimed to assess the accuracy of guideline recommendations to identify low-risk patients, who can safely be discharged from surveillance. Methods: This study includes patients with GPL. Patients underwent at least two endoscopies with an interval of 1–6 years. Patients were defined ‘low risk’ if they fulfilled requirements for discharge, and ‘high risk’ if they fulfilled requirements for surveillance, according to European guidelines (MAPS-2012, updated MAPS-2019, BSG). Patients defined ‘low risk’ with progression of disease during follow-up (FU) were considered ‘misclassified’ as low risk. Results: 334 patients (median age 60 years IQR11; 48.7% ma
    corecore