The Ischemic Stroke Genetics Study (ISGS) Protocol

BACKGROUND: The molecular basis for the genetic risk of ischemic stroke is likely to be multigenic and influenced by environmental factors. Several small case-control studies have suggested associations between ischemic stroke and polymorphisms of genes that code for coagulation cascade proteins and platelet receptors. Our aim is to investigate potential associations between hemostatic gene polymorphisms and ischemic stroke, with particular emphasis on detailed characterization of the phenotype. METHODS/DESIGN: The Ischemic Stroke Genetic Study is a prospective, multicenter genetic association study in adults with recent first-ever ischemic stroke confirmed with computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging. Patients are evaluated at academic medical centers in the United States and compared with sex- and age-matched controls. Stroke subtypes are determined by central blinded adjudication using standardized, validated mechanistic and syndromic classification systems. The panel of genes to be tested for polymorphisms includes β-fibrinogen and platelet glycoprotein Ia, Iba, and IIb/IIIa. Immortalized cell lines are created to allow for time- and cost-efficient testing of additional candidate genes in the future. DISCUSSION: The study is designed to minimize survival bias and to allow for exploring associations between specific polymorphisms and individual subtypes of ischemic stroke. The data set will also permit the study of genetic determinants of stroke outcome. Having cell lines will permit testing of future candidate risk factor genes

A randomized trial to assess the impact of opinion leader endorsed evidence summaries on the use of secondary prevention strategies in patients with coronary artery disease: the ESP-CAD trial protocol [NCT00175240]

BACKGROUND: Although numerous therapies have been shown to be beneficial in the prevention of myocardial infarction and/or death in patients with coronary disease, these therapies are under-used and this gap contributes to sub-optimal patient outcomes. To increase the uptake of proven efficacious therapies in patients with coronary disease, we designed a multifaceted quality improvement intervention employing patient-specific reminders delivered at the point-of-care, with one-page treatment guidelines endorsed by local opinion leaders ("Local Opinion Leader Statement"). This trial is designed to evaluate the impact of these Local Opinion Leader Statements on the practices of primary care physicians caring for patients with coronary disease. In order to isolate the effects of the messenger (the local opinion leader) from the message, we will also test an identical quality improvement intervention that is not signed by a local opinion leader ("Unsigned Evidence Statement") in this trial. METHODS: Randomized trial testing three different interventions in patients with coronary disease: (1) usual care versus (2) Local Opinion Leader Statement versus (3) Unsigned Evidence Statement. Patients diagnosed with coronary artery disease after cardiac catheterization (but without acute coronary syndromes) will be randomly allocated to one of the three interventions by cluster randomization (at the level of their primary care physician), if they are not on optimal statin therapy at baseline. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients demonstrating improvement in their statin management in the first six months post-catheterization. Secondary outcomes include examinations of the use of ACE inhibitors, anti-platelet agents, beta-blockers, non-statin lipid lowering drugs, and provision of smoking cessation advice in the first six months post-catheterization in the three treatment arms. Although randomization will be clustered at the level of the primary care physician, the design effect is anticipated to be negligible and the unit of analysis will be the patient. DISCUSSION: If either the Local Opinion Leader Statement or the Unsigned Evidence Statement improves secondary prevention in patients with coronary disease, they can be easily modified and applied in other communities and for other target conditions

Mortality and pulmonary complications in patients undergoing surgery with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection: an international cohort study

Background: The impact of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) on postoperative recovery needs to be understood to inform clinical decision making during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. This study reports 30-day mortality and pulmonary complication rates in patients with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods: This international, multicentre, cohort study at 235 hospitals in 24 countries included all patients undergoing surgery who had SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed within 7 days before or 30 days after surgery. The primary outcome measure was 30-day postoperative mortality and was assessed in all enrolled patients. The main secondary outcome measure was pulmonary complications, defined as pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, or unexpected postoperative ventilation. Findings: This analysis includes 1128 patients who had surgery between Jan 1 and March 31, 2020, of whom 835 (74·0%) had emergency surgery and 280 (24·8%) had elective surgery. SARS-CoV-2 infection was confirmed preoperatively in 294 (26·1%) patients. 30-day mortality was 23·8% (268 of 1128). Pulmonary complications occurred in 577 (51·2%) of 1128 patients; 30-day mortality in these patients was 38·0% (219 of 577), accounting for 81·7% (219 of 268) of all deaths. In adjusted analyses, 30-day mortality was associated with male sex (odds ratio 1·75 [95% CI 1·28–2·40], p\textless0·0001), age 70 years or older versus younger than 70 years (2·30 [1·65–3·22], p\textless0·0001), American Society of Anesthesiologists grades 3–5 versus grades 1–2 (2·35 [1·57–3·53], p\textless0·0001), malignant versus benign or obstetric diagnosis (1·55 [1·01–2·39], p=0·046), emergency versus elective surgery (1·67 [1·06–2·63], p=0·026), and major versus minor surgery (1·52 [1·01–2·31], p=0·047). Interpretation: Postoperative pulmonary complications occur in half of patients with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection and are associated with high mortality. Thresholds for surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic should be higher than during normal practice, particularly in men aged 70 years and older. Consideration should be given for postponing non-urgent procedures and promoting non-operative treatment to delay or avoid the need for surgery. Funding: National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, NIHR Academy, Sarcoma UK, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research

Diabetes Mellitus prevalence and control in Sleep Disordered Breathing: the European Sleep Apnea Cohort (ESADA) study.

BACKGROUND: OSA is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity. A driver of this is metabolic dysfunction and in particular type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Prior studies identifying a link between OSA and T2DM have excluded subjects with undiagnosed T2DM, and there is a lack of population-level data on the interaction between OSA and glycemic control among patients with diabetes. We assessed the relationship between OSA severity and T2DM prevalence and control in a large multinational population. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of 6,616 participants in the European Sleep Apnea Cohort (ESADA) study, using multivariate regression analysis to assess T2DM prevalence according to OSA severity, as measured by the oxyhemoglobin desaturation index. Patients with diabetes were identified by previous history and medication prescription, and by screening for undiagnosed diabetes with glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) measurement. The relationship of OSA severity with glycemic control was assessed in diabetic subjects. RESULTS: T2DM prevalence increased with OSA severity, from 6.6% in subjects without OSA to 28.9% in those with severe OSA. Despite adjustment for obesity and other confounding factors, in comparison with subjects free of OSA, patients with mild, moderate, or severe disease had an OR (95% CI) of 1.33 (1.04-1.72), 1.73 (1.33-2.25), and 1.87 (1.45-2.42) (P.001),respectively, for prevalent T2DM. Diabetic subjects with more severe OSA had worse glycemic control, with adjusted mean HbA1c levels 0.72% higher in patients with severe OSA than in those without sleep-disordered breathing (analysis of covariance, P.001). CONCLUSIONS:Increasing OSA severity is associated with increased likelihood of concomitant T2DM and worse diabetic control in patients with T2DM

Sleep apnoea severity independently predicts glycaemic health in nondiabetic subjects: the ESADA study.

Obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) is associated with increased risk of dysglycaemia but the intimate link of these conditions with obesity makes discerning an independent relationship between them challenging. Glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels predict adverse cardiovascular outcomes in nondiabetics but there is a lack of population-level data exploring the relationship of HbA1c with OSA. A cross-sectional analysis of 5294 participants in the multinational European Sleep Apnoea Cohort (European Sleep Apnoea Database) study was performed, assessing the relationship of OSA severity with HbA1c levels in nondiabetic subjects, with adjustment for confounding factors. HbA1c levels correlated significantly with OSA severity in univariate analysis. Following adjustment for confounding factors, apnoea-hypopnoea index (AHI) (standardised β 0.158; p<0.001), along with nocturnal hypoxaemia, predicted HbA1c. Adjusted mean HbA1c levels were lower in the lowest AHI quartile (5.24%, 95% CI 5.21-5.27%) than in the second (5.37%, 95% CI 5.34-5.40%), third (5.44%, 95% CI 5.41-5.47%) or highest (5.50%, 95% CI 5.46-5.53%) quartiles. Subjects in the higher quartiles had significantly greater adjusted odds ratios of HbA1c level ≥6.0% than those in the first quartile. In stratified analyses, OSA severity predicted glycaemic health irrespective of sleep study modality, sex, obesity or daytime sleepiness. OSA severity independently predicts glycaemic health in nondiabetic subjects. Further studies should assess the impact of OSA treatment on glycaemic health and elucidate underlying mechanisms