Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (77)
- Conference Proceeding (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (78)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (78)
Keywords
Objectives In this early retrospective cohort study, a total of 26 patients with SARS-CoV-2 were treated with bamlanivimab or casirivimab/imdevimab, and the reduction of the viral load associated with the developed clinical symptoms was analyzed.
Methods: Patients in the intervention groups received bamlanivimab or casirivimab/imdevimab. Patients without treatment served as control. Outcomes were assessed by clinical symptoms and change in log viral load from baseline based on the cycle threshold over a period of 18 days.
Results: Median log viral load decline was higher in both intervention groups after 3 and 6 days compared to control. However, at later time points, the decline of the viral load was more distinct in the control group. Mild symptoms of COVID-19 were observed in 6.3% of the intervention groups and in no patient of the control. No patients treated with bamlanivimab, 18.8% treated with casirivimab/imdevimab, and 14.2% in the control group developed moderate symptoms. Severe symptoms were recorded only in the control group (14.2%), including one related death.
Conclusion: Treatment with monoclonal SARS-CoV-2 antibodies seems to accelerate decline of virus loads, especially in the first 6 days after administration, compared to control. This may be associated with a reduced likeliness of a severe course of COVID-19.
Compressive knee joint contact force during walking is thought to be related to initiation and progression of knee osteoarthritis. However, joint loading is often evaluated with surrogate measures, like the external knee adduction moment, due to the complexity of computing joint contact forces. Statistical models have shown promising correlations between medial knee joint contact forces and knee adduction moments in particularly in individuals with knee osteoarthritis or after total knee replacements (R2 = 0.44–0.60). The purpose of this study was to evaluate how accurately model-based predictions of peak medial and lateral knee joint contact forces during walking could be estimated by linear mixed-effects models including joint moments for children and adolescents with and without valgus malalignment. Peak knee joint moments were strongly correlated (R2 > 0.85, p < 0.001) with both peak medial and lateral knee joint contact forces. The knee flexion and adduction moments were significant covariates in the models, strengthening the understanding of the statistical relationship between both moments and medial and lateral knee joint contact forces. In the future, these models could be used to evaluate peak knee joint contact forces from musculoskeletal simulations using peak joint moments from motion capture software, obviating the need for time-consuming musculoskeletal simulations.
Background: Postoperative complication rates using 3D visualization are rarely reported. The primary aim of our study is to detect a possible advantage of using 3D on postoperative complication rates in a real-world setting.
Method: With a sample size calculation for a medium effect size difference that 3D reduces significantly postoperative complications, data of 287 patients with 3D visualization and 832 with 2D procedure were screened. The groups underwent an exact propensity score-matching to be comparable. Comprehensive complication index (CCI) for every procedure was calculated and Operation Time was determined.
Results: Including 1078 patients in the study, 213 exact propensity score-matched pairs could finally be established. Concerning overall CCI (3D: 5.70 ± 13.63 vs. 2D: 3.37 ± 9.89; p = 0.076) and operation time (3D: 103.98 ± 93.26 min vs. 2D: 88.60 ±6 9.32 min; p = 0.2569) there was no significant difference between the groups.
Conclusion: Our study shows no advantage of 3D over 2D laparoscopy regarding postoperative complications in a real-world setting, the second endpoint operation time, too, was not influenced by 3D overall.
Keywords: 3D laparoscopy; Comprehensive complication index; Propensity score matching
Objectives: Regarding reactogenicity and immunogenicity, heterologous COVID-19 vaccination regimens are considered as an alternative to conventional immunization schemes.
Methods: Individuals receiving either heterologous (ChAdOx1-S [AstraZeneca, Cambridge, UK]/BNT162b2 [Pfizer-BioNTech, Mainz, Germany]; n = 306) or homologous (messenger RNA [mRNA]-1273 [Moderna, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA]; n = 139) vaccination were asked to participate when receiving their second dose. Reactogenicity was assessed after 1 month, immunogenicity after 1, 3, and/or 6 months, including a third dose, through SARS-CoV-2 antispike immunoglobulin G, surrogate virus neutralization test, and a plaque reduction neutralization test against the Delta (B.1.167.2) and Omicron (B.1.1.529; BA.1) variants of concern.
Results: The overall reactogenicity was lower after heterologous vaccination. In both cohorts, SARS-CoV-2 antispike immunoglobulin G concentrations waned over time with the heterologous vaccination demonstrating higher neutralizing activity than homologous mRNA vaccination after 3 months to low neutralizing levels in the Delta plaque reduction neutralization test after 6 months. At this point, 3.2% of the heterologous and 11.4% of the homologous cohort yielded low neutralizing activity against Omicron. After a third dose of an mRNA vaccine, ≥99% of vaccinees demonstrated positive neutralizing activity against Delta. Depending on the vaccination scheme and against Omicron, 60% to 87.5% of vaccinees demonstrated positive neutralizing activity.
Conclusion: ChAdOx1-S/BNT162b2 vaccination demonstrated an acceptable reactogenicity and immunogenicity profile. A third dose of an mRNA vaccine is necessary to maintain neutralizing activity against SARS-CoV-2. However, variants of concern-adapted versions of the vaccines would be desirable.
Introduction Patients undergoing heart valve surgery are predominantly transferred postoperatively to the intensive care unit (ICU) under continuous sedation. Volatile anaesthetics are an increasingly used treatment alternative to intravenous substances in the ICU. As subject to inhalational uptake and elimination, the resulting pharmacological benefits have been repeatedly demonstrated. Therefore, volatile anaesthetics appear suitable to meet the growing demands of fast-track cardiac surgery. However, their use requires special preparation at the bedside and trained medical and nursing staff, which might limit the pharmacological benefits. The aim of our work is to assess whether the temporal advantages of recovery under volatile sedation outweigh the higher effort of special preparation.
Methods and analysis The study is designed to evaluate the differences between intravenous sedatives (n=48) and volatile sedatives (n=48) in continued intensive care sedation. This study will be conducted as a prospective, randomised, controlled, single-blinded, monocentre trial at a German university hospital in consenting adult patients undergoing heart valve surgery at a university hospital. This observational study will examine the necessary preparation time, staff consultation and overall feasibility of the chosen sedation method. For this purpose, the continuation of sedation in the ICU with volatile sedatives is considered as one study arm and with intravenous sedatives as the comparison group. Due to rapid elimination and quick awakening after the termination of sedation, closer consultation between the attending physician and the ICU nursing staff is required, in addition to a prolonged setup time. Study analysis will include the required setup time, time from admission to extubation as primary outcome and neurocognitive assessability. In addition, possible operation-specific (blood loss, complications), treatment parameters (catecholamine dosages, lung function) and laboratory results (acute kidney injury, acid base balance (lactataemia), liver failure) as influencing factors will be collected. The study-relevant data will be extracted from the continuous digital records of the patient data management system after the patient has been discharged from the ICU. For statistical evaluation, 95% CIs will be calculated for the median time to extubation and neurocognitive assessability, and the association will be assessed with a Cox regression model. In addition, secondary binary outcome measures will be evaluated using Fisher’s exact tests. Further descriptive and exploratory statistical analyses are also planned.
Ethics and dissemination The study was approved by the Institutional Ethics Board of the University of Frankfurt, Germany (#20-1050). Informed consent of all individual patients will be obtained before randomisation. Results will be disseminated via publication in peer-reviewed journals.
Background: In recent months, Omicron variants of SARS-CoV-2 have become dominant in many regions of the world, and case numbers with Omicron subvariants BA.1 and BA.2 continue to increase. Due to numerous mutations in the spike protein, the efficacy of currently available vaccines, which are based on Wuhan-Hu 1 isolate of SARS-CoV-2, is reduced, leading to breakthrough infections. Efficacy of monoclonal antibody therapy is also likely impaired.
Methods: In our in vitro study using A549-AT cells constitutively expressing ACE2 and TMPRSS2, we determined and compared the neutralizing capacity of vaccine-elicited sera, convalescent sera and monoclonal antibodies against authentic SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 compared with Delta.
Findings: Almost no neutralisation of Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 was observed using sera from individuals vaccinated with two doses 6 months earlier, regardless of the type of vaccine taken. Shortly after the booster dose, most sera from triple BNT162b2-vaccinated individuals were able to neutralise both Omicron variants. In line with waning antibody levels three months after the booster, only weak residual neutralisation was observed for BA.1 (26%, n = 34, 0 median NT50) and BA.2 (44%, n = 34, 0 median NT50). In addition, BA.1 but not BA.2 was resistant to the neutralising monoclonal antibodies casirivimab/imdevimab, while BA.2 exhibited almost a complete evasion from the neutralisation induced by sotrovimab.
Interpretation: Both SARS-CoV-2 Omicron subvariants BA.1 and BA.2 escape antibody-mediated neutralisation elicited by vaccination, previous infection with SARS-CoV-2, and monoclonal antibodies. Waning immunity renders the majority of tested sera obtained three months after booster vaccination negative in BA.1 and BA.2 neutralisation. Omicron subvariant specific resistance to the monoclonal antibodies casirivimab/imdevimab and sotrovimab emphasizes the importance of genotype-surveillance and guided application.
Funding: This study was supported in part by the Goethe-Corona-Fund of the Goethe University Frankfurt (M.W.) and the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (COVIDready; grant 02WRS1621C (M.W.).
Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (iCCA) is the most frequent subtype of cholangiocarcinoma (CCA), and the incidence has globally increased in recent years. In contrast to surgically treated iCCA, data on the impact of fibrosis on survival in patients undergoing palliative chemotherapy are missing. We retrospectively analyzed the cases of 70 patients diagnosed with iCCA between 2007 and 2020 in our tertiary hospital. Histopathological assessment of fibrosis was performed by an expert hepatobiliary pathologist. Additionally, the fibrosis-4 score (FIB-4) was calculated as a non-invasive surrogate marker for liver fibrosis. For overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), Kaplan–Meier curves and Cox-regression analyses were performed. Subgroup analyses revealed a median OS of 21 months (95% CI = 16.7–25.2 months) and 16 months (95% CI = 7.6–24.4 months) for low and high fibrosis, respectively (p = 0.152). In non-cirrhotic patients, the median OS was 21.8 months (95% CI = 17.1–26.4 months), compared with 9.5 months (95% CI = 4.6–14.3 months) in cirrhotic patients (p = 0.007). In conclusion, patients with iCCA and cirrhosis receiving palliative chemotherapy have decreased OS rates, while fibrosis has no significant impact on OS or PFS. These patients should not be prevented from state-of-the-art first-line chemotherapy.
Background: The development of robotic systems has provided an alternative to frame-based stereotactic procedures. The aim of this experimental phantom study was to compare the mechanical accuracy of the Robotic Surgery Assistant (ROSA) and the Leksell stereotactic frame by reducing clinical and procedural factors to a minimum.
Methods: To precisely compare mechanical accuracy, a stereotactic system was chosen as reference for both methods. A thin layer CT scan with an acrylic phantom fixed to the frame and a localizer enabling the software to recognize the coordinate system was performed. For each of the five phantom targets, two different trajectories were planned, resulting in 10 trajectories. A series of five repetitions was performed, each time based on a new CT scan. Hence, 50 trajectories were analyzed for each method. X-rays of the final cannula position were fused with the planning data. The coordinates of the target point and the endpoint of the robot- or frame-guided probe were visually determined using the robotic software. The target point error (TPE) was calculated applying the Euclidian distance. The depth deviation along the trajectory and the lateral deviation were separately calculated.
Results: Robotics was significantly more accurate, with an arithmetic TPE mean of 0.53 mm (95% CI 0.41–0.55 mm) compared to 0.72 mm (95% CI 0.63–0.8 mm) in stereotaxy (p < 0.05). In robotics, the mean depth deviation along the trajectory was −0.22 mm (95% CI −0.25 to −0.14 mm). The mean lateral deviation was 0.43 mm (95% CI 0.32–0.49 mm). In frame-based stereotaxy, the mean depth deviation amounted to −0.20 mm (95% CI −0.26 to −0.14 mm), the mean lateral deviation to 0.65 mm (95% CI 0.55–0.74 mm).
Conclusion: Both the robotic and frame-based approach proved accurate. The robotic procedure showed significantly higher accuracy. For both methods, procedural factors occurring during surgery might have a more relevant impact on overall accuracy.
The coronavirus pandemic continues to challenge global healthcare. Severely affected patients are often in need of high doses of analgesics and sedatives. The latter was studied in critically ill coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients in this prospective monocentric analysis. COVID-19 acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patients admitted between 1 April and 1 December 2020 were enrolled in the study. A statistical analysis of impeded sedation using mixed-effect linear regression models was performed. Overall, 114 patients were enrolled, requiring unusual high levels of sedatives. During 67.9% of the observation period, a combination of sedatives was required in addition to continuous analgesia. During ARDS therapy, 85.1% (n = 97) underwent prone positioning. Veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (vv-ECMO) was required in 20.2% (n = 23) of all patients. vv-ECMO patients showed significantly higher sedation needs (p < 0.001). Patients with hepatic (p = 0.01) or renal (p = 0.01) dysfunction showed significantly lower sedation requirements. Except for patient age (p = 0.01), we could not find any significant influence of pre-existing conditions. Age, vv-ECMO therapy and additional organ failure could be demonstrated as factors influencing sedation needs. Young patients and those receiving vv-ECMO usually require increased sedation for intensive care therapy. However, further studies are needed to elucidate the causes and mechanisms of impeded sedation.
Association of mortality and early tracheostomy in patients with COVID-19: a retrospective analysis
(2022)
COVID-19 adds to the complexity of optimal timing for tracheostomy. Over the course of this pandemic, and expanded knowledge of the disease, many centers have changed their operating procedures and performed an early tracheostomy. We studied the data on early and delayed tracheostomy regarding patient outcome such as mortality. We performed a retrospective analysis of all tracheostomies at our institution in patients diagnosed with COVID-19 from March 2020 to June 2021. Time from intubation to tracheostomy and mortality of early (≤ 10 days) vs. late (> 10 days) tracheostomy were the primary objectives of this study. We used mixed cox-regression models to calculate the effect of distinct variables on events. We studied 117 tracheostomies. Intubation to tracheostomy shortened significantly (Spearman’s correlation coefficient; rho = − 0.44, p ≤ 0.001) during the course of this pandemic. Early tracheostomy was associated with a significant increase in mortality in uni- and multivariate analysis (Hazard ratio 1.83, 95% CI 1.07–3.17, p = 0.029). The timing of tracheostomy in COVID-19 patients has a potentially critical impact on mortality. The timing of tracheostomy has changed during this pandemic tending to be performed earlier. Future prospective research is necessary to substantiate these results.