Sex differences in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest without ST-segment elevation:A COACT trial substudy

Background: Whether sex is associated with outcomes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) is unclear. Objectives: This study examined sex differences in survival in patients with OHCA without ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Methods: Using data from the randomized controlled Coronary Angiography after Cardiac Arrest (COACT) trial, the primary point of interest was sex differences in OHCA-related one-year survival. Secondary points of interest included the benefit of immediate coronary angiography compared to delayed angiography until after neurologic recovery, angiographic and clinical outcomes. Results: In total, 522 patients (79.1% men) were included. Overall one-year survival was 59.6% in women and 63.4% in men (HR 1.18; 95% CI: 0.761.81;p = 0.47). No cardiovascular risk factors were found that modified survival. Women less often had significant coronary artery disease (CAD) (37.0% vs. 71.3%; p < 0.001), but when present, they had a worse prognosis than women without CAD (HR 3.06; 95% CI 1.31-7.19; p = 0.01). This was not the case for men (HR 1.05; 95% CI 0.67-1.65; p = 0.83). In both sexes, immediate coronary angiography did not improve one-year survival compared to delayed angiography (women, odds ratio (OR) 0.87; 95% CI 0.58-1.30;p = 0.49; vs. men, OR 0.97; 95% CI 0.45-2.09; p = 0.93). Conclusion: In OHCA patients without STEMI, we found no sex differences in overall one-year survival. Women less often had significant CAD, but when CAD was present they had worse survival than women without CAD. This was not the case for men. Both sexes did not benefit from a strategy of immediate coronary angiography as compared to delayed strategy with respect to one-year survival

Data on sex differences in one-year outcomes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients without ST-segment elevation

Sex differences in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients are increasingly recognized. Although it has been found that post-resuscitated women are less likely to have significant coronary artery disease (CAD) than men, data on follow-up in these patients are limited. Data for this data in brief article was obtained as a part of the randomized controlled Coronary Angiography after Cardiac Arrest without ST-segment elevation (COACT) trial. The data supplements the manuscript "Sex differences in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients without ST-segment elevation: A COACT trial substudy" were it was found that women were less likely to have significant CAD including chronic total occlusions, and had worse survival when CAD was present. The dataset presented in this paper describes sex differences on interventions, implantable-cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) shocks and hospitalizations due to heart failure during one-year follow-up in patients successfully resuscitated after OHCA. Data was derived through a telephone interview at one year with the patient or general practitioner. Patients in this randomized dataset reflects a homogenous study population, which can be valuable to further build on research regarding long-term sex differences and to further improve cardiac care. (C) 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc

Coronary Angiography After Cardiac Arrest Without ST Segment Elevation:One-Year Outcomes of the COACT Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance: Ischemic heart disease is a common cause of cardiac arrest. However, randomized data on long-term clinical outcomes of immediate coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients successfully resuscitated from cardiac arrest in the absence of ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) are lacking. Objective: To determine whether immediate coronary angiography improves clinical outcomes at 1 year in patients after cardiac arrest without signs of STEMI, compared with a delayed coronary angiography strategy. Design, Setting, and Participants: A prespecified analysis of a multicenter, open-label, randomized clinical trial evaluated 552 patients who were enrolled in 19 Dutch centers between January 8, 2015, and July 17, 2018. The study included patients who experienced out-of-hospital cardiac arrest with a shockable rhythm who were successfully resuscitated without signs of STEMI. Follow-up was performed at 1 year. Data were analyzed, using the intention-to-treat principle, between August 29 and October 10, 2019. Interventions: Immediate coronary angiography and PCI if indicated or coronary angiography and PCI if indicated, delayed until after neurologic recovery. Main Outcomes and Measures: Survival, myocardial infarction, revascularization, implantable cardiac defibrillator shock, quality of life, hospitalization for heart failure, and the composite of death or myocardial infarction or revascularization after 1 year. Results: At 1 year, data on 522 of 552 patients (94.6%) were available for analysis. Of these patients, 413 were men (79.1%); mean (SD) age was 65.4 (12.3) years. A total of 162 of 264 patients (61.4%) in the immediate angiography group and 165 of 258 patients (64.0%) in the delayed angiography group were alive (odds ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.63-1.28). The composite end point of death, myocardial infarction, or repeated revascularization since the index hospitalization was met in 112 patients (42.9%) in the immediate group and 104 patients (40.6%) in the delayed group (odds ratio, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.77-1.56). No significant differences between the groups were observed for the other outcomes at 1-year follow-up. For example, the rate of ICD shocks was 20.4% in the immediate group and 16.2% in the delayed group (odds ratio, 1.32; 95% CI, 0.66-2.64). Conclusions and Relevance: In this trial of patients successfully resuscitated after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and without signs of STEMI, a strategy of immediate angiography was not found to be superior to a strategy of delayed angiography with respect to clinical outcomes at 1 year. Coronary angiography in this patient group can therefore be delayed until after neurologic recovery without affecting outcomes

Dysregulated innate and adaptive immune responses discriminate disease severity in COVID-19

The clinical spectrum of COVID-19 varies and the differences in host response characterizing this variation have not been fully elucidated. COVID-19 disease severity correlates with an excessive pro-inflammatory immune response and profound lymphopenia. Inflammatory responses according to disease severity were explored by plasma cytokine measurements and proteomics analysis in 147 COVID-19 patients. Furthermore, peripheral blood mononuclear cell cytokine production assays and whole blood flow cytometry were performed. Results confirm a hyperinflammatory innate immune state, while highlighting hepatocyte growth factor and stem cell factor as potential biomarkers for disease severity. Clustering analysis reveals no specific inflammatory endotypes in COVID-19 patients. Functional assays reveal abrogated adaptive cytokine production (interferon-gamma, interleukin-17 and interleukin-22) and prominent T cell exhaustion in critically ill patients, whereas innate immune responses were intact or hyperresponsive. Collectively, this extensive analysis provides a comprehensive insight into the pathobiology of severe to critical COVID-19 and highlight potential biomarkers of disease severity

Rationale and design of the PRAETORIAN-COVID trial:A double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial with valsartan for PRevention of Acute rEspiraTORy dIstress syndrome in hospitAlized patieNts with SARS-COV-2 Infection Disease

There is much debate on the use of angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) in severe acute respiratory syndrome–coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2)–infected patients. Although it has been suggested that ARBs might lead to a higher susceptibility and severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection, experimental data suggest that ARBs may reduce acute lung injury via blocking angiotensin-II–mediated pulmonary permeability, inflammation, and fibrosis. However, despite these hypotheses, specific studies on ARBs in SARS-CoV-2 patients are lacking. Methods: The PRAETORIAN-COVID trial is a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled 1:1 randomized clinical trial in adult hospitalized SARS-CoV-2–infected patients (n = 651). The primary aim is to investigate the effect of the ARB valsartan compared to placebo on the composite end point of admission to an intensive care unit, mechanical ventilation, or death within 14 days of randomization. The active-treatment arm will receive valsartan in a dosage titrated to blood pressure up to a maximum of 160 mg bid, and the placebo arm will receive matching placebo. Treatment duration will be 14 days, or until the occurrence of the primary end point or until hospital discharge, if either of these occurs within 14 days. The trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04335786, 2020). The PRAETORIAN-COVID trial is a double-blind, placebo-controlled 1:1 randomized trial to assess the effect of valsartan compared to placebo on the occurrence of ICU admission, mechanical ventilation, and death in hospitalized SARS-CoV-2–infected patients. The results of this study might impact the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 patients globally

Factors Associated with Revision Surgery after Internal Fixation of Hip Fractures

Background: Femoral neck fractures are associated with high rates of revision surgery after management with internal fixation. Using data from the Fixation using Alternative Implants for the Treatment of Hip fractures (FAITH) trial evaluating methods of internal fixation in patients with femoral neck fractures, we investigated associations between baseline and surgical factors and the need for revision surgery to promote healing, relieve pain, treat infection or improve function over 24 months postsurgery. Additionally, we investigated factors associated with (1) hardware removal and (2) implant exchange from cancellous screws (CS) or sliding hip screw (SHS) to total hip arthroplasty, hemiarthroplasty, or another internal fixation device. Methods: We identified 15 potential factors a priori that may be associated with revision surgery, 7 with hardware removal, and 14 with implant exchange. We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards analyses in our investigation. Results: Factors associated with increased risk of revision surgery included: female sex, [hazard ratio (HR) 1.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.25-2.50; P = 0.001], higher body mass index (fo

Perceived Burden Due to Registrations for Quality Monitoring and Improvement in Hospitals: A Mixed Methods Study

BACKGROUND: Quality indicators are registered to monitor and improve the quality of care. However, the number and effectiveness of quality indicators is under debate, and may influence the joy in work of physicians and nurses. Empirical data on the nature and consequences of the registration burden are lacking. The aim of this study was to identify and explore healthcare professionals' perceived burden due to quality registrations in hospitals, and the effect of this burden on their joy in work. METHODS: A mixed methods observational study, including participative observations, a survey and semi-structured interviews in two academic hospitals and one teaching hospital in the Netherlands. Study participants were 371 healthcare professionals from an intensive care unit (ICU), a haematology department and others involved in the care of elderly patients and patients with prostate or gastrointestinal cancer. RESULTS: On average, healthcare professionals spend 52.3 minutes per working day on quality registrations. The average number of quality measures per department is 91, with 1380 underlying variables. Overall, 57% are primarily registered for accountability purposes, 19% for institutional governance and 25% for quality improvement objectives. Only 36% were perceived as useful for improving quality in everyday practice. Eight types of registration burden were identified, such as an excessive number of quality registrations, and the lack of usefulness for improving quality and inefficiencies in the registration process. The time healthcare professionals spent on quality registrations was not correlated with any measure of joy in work. Perceived unreasonable registrations were negatively associated with healthcare professionals' joy in work (intrinsic motivation and autonomy). Healthcare professionals experienced quality registrations as diverting time from patient care and from actually improving quality. CONCLUSION: Registering fewer quality indicators, but more of what really matters to healthcare professionals, is key to increasing the effectiveness of registrations for quality improvement and governance. Also the efficiency of quality registrations should be increased through staffing and information and communications technology solutions to reduce the registration burden experienced by nurses and physicians