Immunoglobulin, glucocorticoid, or combination therapy for multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children: a propensity-weighted cohort study

Background: Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), a hyperinflammatory condition associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection, has emerged as a serious illness in children worldwide. Immunoglobulin or glucocorticoids, or both, are currently recommended treatments. Methods: The Best Available Treatment Study evaluated immunomodulatory treatments for MIS-C in an international observational cohort. Analysis of the first 614 patients was previously reported. In this propensity-weighted cohort study, clinical and outcome data from children with suspected or proven MIS-C were collected onto a web-based Research Electronic Data Capture database. After excluding neonates and incomplete or duplicate records, inverse probability weighting was used to compare primary treatments with intravenous immunoglobulin, intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids, or glucocorticoids alone, using intravenous immunoglobulin as the reference treatment. Primary outcomes were a composite of inotropic or ventilator support from the second day after treatment initiation, or death, and time to improvement on an ordinal clinical severity scale. Secondary outcomes included treatment escalation, clinical deterioration, fever, and coronary artery aneurysm occurrence and resolution. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN69546370. Findings: We enrolled 2101 children (aged 0 months to 19 years) with clinically diagnosed MIS-C from 39 countries between June 14, 2020, and April 25, 2022, and, following exclusions, 2009 patients were included for analysis (median age 8·0 years [IQR 4·2–11·4], 1191 [59·3%] male and 818 [40·7%] female, and 825 [41·1%] White). 680 (33·8%) patients received primary treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin, 698 (34·7%) with intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids, 487 (24·2%) with glucocorticoids alone; 59 (2·9%) patients received other combinations, including biologicals, and 85 (4·2%) patients received no immunomodulators. There were no significant differences between treatments for primary outcomes for the 1586 patients with complete baseline and outcome data that were considered for primary analysis. Adjusted odds ratios for ventilation, inotropic support, or death were 1·09 (95% CI 0·75–1·58; corrected p value=1·00) for intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids and 0·93 (0·58–1·47; corrected p value=1·00) for glucocorticoids alone, versus intravenous immunoglobulin alone. Adjusted average hazard ratios for time to improvement were 1·04 (95% CI 0·91–1·20; corrected p value=1·00) for intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids, and 0·84 (0·70–1·00; corrected p value=0·22) for glucocorticoids alone, versus intravenous immunoglobulin alone. Treatment escalation was less frequent for intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids (OR 0·15 [95% CI 0·11–0·20]; p<0·0001) and glucocorticoids alone (0·68 [0·50–0·93]; p=0·014) versus intravenous immunoglobulin alone. Persistent fever (from day 2 onward) was less common with intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids compared with either intravenous immunoglobulin alone (OR 0·50 [95% CI 0·38–0·67]; p<0·0001) or glucocorticoids alone (0·63 [0·45–0·88]; p=0·0058). Coronary artery aneurysm occurrence and resolution did not differ significantly between treatment groups. Interpretation: Recovery rates, including occurrence and resolution of coronary artery aneurysms, were similar for primary treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin when compared to glucocorticoids or intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids. Initial treatment with glucocorticoids appears to be a safe alternative to immunoglobulin or combined therapy, and might be advantageous in view of the cost and limited availability of intravenous immunoglobulin in many countries. Funding: Imperial College London, the European Union's Horizon 2020, Wellcome Trust, the Medical Research Foundation, UK National Institute for Health and Care Research, and National Institutes of Health

A global point prevalence survey of antimicrobial use in neonatal intensive care units: The no-more-antibiotics and resistance (NO-MAS-R) study

Background: Global assessment of antimicrobial agents prescribed to infants in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) may inform antimicrobial stewardship efforts. Methods: We conducted a one-day global point prevalence study of all antimicrobials provided to NICU infants. Demographic, clinical, and microbiologic data were obtained including NICU level, census, birth weight, gestational/chronologic age, diagnoses, antimicrobial therapy (reason for use; length of therapy), antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP), and 30-day in-hospital mortality. Findings: On July 1, 2019, 26 of infants (580/2,265; range, 0�100; median gestational age, 33 weeks; median birth weight, 1800 g) in 84 NICUs (51, high-income; 33, low-to-middle income) from 29 countries (14, high-income; 15, low-to-middle income) in five continents received �1 antimicrobial agent (92, antibacterial; 19, antifungal; 4, antiviral). The most common reasons for antibiotic therapy were �rule-out� sepsis (32) and �culture-negative� sepsis (16) with ampicillin (40), gentamicin (35), amikacin (19), vancomycin (15), and meropenem (9) used most frequently. For definitive treatment of presumed/confirmed infection, vancomycin (26), amikacin (20), and meropenem (16) were the most prescribed agents. Length of therapy for culture-positive and �culture-negative� infections was 12 days (median; IQR, 8�14) and 7 days (median; IQR, 5�10), respectively. Mortality was 6 (42, infection-related). An NICU ASP was associated with lower rate of antibiotic utilization (p = 0·02). Interpretation: Global NICU antibiotic use was frequent and prolonged regardless of culture results. NICU-specific ASPs were associated with lower antibiotic utilization rates, suggesting the need for their implementation worldwide. Funding: Merck & Co.; The Ohio State University College of Medicine Barnes Medical Student Research Scholarship © 2021 The Author

Immunoglobulin, glucocorticoid, or combination therapy for multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children: a propensity-weighted cohort study

Background Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), a hyperinflammatory condition associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection, has emerged as a serious illness in children worldwide. Immunoglobulin or glucocorticoids, or both, are currently recommended treatments. Methods The Best Available Treatment Study evaluated immunomodulatory treatments for MIS-C in an international observational cohort. Analysis of the first 614 patients was previously reported. In this propensity-weighted cohort study, clinical and outcome data from children with suspected or proven MIS-C were collected onto a web-based Research Electronic Data Capture database. After excluding neonates and incomplete or duplicate records, inverse probability weighting was used to compare primary treatments with intravenous immunoglobulin, intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids, or glucocorticoids alone, using intravenous immunoglobulin as the reference treatment. Primary outcomes were a composite of inotropic or ventilator support from the second day after treatment initiation, or death, and time to improvement on an ordinal clinical severity scale. Secondary outcomes included treatment escalation, clinical deterioration, fever, and coronary artery aneurysm occurrence and resolution. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN69546370. Findings We enrolled 2101 children (aged 0 months to 19 years) with clinically diagnosed MIS-C from 39 countries between June 14, 2020, and April 25, 2022, and, following exclusions, 2009 patients were included for analysis (median age 8·0 years [IQR 4·2–11·4], 1191 [59·3%] male and 818 [40·7%] female, and 825 [41·1%] White). 680 (33·8%) patients received primary treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin, 698 (34·7%) with intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids, 487 (24·2%) with glucocorticoids alone; 59 (2·9%) patients received other combinations, including biologicals, and 85 (4·2%) patients received no immunomodulators. There were no significant differences between treatments for primary outcomes for the 1586 patients with complete baseline and outcome data that were considered for primary analysis. Adjusted odds ratios for ventilation, inotropic support, or death were 1·09 (95% CI 0·75–1·58; corrected p value=1·00) for intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids and 0·93 (0·58–1·47; corrected p value=1·00) for glucocorticoids alone, versus intravenous immunoglobulin alone. Adjusted average hazard ratios for time to improvement were 1·04 (95% CI 0·91–1·20; corrected p value=1·00) for intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids, and 0·84 (0·70–1·00; corrected p value=0·22) for glucocorticoids alone, versus intravenous immunoglobulin alone. Treatment escalation was less frequent for intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids (OR 0·15 [95% CI 0·11–0·20]; p<0·0001) and glucocorticoids alone (0·68 [0·50–0·93]; p=0·014) versus intravenous immunoglobulin alone. Persistent fever (from day 2 onward) was less common with intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids compared with either intravenous immunoglobulin alone (OR 0·50 [95% CI 0·38–0·67]; p<0·0001) or glucocorticoids alone (0·63 [0·45–0·88]; p=0·0058). Coronary artery aneurysm occurrence and resolution did not differ significantly between treatment groups. Interpretation Recovery rates, including occurrence and resolution of coronary artery aneurysms, were similar for primary treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin when compared to glucocorticoids or intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids. Initial treatment with glucocorticoids appears to be a safe alternative to immunoglobulin or combined therapy, and might be advantageous in view of the cost and limited availability of intravenous immunoglobulin in many countries. Funding Imperial College London, the European Union's Horizon 2020, Wellcome Trust, the Medical Research Foundation, UK National Institute for Health and Care Research, and National Institutes of Health

Improvement in postoperative mortality in elective gastrectomy for gastric cancer: Analysis of predictive factors in 1066 patients from a single centre

Background: Gastrectomy represents the main treatment for gastric adenocarcinoma. This procedure is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study was to evaluate the postoperative mortality changes across the study period and to identify predictive factors of 30-day mortality after elective gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of a prospective database from a single centre. Patients treated with an elective gastrectomy from 1996 to 2014 for gastric adenocarcinoma were included. We compared postoperative mortality between four time periods: 1996-2000, 2001-2005, 2006-2010, and 2011-2014. Univariate and multivariate analyses were applied to identify predictors of 30 day postoperative mortality. Results: We included 1066 patients (median age 65 years; 67% male). The 30-day mortality rate was 4.7%. Mortality decreased across the four time periods; from 6.5% to 1.8% (P = 0.022). In the univariate analysis, age, ASA score, albumin <3.5, multivisceral resection, splenectomy, intrathoracic esophagojejunal anastomosis, R status, and T status were significantly associated with postoperative mortality. In the multivariate analysis, ASA class 3 (OR 10.06; CI 1.97-51.3; P = 0.005) and multivisceral resection (OR 1.6; CI 1.09-2.36; P = 0.016) were associated with higher postoperative 30-day mortality; surgery between 2011 and 2014 was associated with lower postoperative 30 day mortality (OR 0.55; CI 0.33-0.15; P = 0.030). Conclusion: There was a decrease in postoperative 30-day mortality during this 18-year period at our institution. We have identified ASA score and multivisceral resection as predictors of 30-day mortality for elective gastrectomy for cancer. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd, BASO - The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved

Epidemiological Aspects of Maternal and Congenital Toxoplasmosis in Panama

In Panama, epidemiological data on congenital toxoplasmosis are limited, making it difficult to understand the scope of clinical manifestations in the population and factors that may increase the risk of infection. This study provides insight into the epidemiological situation of maternal and congenital toxoplasmosis in Panama and contributing information on the burden of this disease in Central America. Blood samples were collected from 2326 pregnant women and used for the detection of anti-T. gondii antibodies. A high seroprevalence (44.41%) was observed for T. gondii infection in pregnant women from different regions of Panama, with an estimated incidence rate of congenital toxoplasmosis of 3.8 cases per 1000 live births. The main risk factors associated with T. gondii infection using bivariate statistical analysis were an elementary level education and maternal age range of 34-45 years. Multivariate statistical analyses revealed that in some regions (San Miguelito, North and West regions), the number of positive cases correlated with the presence of pets, stray dogs and the consumption of poultry. In other regions (East and Metropolitan regions), the absence of pets was considered a protective factor associated with negative cases, while the presence of stray cats and the age range of 25–34 years did not represent any risk in these regions

Prospective, observational, multicenter study on minimally invasive gastrectomy for gastric cancer: robotic, laparoscopic and open surgery compared on operative and follow-up outcomes - IMIGASTRIC II study protocol: IMIGASTRIC II.

Background: Several meta-analyses have tried to defi ne the role of minimally invasive approaches. However, further evidence to get a wider spread of these methods is necessary. Current studies describe minimally invasive surgery as a possible alternative to open surgery but deserving further clarifi cation. However, despite the increasing interest, the difficulty of planning prospective studies of adequate size accounts for the low level of evidence, which is mostly based on retrospective experiences. A multi-institutional prospective study allows the collection of an impressive amount of data to investigate various aspects of minimally invasive procedures with the opportunity of developing several subgroup analyses. A prospective data collection with high methodological quality on minimally invasive and open gastrectomies can clarify the role of diff erent procedures with the aim to develop specifi c guidelines. Methods and analysis: a multi-institutional prospective database will be established including information on surgical, clinical and oncological features of patients treated for gastric cancer with robotic, laparoscopic or open approaches and subsequent follow-up. The study has been shared by the members of the International study group on Minimally Invasive surgery for GASTRIc Cancer (IMIGASTRIC) The database is designed to be an international electronic submission system and a HIPPA protected real time data repository from high volume gastric cancer centers