26 research outputs found
Impact of route of access and stenosis subtype on outcome after transcatheter aortic valve replacement.
INTRODUCTION
Previous analyses have reported the outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for patients with low-flow, low-gradient (LFLG) aortic stenosis (AS), without stratifying according to the route of access. Differences in mortality rates among access routes have been established for high-gradient (HG) patients and hypothesized to be even more pronounced in LFLG AS patients. This study aims to compare the outcomes of patients with LFLG or HG AS following transfemoral (TF) or transapical (TA) TAVR.
METHODS
A total of 910 patients, who underwent either TF or TA TAVR with a median follow-up of 2.22 (IQR: 1.22-4.03) years, were included in this multicenter cohort study. In total, 146 patients (16.04%) suffered from LFLG AS. The patients with HG and LFLG AS were stratified according to the route of access and compared statistically.
RESULTS
The operative mortality rates of patients with HG and LFLG were found to be comparable following TF access. The operative mortality rate was significantly increased for patients who underwent TA access [odds ratio (OR): 2.91 (1.54-5.48), p = 0.001] and patients with LFLG AS [OR: 2.27 (1.13-4.56), p = 0.02], which could be corroborated in a propensity score-matched subanalysis. The observed increase in the risk of operative mortality demonstrated an additive effect [OR for TA LFLG: 5.45 (2.35-12.62), p < 0.001]. LFLG patients who underwent TA access had significantly higher operative mortality rates (17.78%) compared with TF LFLG (3.96%, p = 0.016) and TA HG patients (6.36%, p = 0.024).
CONCLUSIONS
HG patients experienced a twofold increase in operative mortality rates following TA compared with TF access, while LFLG patients had a fivefold increase in operative mortality rates. TA TAVR appears suboptimal for patients with LFLG AS. Prospective studies should be conducted to evaluate alternative options in cases where TF is not possible
Distinct chemokine receptor expression profiles in de novo DLBCL, transformed follicular lymphoma, Richter’s trans-formed DLBCL and germinal center B-cells
SIAMOC position paper on gait analysis in clinical practice: General requirements, methods and appropriateness. Results of an Italian consensus conference
Gait analysis is recognized as a useful assessment tool in the field of human movement research. However, doubts remain on its real effectiveness as a clinical tool, i.e. on its capability to change the diagnostic-therapeutic practice. In particular, the conditions in which evidence of a favorable cost-benefit ratio is found and the methodology for properly conducting and interpreting the exam are not identified clearly. To provide guidelines for the use of Gait Analysis in the context of rehabilitation medicine, SIAMOC (the Italian Society of Clinical Movement Analysis) promoted a National Consensus Conference which was held in Bologna on September 14th, 2013. The resulting recommendations were the result of a three-stage process entailing i) the preparation of working documents on specific open issues, ii) the holding of the consensus meeting, and iii) the drafting of consensus statements by an external Jury. The statements were formulated based on scientific evidence or experts' opinion, when the quality/quantity of the relevant literature was deemed insufficient. The aim of this work is to disseminate the consensus statements. These are divided into 13 questions grouped in three areas of interest: 1) General requirements and management, 2) Methodological and instrumental issues, and 3) Scientific evidence and clinical appropriateness. SIAMOC hopes that this document will contribute to improve clinical practice and help promoting further research in the field
The Changing Landscape for Stroke\ua0Prevention in AF: Findings From the GLORIA-AF Registry Phase 2
Background GLORIA-AF (Global Registry on Long-Term Oral Antithrombotic Treatment in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation) is a prospective, global registry program describing antithrombotic treatment patterns in patients with newly diagnosed nonvalvular atrial fibrillation at risk of stroke. Phase 2 began when dabigatran, the first non\u2013vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC), became available. Objectives This study sought to describe phase 2 baseline data and compare these with the pre-NOAC era collected during phase 1. Methods During phase 2, 15,641 consenting patients were enrolled (November 2011 to December 2014); 15,092 were eligible. This pre-specified cross-sectional analysis describes eligible patients\u2019 baseline characteristics. Atrial fibrillation disease characteristics, medical outcomes, and concomitant diseases and medications were collected. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results Of the total patients, 45.5% were female; median age was 71 (interquartile range: 64, 78) years. Patients were from Europe (47.1%), North America (22.5%), Asia (20.3%), Latin America (6.0%), and the Middle East/Africa (4.0%). Most had high stroke risk (CHA2DS2-VASc [Congestive heart failure, Hypertension, Age 6575 years, Diabetes mellitus, previous Stroke, Vascular disease, Age 65 to 74 years, Sex category] score 652; 86.1%); 13.9% had moderate risk (CHA2DS2-VASc = 1). Overall, 79.9% received oral anticoagulants, of whom 47.6% received NOAC and 32.3% vitamin K antagonists (VKA); 12.1% received antiplatelet agents; 7.8% received no antithrombotic treatment. For comparison, the proportion of phase 1 patients (of N = 1,063 all eligible) prescribed VKA was 32.8%, acetylsalicylic acid 41.7%, and no therapy 20.2%. In Europe in phase 2, treatment with NOAC was more common than VKA (52.3% and 37.8%, respectively); 6.0% of patients received antiplatelet treatment; and 3.8% received no antithrombotic treatment. In North America, 52.1%, 26.2%, and 14.0% of patients received NOAC, VKA, and antiplatelet drugs, respectively; 7.5% received no antithrombotic treatment. NOAC use was less common in Asia (27.7%), where 27.5% of patients received VKA, 25.0% antiplatelet drugs, and 19.8% no antithrombotic treatment. Conclusions The baseline data from GLORIA-AF phase 2 demonstrate that in newly diagnosed nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients, NOAC have been highly adopted into practice, becoming more frequently prescribed than VKA in Europe and North America. Worldwide, however, a large proportion of patients remain undertreated, particularly in Asia and North America. (Global Registry on Long-Term Oral Antithrombotic Treatment in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation [GLORIA-AF]; NCT01468701
Impact of route of access and stenosis subtype on outcome after transcatheter aortic valve replacement
IntroductionPrevious analyses have reported the outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for patients with low-flow, low-gradient (LFLG) aortic stenosis (AS), without stratifying according to the route of access. Differences in mortality rates among access routes have been established for high-gradient (HG) patients and hypothesized to be even more pronounced in LFLG AS patients. This study aims to compare the outcomes of patients with LFLG or HG AS following transfemoral (TF) or transapical (TA) TAVR.MethodsA total of 910 patients, who underwent either TF or TA TAVR with a median follow-up of 2.22 (IQR: 1.22–4.03) years, were included in this multicenter cohort study. In total, 146 patients (16.04%) suffered from LFLG AS. The patients with HG and LFLG AS were stratified according to the route of access and compared statistically.ResultsThe operative mortality rates of patients with HG and LFLG were found to be comparable following TF access. The operative mortality rate was significantly increased for patients who underwent TA access [odds ratio (OR): 2.91 (1.54–5.48), p = 0.001] and patients with LFLG AS [OR: 2.27 (1.13–4.56), p = 0.02], which could be corroborated in a propensity score-matched subanalysis. The observed increase in the risk of operative mortality demonstrated an additive effect [OR for TA LFLG: 5.45 (2.35–12.62), p < 0.001]. LFLG patients who underwent TA access had significantly higher operative mortality rates (17.78%) compared with TF LFLG (3.96%, p = 0.016) and TA HG patients (6.36%, p = 0.024).ConclusionsHG patients experienced a twofold increase in operative mortality rates following TA compared with TF access, while LFLG patients had a fivefold increase in operative mortality rates. TA TAVR appears suboptimal for patients with LFLG AS. Prospective studies should be conducted to evaluate alternative options in cases where TF is not possible
A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on the Safety of Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF) Inhibitors for the Treatment of Retinopathy of Prematurity
<div><p>Introduction</p><p>Laser photocoagulation is the current gold standard treatment for proliferative retinopathy of prematurity (ROP). However, it permanently reduces the visual field and might induce myopia. Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors for the treatment of ROP may enable continuing vascularization of the retina, potentially allowing the preservation of the visual field. However, for their use in infants concern remains. This meta-analysis explores the safety of VEGF inhibitors.</p><p>Methods</p><p>The Ovid Interface was used to perform a systematic review of the literature in the databases PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library.</p><p>Results</p><p>This meta-analysis included 24 original reports (including 1.457 eyes) on VEGF inhibitor treatment for ROP. The trials were solely observational except for one randomized and two case-control studies. We estimated a 6-month risk of retreatment per eye of 2.8%, and a 6-month risk of ocular complication without the need of retreatment of 1.6% per eye. Systemic complications were only reported as isolated incidents.</p><p>Discussion</p><p>VEGF inhibitors seem to be associated with low recurrence rates and ocular complication rates. They may have the benefit of potentially allowing the preservation of visual field and lower rates of myopia. Due to the lack of data, the risk of systemic side effects cannot be assessed.</p></div
Vitreous hyper-reflective dots in pseudophakic cystoid macular edema assessed with optical coherence tomography - Fig 1
<p>(Upper, Middle) Arrows indicate vitreous hyper-reflective dots (VHDs) in an eye with pseudophakic CME. (Lower) The rectangle displays a magnified VHD with bars measuring its vertical and horizontal diameter. The bar measuring the horizontal diameter appears shorter since the OCT scan is displayed with full vertical resolution (1:1 pixel) instead of the vertical scale adjusted to the horizontal scale (1:1 μm).</p
Correlation coefficient r and p value estimated with Spearman’s correlation between frequency of peribulbar steroid injections or intravitreal steroid injections and relevant Clinical parameters.
<p>Correlation coefficient r and p value estimated with Spearman’s correlation between frequency of peribulbar steroid injections or intravitreal steroid injections and relevant Clinical parameters.</p
Systemic VEGF suppression after VEGF inhibitors.
<p>Research papers investigating systemic levels of VEGF after intravitreal injection of VEGF inhibitors over a defined period of time. *1 = infants with retinopathy of prematurity, unilateral injection of bevacizumab (14); 2 = infants with retinopathy of prematurity, unilateral injection of ranibizumab (105); 3 = patients with age-related macular degeneration (AMD), unilateral injection of bevacizumab (106); 4 = patients with AMD, bilateral injection of bevacizumab (106); 5 = patients with AMD, unilateral injection of ranibizumab (107); 6 = patients with AMD, unilateral injection of bevacizumab (108); 7 = patients with AMD, unilateral injection of ranibizumab (108); 8 = patients with AMD, unilateral injection of aflibercept (109); 9 = patients with AMD, unilateral injection of ranibizumab (109); 10 = patients with AMD, unilateral injection of ranibizumab (110); 11 = patients with AMD, unilateral injection of aflibercept (110); 12 = patients with AMD, unilateral injection of ranibizumab (111). ** y-axis in pg/ml.</p
Preoperative and postoperative data of the eyes of enrolled subjects.
<p>Preoperative and postoperative data of the eyes of enrolled subjects.</p