Principales medidas de profilaxis en endoscopia bariátrica. Guía Española de Recomendación de Expertos

Bariatric endoscopy (BE) encompasses a number of techniques -some consolidated, some under development- aiming to contribute to the management of obese patients and their associated metabolic diseases as a complement to dietary and lifestyle changes. To date different intragastric balloon models, suture systems, aspiration methods, substance injections and both gastric and duodenal malabsorptive devices have been developed, as well as endoscopic procedures for the revision of bariatric surgery. Their ongoing evolution conditions a gradual increase in the quantity and quality of scientific evidence about their effectiveness and safety. Despite this, scientific evidence remains inadequate to establish strong grades of recommendation allowing a unified perspective on prophylaxis in BE. This dearth of data conditions leads, in daily practice, to frequently extrapolate the measures that are used in bariatric surgery (BS) and/or in general therapeutic endoscopy. In this respect, this special article is intended to reach a consensus on the most common prophylactic measures we should apply in BE. The methodological design of this document was developed while attempting to comply with the following 5 phases: Phase 1: delimitation and scope of objectives, according to the GRADE Clinical Guidelines. Phase 2: setup of the Clinical Guide-developing Group: national experts, members of the Grupo Español de Endoscopia Bariátrica (GETTEMO, SEED), SEPD, and SECO, selecting 2 authors for each section. Phase 3: clinical question form (PICO): patients, intervention, comparison, outcomes. Phase 4: literature assessment and synthesis. Search for evidence and elaboration of recommendations. Based on the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine classification, most evidence in this article will correspond to level 5 (expert opinions without explicit critical appraisal) and grade of recommendation C (favorable yet inconclusive recommendation) or D (inconclusive or inconsistent studies). Phase 5: External review by experts. We hope that these basic preventive measures will be of interest for daily practice, and may help prevent medical and/or legal conflicts for the benefit of patients, physicians, and BE in general

Role of age and comorbidities in mortality of patients with infective endocarditis

[Purpose]: The aim of this study was to analyse the characteristics of patients with IE in three groups of age and to assess the ability of age and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) to predict mortality. [Methods]: Prospective cohort study of all patients with IE included in the GAMES Spanish database between 2008 and 2015.Patients were stratified into three age groups:<65 years,65 to 80 years,and ≥ 80 years.The area under the receiver-operating characteristic (AUROC) curve was calculated to quantify the diagnostic accuracy of the CCI to predict mortality risk. [Results]: A total of 3120 patients with IE (1327 < 65 years;1291 65-80 years;502 ≥ 80 years) were enrolled.Fever and heart failure were the most common presentations of IE, with no differences among age groups.Patients ≥80 years who underwent surgery were significantly lower compared with other age groups (14.3%,65 years; 20.5%,65-79 years; 31.3%,≥80 years). In-hospital mortality was lower in the <65-year group (20.3%,<65 years;30.1%,65-79 years;34.7%,≥80 years;p < 0.001) as well as 1-year mortality (3.2%, <65 years; 5.5%, 65-80 years;7.6%,≥80 years; p = 0.003).Independent predictors of mortality were age ≥ 80 years (hazard ratio [HR]:2.78;95% confidence interval [CI]:2.32–3.34), CCI ≥ 3 (HR:1.62; 95% CI:1.39–1.88),and non-performed surgery (HR:1.64;95% CI:11.16–1.58).When the three age groups were compared,the AUROC curve for CCI was significantly larger for patients aged <65 years(p < 0.001) for both in-hospital and 1-year mortality. [Conclusion]: There were no differences in the clinical presentation of IE between the groups. Age ≥ 80 years, high comorbidity (measured by CCI),and non-performance of surgery were independent predictors of mortality in patients with IE.CCI could help to identify those patients with IE and surgical indication who present a lower risk of in-hospital and 1-year mortality after surgery, especially in the <65-year group

El desafío de la paz: Colombia, Guatemala, Ucrania y El Salvador a la luz de los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible

Recoge las ponencias expuestas por treinta y una personalidades académicas y políticas de talla internacional además de las intervenciones de las autoridades académicas de la Universidad Carlos III de Madrid y del Ministerio de Derechos Sociales y Agenda 2030, presentadas en cuatro seminarios, que comenzaron con los relativos a los procesos de paz en Colombia y Guatemala, a fines de 2021, que continuaron el 30 de marzo de 2022 con la jornada dedicada a las herramientas para buscar una solución diplomática a la guerra en Ucrania (solo un mes después de la invasión rusa) y en junio del mismo año con el relativo a los acuerdos de 1992 en El Salvador. Dichos seminarios fueron: "Los Acuerdos de Paz en Colombia, cinco años después". (Madrid, 29 y 30 de noviembre de 2021); "Los Acuerdos de Paz en Guatemala, veinticinco años después". (Madrid, 13 de diciembre de 2021); "Ucrania: Solución negociada, seguridad compartida". (Madrid, 30 de marzo de 2022); "Los Acuerdos de Paz de El Salvador, treinta años después, en el marco de la Agenda 2030". (Madrid, 22 de junio de 2022)Presentación / Juan Daniel Oliva, Carlos R. Fernández Liesa (pp.12-14). -- Prólogo / Lilith Verstrynge Revuelta, (pp. 15-16). -- Primera parte: Los acuerdos de paz en Colombia, cinco años después (p. 18). -- Apertura / Juan Romo Uroz (pp. 18-20). -- [Apertura] / Ione Belarra (pp. 20-23). -- Hacer la paz es más difícil que hacer la guerra / Juan Manuel Santos Calderón (pp. 23-27). -- No hay un acuerdo de paz que tenga un calado de reformas como el colombiano / Josefina Echavarría Álvarez (pp. 28-34). -- Juramos que nuestra única arma sería la palabra / Rodrigo Londoño Echeverri (pp. 34-38). -- Tuvisteis que hacer frente a una coyuntura política dificilísima / José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero (pp. 38-42). -- Segunda mesa: Balance, implementación y Agenda 2030 / Enrique Santiago (pp. 43-46). -- Solicito la apertura del macrocaso de la responsabilidad del Estado / Álvaro Leyva Durán (pp. 47-53). -- En Colombia existen más de cien mil desaparecidos / Luz Marina Monzón Cifuentes (pp. 54-61). -- No hay contradicción entre la búsqueda de la paz y la de la justicia / Yesid Reyes Alvarado (pp. 62-67). -- Logramos el primer acuerdo de paz con enfoque de género / Gloria Inés Ramírez (pp. 68-74). -- Segunda parte. Los Acuerdos de Paz en Guatemala, veinticinco años después (p. 75). -- Apertura / J. Daniel Oliva Martínez (pp. 75-76) , Enrique Santiago Romero (pp. 77-78). -- Guatemala es hoy un Estado capturado por mafias / José Manuel Martín Medem (pp. 78-81). -- Se firmó la paz, pero falta la construcción de una cultura de paz / Olinda Salguero (pp. 81-85). -- Guatemala se halla en el peor escenario en materia de derechos humanos desde 1986 / Velia Muralles (pp. 85-90). -- Las comisiones de la verdad registraron unas doscientas mil personas desaparecidas y ejecutadas / Erik de León (pp. 90-94). -- El problema fundamental era y es la marginación de los grupos indígenas y la pobreza extrema / Vinicio Cerezo Arévalo (pp. 94-102). -- Guatemala está peor que cuando firmamos la paz / Pablo Monsanto (pp. 103-109). -- Guatemala es un barril de pólvora con la mecha prendida / Ana Isabel Prera (pp. 109-115). -- Clausura / Ione Belarra (pp. 115-120). -- Tercera parte. Ucrania: Solución negociada, seguridad compartida (p. 121). Apertura / María Luisa González Cuéllar Serrano, Ione Belarra (pp. 122-125). -- Debemos trabajar para exponer las amenazas de esta guerra. Es necesario para sobrevivir / Noam Chomsky (pp. 125-132). -- Primera Mesa - La negociación como herramienta de resolución de conflictos / Santiago Jiménez Martín (p. 133). -- Trabajar por la paz acarrea incomprensiones y entraña riesgos / Yago Pico de Coaña (pp. 134-139). -- La Unión Europea debe volver a un papel de potencia pacífica / Gianni Labella (pp. 140-145). -- Las armas no nos salvarán / Carmen Magallón Portoles (pp. 145-149). -- Segunda mesa: Construcción de paz y seguridad compartida en Europa / Cástor Díaz Barrado (pp. 149-150). -- Un mundo sin armas nucleares es necesario y posible / Carlos Umaña (pp. 151-154). -- Pedimos una solución diplomática negociada / Mariela Kohon (pp. 155-159). -- Hay que avanzar hacia una arquitectura de seguridad europea basada en la seguridad compartida / Vicenç Fisas Armengol (pp. 159-162). -- Que la guerra en Ucrania no nos lleve a olvidar los otros conflictos armados, que también requieren nuestro apoyo / Mabel González Bustelo (pp. 163-168). -- Clausura / Carlos Fernández Liesa, Enrique Santiago (pp. 168-173). -- Cuarta parte. Los Acuerdos de Paz de El Salvador, treinta años después, en el marco de la Agenda 2030 (p. 174). -- Apertura / Montserrat Huguet Santos, Enrique Santiago (pp. 175-178). -- Hicimos la paz a través del diálogo político en medio de la guerra / Óscar Santamaría (pp. 178-182). -- Agradecemos el acompañamiento y la solidaridad de la comunidad internacional / Nidia Díaz (pp. 183-190). -- El proceso de paz no fue una confrontación ideológica / Álvaro de Soto (pp. 190-196). -- Fue el momento más importante desde la independencia nacional / Rubén Zamora (pp. 196-201). -- Segunda mesa: Los Acuerdos de Paz treinta años después: Balance, implementación y Agenda 2030 / Daniel Oliva (pp. 202-203). -- El presidente Bukele se burla de los acuerdos de paz / David Morales (pp. 203-209). -- Están en riesgo los derechos conquistados por las mujeres / Lorena Peña (pp. 209-212). -- Necesitamos una alianza en defensa de los derechos humanos / José María Tojeira (pp. 213-216). -- Tenemos que construir la unidad opositora para desplazar a esta dictadura de nuevo tipo / Maricela Ramírez (pp. 217-222). -- Clausura / Matilde Sánchez, Ione Belarra (pp. 222-224). -- Epílogo / Federico Mayor Zaragoza (pp. 225-228)

Effectiveness of Fosfomycin for the Treatment of Multidrug-Resistant Escherichia coli Bacteremic Urinary Tract Infections

IMPORTANCE The consumption of broad-spectrum drugs has increased as a consequence of the spread of multidrug-resistant (MDR) Escherichia coli. Finding alternatives for these infections is critical, for which some neglected drugs may be an option. OBJECTIVE To determine whether fosfomycin is noninferior to ceftriaxone or meropenem in the targeted treatment of bacteremic urinary tract infections (bUTIs) due to MDR E coli. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This multicenter, randomized, pragmatic, open clinical trial was conducted at 22 Spanish hospitals from June 2014 to December 2018. Eligible participants were adult patients with bacteremic urinary tract infections due to MDR E coli; 161 of 1578 screened patients were randomized and followed up for 60 days. Data were analyzed in May 2021. INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized 1 to 1 to receive intravenous fosfomycin disodium at 4 g every 6 hours (70 participants) or a comparator (ceftriaxone or meropenem if resistant; 73 participants) with the option to switch to oral fosfomycin trometamol for the fosfomycin group or an active oral drug or pa renteral ertapenem for the comparator group after 4 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was clinical and microbiological cure (CMC) 5 to 7 days after finalization of treatment; a noninferiority margin of 7% was considered. RESULTS Among 143 patients in the modified intention-to-treat population (median [IQR] age, 72 [62-81] years; 73 [51.0%] women), 48 of 70 patients (68.6%) treated with fosfomycin and 57 of 73 patients (78.1%) treated with comparators reached CMC (risk difference, -9.4 percentage points; 1-sided 95% CI, -21.5 to infinity percentage points; P = .10). While clinical or microbiological failure occurred among 10 patients (14.3%) treated with fosfomycin and 14 patients (19.7%) treated with comparators (risk difference, -5.4 percentage points; 1-sided 95% CI. -infinity to 4.9; percentage points; P = .19), an increased rate of adverse event-related discontinuations occurred with fosfomycin vs comparators (6 discontinuations [8.5%] vs 0 discontinuations; P = .006). In an exploratory analysis among a subset of 38 patients who underwent rectal colonization studies, patients treated with fosfomycin acquired a new ceftriaxone-resistant or meropenem-resistant gram-negative bacteria at a decreased rate compared with patients treated with comparators (0 of 21 patients vs 4 of 17 patients [23.5%]; 1-sided P = .01). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This study found that fosfomycin did not demonstrate noninferiority to comparators as targeted treatment of bUTI from MDR E coli; this was due to an increased rate of adverse event-related discontinuations. This finding suggests that fosfomycin may be considered for selected patients with these infections

EDUCACIÓN AMBIENTAL Y SOCIEDAD. SABERES LOCALES PARA EL DESARROLLO Y LA SUSTENTABILIDAD

Este texto contribuye al análisis científico de varias áreas del conocimiento como la filosofía social, la patología, la educación para el cuidado del medio ambiente y la sustentabilidad que inciden en diversas unidades de aprendizaje de la Licenciatura en Educación para la Salud y de la Maestría en Sociología de la SaludLas comunidades indígenas de la sierra norte de Oaxaca México, habitan un territorio extenso de biodiversidad. Sin que sea una área protegida y sustentable, la propia naturaleza de la región ofrece a sus visitantes la riqueza de la vegetación caracterizada por sus especies endémicas que componen un paisaje de suma belleza

Principales medidas de profilaxis en endoscopia bariátrica. Guía Española de Recomendación de Expertos

Bariatric endoscopy (BE) encompasses a number of techniques -some consolidated, some under development- aiming to contribute to the management of obese patients and their associated metabolic diseases as a complement to dietary and lifestyle changes. To date different intragastric balloon models, suture systems, aspiration methods, substance injections and both gastric and duodenal malabsorptive devices have been developed, as well as endoscopic procedures for the revision of bariatric surgery. Their ongoing evolution conditions a gradual increase in the quantity and quality of scientific evidence about their effectiveness and safety. Despite this, scientific evidence remains inadequate to establish strong grades of recommendation allowing a unified perspective on prophylaxis in BE. This dearth of data conditions leads, in daily practice, to frequently extrapolate the measures that are used in bariatric surgery (BS) and/or in general therapeutic endoscopy. In this respect, this special article is intended to reach a consensus on the most common prophylactic measures we should apply in BE. The methodological design of this document was developed while attempting to comply with the following 5 phases: Phase 1: delimitation and scope of objectives, according to the GRADE Clinical Guidelines. Phase 2: setup of the Clinical Guide-developing Group: national experts, members of the Grupo Español de Endoscopia Bariátrica (GETTEMO, SEED), SEPD, and SECO, selecting 2 authors for each section. Phase 3: clinical question form (PICO): patients, intervention, comparison, outcomes. Phase 4: literature assessment and synthesis. Search for evidence and elaboration of recommendations. Based on the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine classification, most evidence in this article will correspond to level 5 (expert opinions without explicit critical appraisal) and grade of recommendation C (favorable yet inconclusive recommendation) or D (inconclusive or inconsistent studies). Phase 5: External review by experts. We hope that these basic preventive measures will be of interest for daily practice, and may help prevent medical and/or legal conflicts for the benefit of patients, physicians, and BE in general

Revista esencia y espacio

Arquitectur