Combination of electrochemical and ion-exchange methods in metal separation

Tese de mestrado integrado. Engenharia Química. Faculdade de Engenharia. Universidade do Porto, Department of Power Engineering. Vysoká Skola Chemicko-Technologická V Praze, Praga. 200

Accuracy of faecal calprotectin and neutrophil Gelatinase B-associated Lipocalin in evaluating subclinical inflammation in UlceRaTIVE colitis-the ACERTIVE study

Background and Aims: Mucosal healing and histological remission are different targets for patients with ulcerative colitis, but both rely on an invasive endoscopic procedure. This study aimed to assess faecal calprotectin and neutrophil gelatinase B-associated lipocalin as biomarkers for disease activity in asymptomatic ulcerative colitis patients. Methods: This was a multicentric cross-sectional study including 371 patients, who were classified according to their endoscopic and histological scores. These results were evaluated alongside the faecal levels of both biomarkers. Results: Macroscopic lesions [i.e. endoscopic Mayo score >= 1] were present in 28% of the patients, and 9% had active disease according to fht Ulcerative Colitis Endoscopic Index of Severity. Moreover, 21% presented with histological inflammation according to the Geboes index, whereas 15% and 5% presented with focal and diffuse basal plasmacytosis, respectively. The faecal levels of calprotectin and neutrophil gelatinase B-associated lipocalin were statistically higher for patients with endoscopic lesions and histological activity. A receiver operating characteristic-based analysis revealed that both biomarkers were able to indicate mucosal healing and histological remission with an acceptable probability, and cut-off levels of 150-250 mu g/g for faecal calprotectin and 12 mu g/g for neutrophil gelatinase B-associated lipocalin were proposed. Conclusions: Faecal calprotectin and neutrophil gelatinase B-associated lipocalin levels are a valuable addition for assessment of disease activity in asymptomatic ulcerative colitis patients. Biological levels of the analysed biomarkers below the proposed thresholds can rule out the presence of macroscopic and microscopic lesions with a probability of 75-93%. However, caution should be applied whenever interpreting positive results, as these biomarkers present consistently low positive predictive values.Portuguese IBD Group [GEDII - Grupo de Estudo da Doenca Inflamatcria Intestinal]info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Effect of Hydrocortisone on Mortality and Organ Support in Patients With Severe COVID-19: The REMAP-CAP COVID-19 Corticosteroid Domain Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Evidence regarding corticosteroid use for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is limited. Objective: To determine whether hydrocortisone improves outcome for patients with severe COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: An ongoing adaptive platform trial testing multiple interventions within multiple therapeutic domains, for example, antiviral agents, corticosteroids, or immunoglobulin. Between March 9 and June 17, 2020, 614 adult patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled and randomized within at least 1 domain following admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for respiratory or cardiovascular organ support at 121 sites in 8 countries. Of these, 403 were randomized to open-label interventions within the corticosteroid domain. The domain was halted after results from another trial were released. Follow-up ended August 12, 2020. Interventions: The corticosteroid domain randomized participants to a fixed 7-day course of intravenous hydrocortisone (50 mg or 100 mg every 6 hours) (n = 143), a shock-dependent course (50 mg every 6 hours when shock was clinically evident) (n = 152), or no hydrocortisone (n = 108). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of ICU-based respiratory or cardiovascular support) within 21 days, where patients who died were assigned -1 day. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model that included all patients enrolled with severe COVID-19, adjusting for age, sex, site, region, time, assignment to interventions within other domains, and domain and intervention eligibility. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%). Results: After excluding 19 participants who withdrew consent, there were 384 patients (mean age, 60 years; 29% female) randomized to the fixed-dose (n = 137), shock-dependent (n = 146), and no (n = 101) hydrocortisone groups; 379 (99%) completed the study and were included in the analysis. The mean age for the 3 groups ranged between 59.5 and 60.4 years; most patients were male (range, 70.6%-71.5%); mean body mass index ranged between 29.7 and 30.9; and patients receiving mechanical ventilation ranged between 50.0% and 63.5%. For the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively, the median organ support-free days were 0 (IQR, -1 to 15), 0 (IQR, -1 to 13), and 0 (-1 to 11) days (composed of 30%, 26%, and 33% mortality rates and 11.5, 9.5, and 6 median organ support-free days among survivors). The median adjusted odds ratio and bayesian probability of superiority were 1.43 (95% credible interval, 0.91-2.27) and 93% for fixed-dose hydrocortisone, respectively, and were 1.22 (95% credible interval, 0.76-1.94) and 80% for shock-dependent hydrocortisone compared with no hydrocortisone. Serious adverse events were reported in 4 (3%), 5 (3%), and 1 (1%) patients in the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with a 7-day fixed-dose course of hydrocortisone or shock-dependent dosing of hydrocortisone, compared with no hydrocortisone, resulted in 93% and 80% probabilities of superiority with regard to the odds of improvement in organ support-free days within 21 days. However, the trial was stopped early and no treatment strategy met prespecified criteria for statistical superiority, precluding definitive conclusions. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707

COVID-19 symptoms at hospital admission vary with age and sex: results from the ISARIC prospective multinational observational study

Background: The ISARIC prospective multinational observational study is the largest cohort of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. We present relationships of age, sex, and nationality to presenting symptoms. Methods: International, prospective observational study of 60 109 hospitalized symptomatic patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 recruited from 43 countries between 30 January and 3 August 2020. Logistic regression was performed to evaluate relationships of age and sex to published COVID-19 case definitions and the most commonly reported symptoms. Results: ‘Typical’ symptoms of fever (69%), cough (68%) and shortness of breath (66%) were the most commonly reported. 92% of patients experienced at least one of these. Prevalence of typical symptoms was greatest in 30- to 60-year-olds (respectively 80, 79, 69%; at least one 95%). They were reported less frequently in children (≤ 18 years: 69, 48, 23; 85%), older adults (≥ 70 years: 61, 62, 65; 90%), and women (66, 66, 64; 90%; vs. men 71, 70, 67; 93%, each P < 0.001). The most common atypical presentations under 60 years of age were nausea and vomiting and abdominal pain, and over 60 years was confusion. Regression models showed significant differences in symptoms with sex, age and country. Interpretation: This international collaboration has allowed us to report reliable symptom data from the largest cohort of patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Adults over 60 and children admitted to hospital with COVID-19 are less likely to present with typical symptoms. Nausea and vomiting are common atypical presentations under 30 years. Confusion is a frequent atypical presentation of COVID-19 in adults over 60 years. Women are less likely to experience typical symptoms than men

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

Comparison of different histological indexes in the assessment of UC activity and their accuracy regarding endoscopic outcomes and faecal calprotectin levels

Objective Histological remission is being increasingly acknowledged as a therapeutic endpoint in patients with UC. The work hereafter described aimed to evaluate the concordance between three histological classification systems-Geboes Score (GS), Nancy Index (NI) and RobartsHistopathologyIndex (RHI), as well as to evaluate their association with the endoscopic outcomes and the faecal calprotectin (FC) levels. Design Biopsy samples from 377 patients with UC were blindly evaluated using GS, NI and RHI. The results were compared with the patients' Mayo Endoscopic Score and FC levels. Result GS, NI and RHI have a good concordance concerning the distinction between patients in histological remission or activity. RHI was particularly close to NI, with 100% of all patients classified as being in remission with NI being identified as such with RHI and 100% of all patients classified as having activity with RHI being identified as such with NI. These scores could also predict the Mayo Endoscopic Score and the FC levels, with their sensitivity and specificity levels depending on the chosen cut-offs. Moreover, higher FC levels were statistically associated with the presence of neutrophils in the epithelium, as well as with ulceration or erosion of the intestinal mucosa. Conclusions GS, NI and RHI histopathological scoring systems are comparable in what concerns patients' stratification into histological remission/activity. Additionally, FC levels are increased when neutrophils are present in the epithelium and the intestinal mucosa has erosions or ulcers. The presence of neutrophils in the epithelium is, indeed, the main marker of histological activity.Portuguese IBD Group (GEDII-Grupo de Estudo da Doenca Inflamatoria Intestinal)info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Comparing the continuous geboes score with the Robarts Histopathology Index: definitions of histological remission and response and their relation to faecal calprotectin levels

Background and Aims: The histological status of ulcerative colitis [UC] patients in clinical and endoscopic remission has gained space as an important prognostic marker and a key component of disease monitoring. Our main aims were to compare two histological indexes-the continuous Geboes score [GS] and the Robarts Histopathology index [RHI]-regarding their definitions of histological remission and response, and the ability of faecal calprotectin [FC] levels to discriminate between these statuses. Methods: This was an analysis of three prospective cohorts including 422 patients previously enrolled in other studies. Results: The two continuous scores [GS and RHI] were shown to be significantly correlated [correlation coefficient of 0.806, p < 0.001] and particularly close regarding their definition of histological response: 95% and 88% of all patients classified as having/not having [respectively] histological response according to RHI also did so according to GS. Moreover, median FC levels in patients with histological response were lower than those in patients without histological response [GS: 73.00 vs 525.00, p < 0.001; RHI: 73.50 vs 510.00, p < 0.001]; a similar trend was observed when FC levels of patients in histological remission were compared to those of patients with histological activity [GS: 76.00 vs 228.00, p < 0.001; RHI: 73.50 vs 467.00, p < 0.001]. FC levels allowed us to exclude the absence of histological remission [according to RHI] and absence of histological response [according to RHI and GS], with negative predictive values varying from 82% to 96%. However, optimization of the FC cut-off to exclude the absence of histological remission, as for the continuous GS, falls within values that resemble those of the healthy population. Conclusion: The continuous GS and RHI histological scores are strongly correlated in their definitions of histological response. An absence of histological remission could only be excluded at physiological levels of FC.Portuguese IBD group [GEDII- Grupo de Estudo da Doenca Inflamatoria Intestinal]info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Characterisation of microbial attack on archaeological bone

As part of an EU funded project to investigate the factors influencing bone preservation in the archaeological record, more than 250 bones from 41 archaeological sites in five countries spanning four climatic regions were studied for diagenetic alteration. Sites were selected to cover a range of environmental conditions and archaeological contexts. Microscopic and physical (mercury intrusion porosimetry) analyses of these bones revealed that the majority (68%) had suffered microbial attack. Furthermore, significant differences were found between animal and human bone in both the state of preservation and the type of microbial attack present. These differences in preservation might result from differences in early taphonomy of the bones. © 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved

Respiratory support in patients with severe COVID-19 in the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection (ISARIC) COVID-19 study: a prospective, multinational, observational study

Background: Up to 30% of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 require advanced respiratory support, including high-flow nasal cannulas (HFNC), non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIV), or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). We aimed to describe the clinical characteristics, outcomes and risk factors for failing non-invasive respiratory support in patients treated with severe COVID-19 during the first two years of the pandemic in high-income countries (HICs) and low middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: This is a multinational, multicentre, prospective cohort study embedded in the ISARIC-WHO COVID-19 Clinical Characterisation Protocol. Patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection who required hospital admission were recruited prospectively. Patients treated with HFNC, NIV, or IMV within the first 24 h of hospital admission were included in this study. Descriptive statistics, random forest, and logistic regression analyses were used to describe clinical characteristics and compare clinical outcomes among patients treated with the different types of advanced respiratory support. Results: A total of 66,565 patients were included in this study. Overall, 82.6% of patients were treated in HIC, and 40.6% were admitted to the hospital during the first pandemic wave. During the first 24 h after hospital admission, patients in HICs were more frequently treated with HFNC (48.0%), followed by NIV (38.6%) and IMV (13.4%). In contrast, patients admitted in lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs) were less frequently treated with HFNC (16.1%) and the majority received IMV (59.1%). The failure rate of non-invasive respiratory support (i.e. HFNC or NIV) was 15.5%, of which 71.2% were from HIC and 28.8% from LMIC. The variables most strongly associated with non-invasive ventilation failure, defined as progression to IMV, were high leukocyte counts at hospital admission (OR [95%CI]; 5.86 [4.83-7.10]), treatment in an LMIC (OR [95%CI]; 2.04 [1.97-2.11]), and tachypnoea at hospital admission (OR [95%CI]; 1.16 [1.14-1.18]). Patients who failed HFNC/NIV had a higher 28-day fatality ratio (OR [95%CI]; 1.27 [1.25-1.30]). Conclusions: In the present international cohort, the most frequently used advanced respiratory support was the HFNC. However, IMV was used more often in LMIC. Higher leucocyte count, tachypnoea, and treatment in LMIC were risk factors for HFNC/NIV failure. HFNC/NIV failure was related to worse clinical outcomes, such as 28-day mortality. Trial registration This is a prospective observational study; therefore, no health care interventions were applied to participants, and trial registration is not applicable