12 research outputs found

    International Veterinary Epilepsy Task Force Consensus Proposal: Diagnostic approach to epilepsy in dogs

    Get PDF
    This article outlines the consensus proposal on diagnosis of epilepsy in dogs by the International Veterinary Epilepsy Task Force. The aim of this consensus proposal is to improve consistency in the diagnosis of epilepsy in the clinical and research settings. The diagnostic approach to the patient presenting with a history of suspected epileptic seizures incorporates two fundamental steps: to establish if the events the animal is demonstrating truly represent epileptic seizures and if so, to identify their underlying cause. Differentiation of epileptic seizures from other non-epileptic episodic paroxysmal events can be challenging. Criteria that can be used to make this differentiation are presented in detail and discussed. Criteria for the diagnosis of idiopathic epilepsy (IE) are described in a three-tier system. Tier I confidence level for the diagnosis of IE is based on a history of two or more unprovoked epileptic seizures occurring at least 24 h apart, age at epileptic seizure onset of between six months and six years, unremarkable inter-ictal physical and neurological examination, and no significant abnormalities on minimum data base blood tests and urinalysis. Tier II confidence level for the diagnosis of IE is based on the factors listed in tier I and unremarkable fasting and post-prandial bile acids, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the brain (based on an epilepsy-specific brain MRI protocol) and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) analysis. Tier III confidence level for the diagnosis of IE is based on the factors listed in tier I and II and identification of electroencephalographic abnormalities characteristic for seizure disorders. The authors recommend performing MRI of the brain and routine CSF analysis, after exclusion of reactive seizures, in dogs with age at epileptic seizure onset 6 years, inter-ictal neurological abnormalities consistent with intracranial neurolocalisation, status epilepticus or cluster seizure at epileptic seizure onset, or a previous presumptive diagnosis of IE and drug-resistance with a single antiepileptic drug titrated to the highest tolerable dose

    COVID-19 trajectories among 57 million adults in England: a cohort study using electronic health records

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Updatable estimates of COVID-19 onset, progression, and trajectories underpin pandemic mitigation efforts. To identify and characterise disease trajectories, we aimed to define and validate ten COVID-19 phenotypes from nationwide linked electronic health records (EHR) using an extensible framework. METHODS: In this cohort study, we used eight linked National Health Service (NHS) datasets for people in England alive on Jan 23, 2020. Data on COVID-19 testing, vaccination, primary and secondary care records, and death registrations were collected until Nov 30, 2021. We defined ten COVID-19 phenotypes reflecting clinically relevant stages of disease severity and encompassing five categories: positive SARS-CoV-2 test, primary care diagnosis, hospital admission, ventilation modality (four phenotypes), and death (three phenotypes). We constructed patient trajectories illustrating transition frequency and duration between phenotypes. Analyses were stratified by pandemic waves and vaccination status. FINDINGS: Among 57 032 174 individuals included in the cohort, 13 990 423 COVID-19 events were identified in 7 244 925 individuals, equating to an infection rate of 12·7% during the study period. Of 7 244 925 individuals, 460 737 (6·4%) were admitted to hospital and 158 020 (2·2%) died. Of 460 737 individuals who were admitted to hospital, 48 847 (10·6%) were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), 69 090 (15·0%) received non-invasive ventilation, and 25 928 (5·6%) received invasive ventilation. Among 384 135 patients who were admitted to hospital but did not require ventilation, mortality was higher in wave 1 (23 485 [30·4%] of 77 202 patients) than wave 2 (44 220 [23·1%] of 191 528 patients), but remained unchanged for patients admitted to the ICU. Mortality was highest among patients who received ventilatory support outside of the ICU in wave 1 (2569 [50·7%] of 5063 patients). 15 486 (9·8%) of 158 020 COVID-19-related deaths occurred within 28 days of the first COVID-19 event without a COVID-19 diagnoses on the death certificate. 10 884 (6·9%) of 158 020 deaths were identified exclusively from mortality data with no previous COVID-19 phenotype recorded. We observed longer patient trajectories in wave 2 than wave 1. INTERPRETATION: Our analyses illustrate the wide spectrum of disease trajectories as shown by differences in incidence, survival, and clinical pathways. We have provided a modular analytical framework that can be used to monitor the impact of the pandemic and generate evidence of clinical and policy relevance using multiple EHR sources. FUNDING: British Heart Foundation Data Science Centre, led by Health Data Research UK

    Considerations and challenges with existing treatments for thrombosis in cancer patients

    No full text

    Cancer- and Chemotherapy-Induced Anemia

    No full text
    Anemia is prevalent in 30% to 90% of patients with cancer. Anemia can be corrected through either treating the underlying cause or providing supportive care through transfusion with packed red blood cells or administration of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs), with or without iron supplementation. Recent studies showing detrimental health effects of ESAs sparked a series of FDA label revisions and a sea change in the perception of these once commonly used agents. In light of this, the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Cancer- and Chemotherapy-Induced Anemia underwent substantial revisions this year. The purpose of these NCCN Guidelines is twofold: 1) to operationalize the evaluation and treatment of anemia in adult cancer patients, with an emphasis on those who are receiving concomitant chemotherapy, and 2) to enable patients and clinicians to individualize anemia treatment options based on patient condition. (JNCCN 2012;10:628-653
    corecore