HTLV-1 infection in solid organ transplant donors and recipients in Spain

Background: HTLV-1 infection is a neglected disease, despite infecting 10–15 million people worldwide and severe illnesses develop in 10% of carriers lifelong. Acknowledging a greater risk for developing HTLV-1 associated illnesses due to immunosuppression, screening is being widely considered in the transplantation setting. Herein, we report the experience with universal HTLV testing of donors and recipients of solid organ transplants in a survey conducted in Spain. Methods: All hospitals belonging to the Spanish HTLV network were invited to participate in the study. Briefly, HTLV antibody screening was performed retrospectively in all specimens collected from solid organ donors and recipients attended since the year 2008. Results: A total of 5751 individuals were tested for HTLV antibodies at 8 sites. Donors represented 2312 (42.2%), of whom 17 (0.3%) were living kidney donors. The remaining 3439 (59.8%) were recipients. Spaniards represented nearly 80%. Overall, 9 individuals (0.16%) were initially reactive for HTLV antibodies. Six were donors and 3 were recipients. Using confirmatory tests, HTLV-1 could be confirmed in only two donors, one Spaniard and another from Colombia. Both kidneys of the Spaniard were inadvertently transplanted. Subacute myelopathy developed within 1 year in one recipient. The second recipient seroconverted for HTLV-1 but the kidney had to be removed soon due to rejection. Immunosuppression was stopped and 3 years later the patient remains in dialysis but otherwise asymptomatic. Conclusion: The rate of HTLV-1 is low but not negligible in donors/recipients of solid organ transplants in Spain. Universal HTLV screening should be recommended in all donor and recipients of solid organ transplantation in Spain. Evidence is overwhelming for very high virus transmission and increased risk along with the rapid development of subacute myelopath

Erratum to: 36th International Symposium on Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1186/s13054-016-1208-6.]

Effectiveness of thrombectomy in stroke according to baseline prognostic factors: inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis of a population-based registry

Background and Purpose In real-world practice, the benefit of mechanical thrombectomy (MT) is uncertain in stroke patients with very favorable or poor prognostic profiles at baseline. We studied the effectiveness of MT versus medical treatment stratifying by different baseline prognostic factors. Methods Retrospective analysis of 2,588 patients with an ischemic stroke due to large vessel occlusion nested in the population-based registry of stroke code activations in Catalonia from January 2017 to June 2019. The effect of MT on good functional outcome (modified Rankin Score ≤2) and survival at 3 months was studied using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis in three pre-defined baseline prognostic groups: poor (if pre-stroke disability, age >85 years, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale [NIHSS] >25, time from onset >6 hours, Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score 3), good (if NIHSS <6 or distal occlusion, in the absence of poor prognostic factors), or reference (not meeting other groups’ criteria). Results Patients receiving MT (n=1,996, 77%) were younger, had less pre-stroke disability, and received systemic thrombolysis less frequently. These differences were balanced after the IPTW stratified by prognosis. MT was associated with good functional outcome in the reference (odds ratio [OR], 2.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.0 to 4.4), and especially in the poor baseline prognostic stratum (OR, 3.9; 95% CI, 2.6 to 5.9), but not in the good prognostic stratum. MT was associated with survival only in the poor prognostic stratum (OR, 2.6; 95% CI, 2.0 to 3.3). Conclusions Despite their worse overall outcomes, the impact of thrombectomy over medical management was more substantial in patients with poorer baseline prognostic factors than patients with good prognostic factors

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)1.

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