Unidade Local de Saúde de São José

To provide an update to the "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock," last published in 2008. A consensus committee of 68 international experts representing 30 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict of interest policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. The entire guidelines process was conducted independent of any industry funding. A stand-alone meeting was held for all subgroup heads, co- and vice-chairs, and selected individuals. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development. The authors were advised to follow the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations as strong (1) or weak (2). The potential drawbacks of making strong recommendations in the presence of low-quality evidence were emphasized. Some recommendations were ungraded (UG). Recommendations were classified into three groups: 1) those directly targeting severe sepsis; 2) those targeting general care of the critically ill patient and considered high priority in severe sepsis; and 3) pediatric considerations. Key recommendations and suggestions, listed by category, include: early quantitative resuscitation of the septic patient during the first 6 hrs after recognition (1C); blood cultures before antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging studies performed promptly to confirm a potential source of infection (UG); administration of broad-spectrum antimicrobials therapy within 1 hr of recognition of septic shock (1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (1C) as the goal of therapy; reassessment of antimicrobial therapy daily for de-escalation, when appropriate (1B); infection source control with attention to the balance of risks and benefits of the chosen method within 12 hrs of diagnosis (1C); initial fluid resuscitation with crystalloid (1B) and consideration of the addition of albumin in patients who continue to require substantial amounts of crystalloid to maintain adequate mean arterial pressure (2C) and the avoidance of hetastarch formulations (1C); initial fluid challenge in patients with sepsis-induced tissue hypoperfusion and suspicion of hypovolemia to achieve a minimum of 30 mL/kg of crystalloids (more rapid administration and greater amounts of fluid may be needed in some patients) (1C); fluid challenge technique continued as long as hemodynamic improvement, as based on either dynamic or static variables (UG); norepinephrine as the first-choice vasopressor to maintain mean arterial pressure ≥ 65 mm Hg (1B); epinephrine when an additional agent is needed to maintain adequate blood pressure (2B); vasopressin (0.03 U/min) can be added to norepinephrine to either raise mean arterial pressure to target or to decrease norepinephrine dose but should not be used as the initial vasopressor (UG); dopamine is not recommended except in highly selected circumstances (2C); dobutamine infusion administered or added to vasopressor in the presence of a) myocardial dysfunction as suggested by elevated cardiac filling pressures and low cardiac output, or b) ongoing signs of hypoperfusion despite achieving adequate intravascular volume and adequate mean arterial pressure (1C); avoiding use of intravenous hydrocortisone in adult septic shock patients if adequate fluid resuscitation and vasopressor therapy are able to restore hemodynamic stability (2C); hemoglobin target of 7-9 g/dL in the absence of tissue hypoperfusion, ischemic coronary artery disease, or acute hemorrhage (1B); low tidal volume (1A) and limitation of inspiratory plateau pressure (1B) for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); application of at least a minimal amount of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in ARDS (1B); higher rather than lower level of PEEP for patients with sepsis-induced moderate or severe ARDS (2C); recruitment maneuvers in sepsis patients with severe refractory hypoxemia due to ARDS (2C); prone positioning in sepsis-induced ARDS patients with a PaO2/FIO2 ratio of ≤ 100 mm Hg in facilities that have experience with such practices (2C); head-of-bed elevation in mechanically ventilated patients unless contraindicated (1B); a conservative fluid strategy for patients with established ARDS who do not have evidence of tissue hypoperfusion (1C); protocols for weaning and sedation (1A); minimizing use of either intermittent bolus sedation or continuous infusion sedation targeting specific titration endpoints (1B); avoidance of neuromuscular blockers if possible in the septic patient without ARDS (1C); a short course of neuromuscular blocker (no longer than 48 hrs) for patients with early ARDS and a Pao2/Fio2 < 150 mm Hg (2C); a protocolized approach to blood glucose management commencing insulin dosing when two consecutive blood glucose levels are > 180 mg/dL, targeting an upper blood glucose ≤ 180 mg/dL (1A); equivalency of continuous veno-venous hemofiltration or intermittent hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis (1B); use of stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with bleeding risk factors (1B); oral or enteral (if necessary) feedings, as tolerated, rather than either complete fasting or provision of only intravenous glucose within the first 48 hrs after a diagnosis of severe sepsis/septic shock (2C); and addressing goals of care, including treatment plans and end-of-life planning (as appropriate) (1B), as early as feasible, but within 72 hrs of intensive care unit admission (2C). Recommendations specific to pediatric severe sepsis include: therapy with face mask oxygen, high flow nasal cannula oxygen, or nasopharyngeal continuous PEEP in the presence of respiratory distress and hypoxemia (2C), use of physical examination therapeutic endpoints such as capillary refill (2C); for septic shock associated with hypovolemia, the use of crystalloids or albumin to deliver a bolus of 20 mL/kg of crystalloids (or albumin equivalent) over 5 to 10 mins (2C); more common use of inotropes and vasodilators for low cardiac output septic shock associated with elevated systemic vascular resistance (2C); and use of hydrocortisone only in children with suspected or proven "absolute"' adrenal insufficiency (2C). Strong agreement existed among a large cohort of international experts regarding many level 1 recommendations for the best care of patients with severe sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for this important group of critically ill patients.

OBJECTIVE: To provide an update to "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2012." DESIGN: A consensus committee of 55 international experts representing 25 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict-of-interest (COI) policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. A stand-alone meeting was held for all panel members in December 2015. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development. METHODS: The panel consisted of five sections: hemodynamics, infection, adjunctive therapies, metabolic, and ventilation. Population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) questions were reviewed and updated as needed, and evidence profiles were generated. Each subgroup generated a list of questions, searched for best available evidence, and then followed the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system to assess the quality of evidence from high to very low, and to formulate recommendations as strong or weak, or best practice statement when applicable. RESULTS: The Surviving Sepsis Guideline panel provided 93 statements on early management and resuscitation of patients with sepsis or septic shock. Overall, 32 were strong recommendations, 39 were weak recommendations, and 18 were best-practice statements. No recommendation was provided for four questions. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial agreement exists among a large cohort of international experts regarding many strong recommendations for the best care of patients with sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for these critically ill patients with high mortality.

BACKGROUND: Hydrocortisone is widely used in patients with septic shock even though a survival benefit has been reported only in patients who remained hypotensive after fluid and vasopressor resuscitation and whose plasma cortisol levels did not rise appropriately after the administration of corticotropin. METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we assigned 251 patients to receive 50 mg of intravenous hydrocortisone and 248 patients to receive placebo every 6 hours for 5 days; the dose was then tapered during a 6-day period. At 28 days, the primary outcome was death among patients who did not have a response to a corticotropin test. RESULTS: Of the 499 patients in the study, 233 (46.7%) did not have a response to corticotropin (125 in the hydrocortisone group and 108 in the placebo group). At 28 days, there was no significant difference in mortality between patients in the two study groups who did not have a response to corticotropin (39.2% in the hydrocortisone group and 36.1% in the placebo group, P=0.69) or between those who had a response to corticotropin (28.8% in the hydrocortisone group and 28.7% in the placebo group, P=1.00). At 28 days, 86 of 251 patients in the hydrocortisone group (34.3%) and 78 of 248 patients in the placebo group (31.5%) had died (P=0.51). In the hydrocortisone group, shock was reversed more quickly than in the placebo group. However, there were more episodes of superinfection, including new sepsis and septic shock. CONCLUSIONS: Hydrocortisone did not improve survival or reversal of shock in patients with septic shock, either overall or in patients who did not have a response to corticotropin, although hydrocortisone hastened reversal of shock in patients in whom shock was reversed. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00147004.)

AIMS: The aim of this study was to determine whether the Joint European Societies guidelines on secondary cardiovascular prevention are followed in everyday practice. DESIGN: A cross-sectional ESC-EORP survey (EUROASPIRE V) at 131 centres in 81 regions in 27 countries. METHODS: Patients (<80 years old) with verified coronary artery events or interventions were interviewed and examined ≥6 months later. RESULTS: ), 59% were centrally obese (waist circumference: men ≥102 cm; women ≥88 cm) while 66% were physically active <30 min 5 times/week. Forty-two per cent had a blood pressure ≥140/90 mmHg (≥140/85 if diabetic), 71% had low-density lipoprotein cholesterol ≥1.8 mmol/L (≥70 mg/dL) and 29% reported having diabetes. Cardioprotective medication was: anti-platelets 93%, beta-blockers 81%, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers 75% and statins 80%. CONCLUSION: A large majority of coronary patients have unhealthy lifestyles in terms of smoking, diet and sedentary behaviour, which adversely impacts major cardiovascular risk factors. A majority did not achieve their blood pressure, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and glucose targets. Cardiovascular prevention requires modern preventive cardiology programmes delivered by interdisciplinary teams of healthcare professionals addressing all aspects of lifestyle and risk factor management, in order to reduce the risk of recurrent cardiovascular events.

RATIONALE: Recent literature in mechanical ventilation includes strong evidence from randomized trials. Little information is available regarding the influence of these trials on usual clinical practice. OBJECTIVES: To describe current mechanical ventilation practices and to assess the influence of interval randomized trials when compared with findings from a 1998 cohort. METHODS: A prospective international observational cohort study, with a nested comparative study performed in 349 intensive care units in 23 countries. We enrolled 4,968 consecutive patients receiving mechanical ventilation over a 1-month period. We recorded demographics and daily data related to mechanical ventilation for the duration of ventilation. We systematically reviewed the literature and developed 11 practice-change hypotheses for the comparative cohort study before seeing these results. In assessing practice changes, we only compared data from the 107 intensive care units (1,675 patients) that also participated in the 1998 cohort (1,383 patients). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In 2004 compared with 1998, the use of noninvasive ventilation increased (11.1 vs. 4.4%, P < 0.001). Among patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome, tidal volumes decreased (7.4 vs. 9.1 ml/kg, P < 0.001) and positive end-expiratory pressure levels increased slightly (8.7 vs. 7.7 cm H(2)O, P = 0.02). More patients were successfully extubated after their first attempt of spontaneous breathing (77 vs. 62%, P < 0.001). Use of synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation fell dramatically (1.6 vs. 11%, P < 0.001). Observations confirmed 10 of our 11 practice-change hypotheses. CONCLUSIONS: The strong concordance of predicted and observed practice changes suggests that randomized trial results have advanced mechanical ventilation practices internationally.

RATIONALE: Baseline characteristics and management have changed over time in patients requiring mechanical ventilation; however, the impact of these changes on patient outcomes is unclear. OBJECTIVES: To estimate whether mortality in mechanically ventilated patients has changed over time. METHODS: Prospective cohort studies conducted in 1998, 2004, and 2010, including patients receiving mechanical ventilation for more than 12 hours in a 1-month period, from 927 units in 40 countries. To examine effects over time on mortality in intensive care units, we performed generalized estimating equation models. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We included 18,302 patients. The reasons for initiating mechanical ventilation varied significantly among cohorts. Ventilatory management changed over time (P < 0.001), with increased use of noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation (5% in 1998 to 14% in 2010), a decrease in tidal volume (mean 8.8 ml/kg actual body weight [SD = 2.1] in 1998 to 6.9 ml/kg [SD = 1.9] in 2010), and an increase in applied positive end-expiratory pressure (mean 4.2 cm H2O [SD = 3.8] in 1998 to 7.0 cm of H2O [SD = 3.0] in 2010). Crude mortality in the intensive care unit decreased in 2010 compared with 1998 (28 versus 31%; odds ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.80-0.94), despite a similar complication rate. Hospital mortality decreased similarly. After adjusting for baseline and management variables, this difference remained significant (odds ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.67-0.92). CONCLUSIONS: Patient characteristics and ventilation practices have changed over time, and outcomes of mechanically ventilated patients have improved. Clinical trials registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01093482).

Approximately 5% to 10% of diffuse large B-cell lymphomas (DLBCLs) harbor an MYC oncogene rearrangement (MYC+). The prognostic significance of MYC+ DLBCL was determined in an unselected population of patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL treated with rituximab in combination with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone chemotherapy (R-CHOP). Using a Vysis break-apart fluorescence in situ hybridization probe, 12 of 135 (8.8%) cases of MYC+ DLBCL were identified that had no defining high-risk features. MYC+ DLBCL was associated with an inferior 5-year progression-free survival (66% vs 31%, P = .006) and overall survival (72% vs 33%, P = .016). Multivariate analysis confirmed the prognostic importance of MYC for both progression-free survival (hazard ratio = 3.28; 95% confidence interval, 1.49-7.21, P = .003) and overall survival (hazard ratio = 2.98; 95% confidence interval, 1.28-6.95, P = .011). Cases of MYC+ DLBCL also had a higher risk of central nervous system relapse (P = .023), independent of other risk factors. The diagnosis of MYC+ DLBCL is likely underappreciated; and given the lack of defining risk factors, fluorescence in situ hybridization for MYC rearrangements should be performed in all patients with DLBCL. In the R-CHOP treatment era, MYC+ DLBCLs have an inferior prognosis. Treatment regimens similar to those used in Burkitt lymphoma may be more appropriate in this patient population and need to be prospectively tested.

General illness severity scores are widely used in the ICU to predict outcome, characterize disease severity and degree of organ dysfunction, and assess resource use. In this article we review the most commonly used scoring systems in each of these three groups. We examine the history of the development of the initial major systems in each group, discuss the construction of subsequent versions, and, when available, provide recent comparative data regarding their performance. Importantly, the different types of scores should be seen as complementary, rather than competitive and mutually exclusive. It is possible that their combined use could provide a more accurate indication of disease severity and prognosis. All these scoring systems will need to be updated with time as ICU populations change and new diagnostic, therapeutic and prognostic techniques become available.

Factors influencing the morbidity and mortality associated with viremic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection change over time and place, making it difficult to compare reported estimates. Models were developed for 17 countries (Bahrain, Bulgaria, Cameroon, Colombia, Croatia, Dominican Republic, Ethiopia, Ghana, Hong Kong, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Morocco, Nigeria, Qatar and Taiwan) to quantify and characterize the viremic population as well as forecast the changes in the infected population and the corresponding disease burden from 2015 to 2030. Model inputs were agreed upon through expert consensus, and a standardized methodology was followed to allow for comparison across countries. The viremic prevalence is expected to remain constant or decline in all but four countries (Ethiopia, Ghana, Jordan and Oman); however, HCV-related morbidity and mortality will increase in all countries except Qatar and Taiwan. In Qatar, the high-treatment rate will contribute to a reduction in total cases and HCV-related morbidity by 2030. In the remaining countries, however, the current treatment paradigm will be insufficient to achieve large reductions in HCV-related morbidity and mortality.

INTRODUCTION: Increasing numbers of cancer patients are being admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU), either for cancer-related complications or treatment-associated side effects, yet there are relatively few data concerning the epidemiology and prognosis of cancer patients admitted to general ICUs. The aim of this study was to assess the characteristics of critically ill cancer patients, and to evaluate their prognosis. METHODS: This was a substudy of the Sepsis Occurrence in Acutely Ill Patients (SOAP) study, a cohort, multicentre, observational study that included data from all adult patients admitted to one of 198 participating ICUs from 24 European countries during the study period. Patients were followed up until death, hospital discharge or for 60 days. RESULTS: Of the 3147 patients enrolled in the SOAP study, 473 (15%) had a malignancy, 404 (85%) had solid tumours and 69 (15%) had haematological cancer. Patients with solid cancers had the same severity of illness as the non-cancer population, but were older, more likely to be a surgical admission and had a higher frequency of sepsis. Patients with haematological cancer were more severely ill and more commonly had sepsis, acute lung injury/acute respiratory distress syndrome, and renal failure than patients with other malignancies; these patients also had the highest hospital mortality rate (58%). The outcome of all cancer patients was comparable with that in the non-cancer population, with a 27% hospital mortality rate. However, in the subset of patients with more than three failing organs, more than 75% of patients with cancer died compared with about 50% of patients without cancer (p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In this large European study, patients with cancer were more often admitted to the ICU for sepsis and respiratory complications than other ICU patients. Overall, the outcome of patients with solid cancer was similar to that of ICU patients without cancer, whereas patients with haematological cancer had a worse outcome.

In current practice, gadolinium-based contrast agents have been considered safe when used at clinically recommended doses in patients without severe renal insufficiency. The causal relationship between gadolinium-based contrast agents and nephrogenic systemic fibrosis in patients with renal insufficiency resulted in new policies regarding the administration of these agents. After an effective screening of patients with renal disease by performing either unenhanced or reduced-dose-enhanced studies in these patients and by using the most stable contrast agents, nephrogenic systemic fibrosis has been largely eliminated since 2009. Evidence of in vivo gadolinium deposition in bone tissue in patients with normal renal function is well-established, but recent literature showing that gadolinium might also deposit in the brain in patients with intact blood-brain barriers caught many individuals in the imaging community by surprise. The purpose of this review was to summarize the literature on gadolinium-based contrast agents, tying together information on agent stability and animal and human studies, and to emphasize that low-stability agents are the ones most often associated with brain deposition.

Social prescribing is an approach that aims to improve health and well-being. It connects individuals to non-clinical services and supports that address social needs, such as those related to loneliness, housing instability and mental health. At the person level, social prescribing can give individuals the knowledge, skills, motivation and confidence to manage their own health and well-being. At the society level, it can facilitate greater collaboration across health, social, and community sectors to promote integrated care and move beyond the traditional biomedical model of health. While the term social prescribing was first popularised in the UK, this practice has become more prevalent and widely publicised internationally over the last decade. This paper aims to illuminate the ways social prescribing has been conceptualised and implemented across 17 countries in Europe, Asia, Australia and North America. We draw from the 'Beyond the Building Blocks' framework to describe the essential inputs for adopting social prescribing into policy and practice, related to service delivery; social determinants and household production of health; workforce; leadership and governance; financing, community organisations and societal partnerships; health technology; and information, learning and accountability. Cross-cutting lessons can inform country and regional efforts to tailor social prescribing models to best support local needs.

Up to 27 May 2022, Portugal has detected 96 confirmed cases of monkeypox. We describe 27 confirmed cases (median age: 33 years (range: 22-51); all males), with an earliest symptom onset date of 29 April. Almost all cases (n = 25) live in the Lisbon and Tagus Valley health region. Most cases were neither part of identified transmission chains, nor linked to travel or had contact with symptomatic persons or with animals, suggesting the possible previously undetected spread of monkeypox.

Great differences in end-of-life practices in treating the critically ill around the world warrant agreement regarding the major ethical principles. This analysis determines the extent of worldwide consensus for end-of-life practices, delineates where there is and is not consensus, and analyzes reasons for lack of consensus. Critical care societies worldwide were invited to participate. Country coordinators were identified and draft statements were developed for major end-of-life issues and translated into six languages. Multidisciplinary responses using a web-based survey assessed agreement or disagreement with definitions and statements linked to anonymous demographic information. Consensus was prospectively defined as >80% agreement. Definitions and statements not obtaining consensus were revised based on comments of respondents, and then translated and redistributed. Of the initial 1,283 responses from 32 countries, consensus was found for 66 (81%) of the 81 definitions and statements; 26 (32%) had >90% agreement. With 83 additional responses to the original questionnaire (1,366 total) and 604 responses to the revised statements, consensus could be obtained for another 11 of the 15 statements. Consensus was obtained for informed consent, withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining treatment, legal requirements, intensive care unit therapies, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, shared decision making, medical and nursing consensus, brain death, and palliative care. Consensus was obtained for 77 of 81 (95%) statements. Worldwide consensus could be developed for the majority of definitions and statements about end-of-life practices. Statements achieving consensus provide standards of practice for end-of-life care; statements without consensus identify important areas for future research.

Chronic infection with hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a leading indicator for liver disease. New treatment options are becoming available, and there is a need to characterize the epidemiology and disease burden of HCV. Data for prevalence, viremia, genotype, diagnosis and treatment were obtained through literature searches and expert consensus for 16 countries. For some countries, data from centralized registries were used to estimate diagnosis and treatment rates. Data for the number of liver transplants and the proportion attributable to HCV were obtained from centralized databases. Viremic prevalence estimates varied widely between countries, ranging from 0.3% in Austria, England and Germany to 8.5% in Egypt. The largest viremic populations were in Egypt, with 6,358,000 cases in 2008 and Brazil with 2,106,000 cases in 2007. The age distribution of cases differed between countries. In most countries, prevalence rates were higher among males, reflecting higher rates of injection drug use. Diagnosis, treatment and transplant levels also differed considerably between countries. Reliable estimates characterizing HCV-infected populations are critical for addressing HCV-related morbidity and mortality. There is a need to quantify the burden of chronic HCV infection at the national level.

Simultaneous electroencephalogram (EEG)-functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) recordings have seen growing application in the evaluation of epilepsy, namely in the characterization of brain networks related to epileptic activity. In EEG-correlated fMRI studies, epileptic events are usually described as boxcar signals based on the timing information retrieved from the EEG, and subsequently convolved with a hemodynamic response function to model the associated Blood Oxygen Level Dependent (BOLD) changes. Although more flexible approaches may allow a higher degree of complexity for the hemodynamics, the issue of how to model these dynamics based on the EEG remains an open question. In this work, a new methodology for the integration of simultaneous EEG-fMRI data in epilepsy is proposed, which incorporates a transfer function from the EEG to the BOLD signal. Independent component analysis of the EEG is performed, and a number of metrics expressing different models of the EEG-BOLD transfer function are extracted from the resulting time courses. These metrics are then used to predict the fMRI data and to identify brain areas associated with the EEG epileptic activity. The methodology was tested on both ictal and interictal EEG-fMRI recordings from one patient with a hypothalamic hamartoma. When compared to the conventional analysis approach, plausible, consistent, and more significant activations were obtained. Importantly, frequency-weighted EEG metrics yielded superior results than those weighted solely on the EEG power, which comes in agreement with previous literature. Reproducibility, specificity, and sensitivity should be addressed in an extended group of patients in order to further validate the proposed methodology and generalize the presented proof of concept.

Importance: To date, only uncontrolled studies have evaluated the efficacy and safety of endovascular treatment (EVT) in patients with cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT), leading to the lack of recommendations on EVT for CVT. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of EVT in patients with a severe form of CVT. Design, Setting, and Participants: TO-ACT (Thrombolysis or Anticoagulation for Cerebral Venous Thrombosis) was a multicenter, open-label, blinded end point, randomized clinical trial conducted in 8 hospitals in 3 countries (the Netherlands, China, and Portugal). Patients were recruited from September 2011 to October 2016, and follow-up began in March 2012 and was completed in December 2017. Adult patients with radiologically confirmed CVT who had at least 1 risk factor for a poor outcome (mental status disorder, coma state, intracerebral hemorrhage, or thrombosis of the deep venous system) were included. Data were analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle from March 2018 to February 2019. The trial was halted after the first interim analysis for reasons of futility. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive either EVT with standard medical care (intervention group) or guideline-based standard medical care only (control group). The EVT consisted of mechanical thrombectomy, local intrasinus application of alteplase or urokinase, or a combination of both strategies. Patients in the intervention group underwent EVT as soon as possible but no later than 24 hours after randomization. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary end point was the proportion of patients with a good outcome at 12 months (recovered without a disability; modified Rankin Scale [mRS] score of 0-1). Secondary end points were the proportion of patients with an mRS score of 0 to 1 at 6 months and an mRS score of 0 to 2 at 6 and 12 months, outcome on the mRS across the ordinal continuum at 12 months, recanalization rate, and surgical interventions in relation to CVT. Safety end points included symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. Results: Of the 67 patients enrolled and randomized, 33 (49%) were randomized to the intervention group and 34 (51%) were randomized to the control group. Patients in the intervention group vs those in the control group were slightly older (median [interquartile range (IQR)] age, 43 [33-50] years vs 38 [23-48] years) and comprised fewer women (23 women [70%] vs 27 women [79%]). The median (IQR) baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score was 12 (7-20) in the EVT group and 12 (5-20) in the standard care group. At the 12-month follow-up, 22 intervention patients (67%) had an mRS score of 0 to 1 compared with 23 control patients (68%) (relative risk ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.71-1.38). Mortality was not statistically significantly higher in the EVT group (12% [n = 4] vs 3% [n = 1]; P = .20). The frequency of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage was not statistically significantly lower in the intervention group (3% [n = 1] vs 9% [n = 3]; P = .61). Conclusions and Relevance: The TO-ACT trial showed that EVT with standard medical care did not appear to improve functional outcome of patients with CVT. Given the small sample size, the possibility exists that future studies will demonstrate better recovery rates after EVT for this patient population. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01204333.

BACKGROUND: Atherosclerosis evaluation by coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) is promising for coronary artery disease (CAD) risk stratification, but time consuming and requires high expertise. Artificial Intelligence (AI) applied to CCTA for comprehensive CAD assessment may overcome these limitations. We hypothesized AI aided analysis allows for rapid, accurate evaluation of vessel morphology and stenosis. METHODS: This was a multi-site study of 232 patients undergoing CCTA. Studies were analyzed by FDA-cleared software service that performs AI-driven coronary artery segmentation and labeling, lumen and vessel wall determination, plaque quantification and characterization with comparison to ground truth of consensus by three L3 readers. CCTAs were analyzed for: % maximal diameter stenosis, plaque volume and composition, presence of high-risk plaque and Coronary Artery Disease Reporting & Data System (CAD-RADS) category. RESULTS: AI performance was excellent for accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value as follows: >70% stenosis: 99.7%, 90.9%, 99.8%, 93.3%, 99.9%, respectively; >50% stenosis: 94.8%, 80.0%, 97.0, 80.0%, 97.0%, respectively. Bland-Altman plots depict agreement between expert reader and AI determined maximal diameter stenosis for per-vessel (mean difference -0.8%; 95% CI 13.8% to -15.3%) and per-patient (mean difference -2.3%; 95% CI 15.8% to -20.4%). L3 and AI agreed within one CAD-RADS category in 228/232 (98.3%) exams per-patient and 923/924 (99.9%) vessels on a per-vessel basis. There was a wide range of atherosclerosis in the coronary artery territories assessed by AI when stratified by CAD-RADS distribution. CONCLUSIONS: AI-aided approach to CCTA interpretation determines coronary stenosis and CAD-RADS category in close agreement with consensus of L3 expert readers. There was a wide range of atherosclerosis identified through AI.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of the study was to assess whether adults admitted to hospitals with both Intensive Care Units (ICU) and Intermediate Care Units (IMCU) have lower in-hospital mortality than those admitted to ICUs without an IMCU. METHODS: An observational multinational cohort study performed on patients admitted to participating ICUs during a four-week period. IMCU was defined as any physically and administratively independent unit open 24 hours a day, seven days a week providing a level of care lower than an ICU but higher than a ward. Characteristics of hospitals, ICUs and patients admitted to study ICUs were recorded. The main outcome was all-cause in-hospital mortality until hospital discharge (censored at 90 days). RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-seven ICUs from 17 European countries enrolled 5,834 patients. Overall, 1,113 (19.1%) patients died in the ICU and 1,397 died in hospital, with a total of 1,397 (23.9%) deaths. The illness severity was higher for patients in ICUs with an IMCU (median Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II: 37) than for patients in ICUs without an IMCU (median SAPS II: 29, P <0.001). After adjustment for patient characteristics at admission such as illness severity, and ICU and hospital characteristics, the odds ratio of mortality was 0.63 (95% CI 0.45 to 0.88, P = 0.007) in favour of the presence of IMCU. The protective effect of the IMCU was absent in patients who were admitted for basic observation, for example, after surgery (odds ratio 1.15, 95% CI 0.65 to 2.03, P = 0.630) but was strong in patients admitted to an ICU for other reasons (odds ratio 0.54, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.80, P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: The presence of an IMCU in the hospital is associated with significantly reduced adjusted hospital mortality for adults admitted to the ICU. This effect is relevant for the patients requiring full intensive treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01422070. Registered 19 August 2011.

There is a growing awareness of the importance of sex and gender in medicine and research. Women typically have stronger immune responses to self and foreign antigens than men, resulting in sex-based differences in autoimmunity and infectious diseases. In both animals and humans, males are generally more susceptible than females to bacterial infections. At the same time, gender differences in health-seeking behavior, quality of health care, and adherence to treatment recommendations have been reported. This review explores our current understanding of differences between males and females in bacterial diseases. We describe how genetic, immunological, hormonal, and anatomical factors interact to influence sex-based differences in pathophysiology, epidemiology, clinical presentation, disease severity, and prognosis, and how gender roles affect the behavior of patients and providers in the health care system.