Refine
Document Type
- Article (5)
Language
- English (5)
Has Fulltext
- yes (5)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (5)
Keywords
- CRM (2)
- stroke (2)
- CardioMEMS™ HF system (1)
- Clinical genetics (1)
- Depression (1)
- Haemodynamic monitoring (1)
- Health‐related quality of life (1)
- Heart failure (1)
- Morbidity (1)
- NSF (1)
Institute
- Medizin (5)
Increased sympathetic noradrenergic signaling is crucially involved in fear and anxiety as defensive states. MicroRNAs regulate dynamic gene expression during synaptic plasticity and genetic variation of microRNAs modulating noradrenaline transporter gene (SLC6A2) expression may thus lead to altered central and peripheral processing of fear and anxiety. In silico prediction of microRNA regulation of SLC6A2 was confirmed by luciferase reporter assays and identified hsa-miR-579-3p as a regulating microRNA. The minor (T)-allele of rs2910931 (MAFcases = 0.431, MAFcontrols = 0.368) upstream of MIR579 was associated with panic disorder in patients (pallelic = 0.004, ncases = 506, ncontrols = 506) and with higher trait anxiety in healthy individuals (pASI = 0.029, pACQ = 0.047, n = 3112). Compared to the major (A)-allele, increased promoter activity was observed in luciferase reporter assays in vitro suggesting more effective MIR579 expression and SLC6A2 repression in vivo (p = 0.041). Healthy individuals carrying at least one (T)-allele showed a brain activation pattern suggesting increased defensive responding and sympathetic noradrenergic activation in midbrain and limbic areas during the extinction of conditioned fear. Panic disorder patients carrying two (T)-alleles showed elevated heart rates in an anxiety-provoking behavioral avoidance test (F(2, 270) = 5.47, p = 0.005). Fine-tuning of noradrenaline homeostasis by a MIR579 genetic variation modulated central and peripheral sympathetic noradrenergic activation during fear processing and anxiety. This study opens new perspectives on the role of microRNAs in the etiopathogenesis of anxiety disorders, particularly their cardiovascular symptoms and comorbidities.
Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the potential risk of gadobutrol-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients with moderate to severe renal impairment for the development of nephrogenic systemic fibrosis (NSF).
Materials and Methods: We performed a prospective, international, multicenter, open-label study in 55 centers. Patients with moderate to severe renal impairment scheduled for any gadobutrol-enhanced MRI were included. All patients received a single intravenous bolus injection of gadobutrol at a dose of 0.1 mmol/kg body weight. The primary target variable was the number of patients who develop NSF within a 2-year follow-up period.
Results: A total of 908 patients were enrolled, including 586 with moderate and 284 with severe renal impairment who are at highest risk for developing NSF. The mean time since renal disease diagnosis was 1.83 and 5.49 years in the moderate and severe renal impairment cohort, respectively. Overall, 184 patients (20.3%) underwent further contrast-enhanced MRI with other gadolinium-based contrast agents within the 2-year follow-up. No patient developed symptoms conclusive of NSF.
Conclusions: No safety concerns with gadobutrol in patients with moderate to severe renal impairment were identified. There were no NSF cases.
Aims: Heart failure (HF) leads to repeat hospitalisations and reduces the duration and quality of life. Pulmonary artery pressure (PAP)‐guided HF management using the CardioMEMS™ HF system was shown to be safe and reduce HF hospitalisation (HFH) rates in New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III patients. However, these findings have not been replicated in health systems outside the United States. Therefore, the CardioMEMS European Monitoring Study for Heart Failure (MEMS‐HF) evaluated the safety, feasibility, and performance of this device in Germany, The Netherlands, and Ireland.
Methods and results: A total of 234 NYHA class III patients (68 ± 11 years, 22% female, ≥1 HFH in the preceding year) from 31 centres were implanted with a CardioMEMS sensor and underwent PAP‐guided HF management. One‐year rates of freedom from device‐ or system‐related complications and from sensor failure (co‐primary outcomes) were 98.3% [95% confidence interval (CI) 95.8–100.0] and 99.6% (95% CI 97.6–100.0), respectively. Survival rate was 86.2%. For the 12 months post‐ vs. pre‐implant, HFHs decreased by 62% (0.60 vs. 1.55 events/patient‐year; hazard ratio 0.38, 95% CI 0.31–0.48; P < 0.0001). After 12 months, mean PAP decreased by 5.1 ± 7.4 mmHg, Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) overall/clinical summary scores increased from 47.0 ± 24.0/51.2 ± 24.8 to 60.5 ± 24.3/62.4 ± 24.1 (P < 0.0001), and the 9‐item Patient Health Questionnaire sum score improved from 8.7 ± 5.9 to 6.3 ± 5.1 (P < 0.0001).
Conclusion: Haemodynamic‐guided HF management proved feasible and safe in the health systems of Germany, The Netherlands, and Ireland. Physician‐directed treatment modifications based on remotely obtained PAP values were associated with fewer HFH, sustainable PAP decreases, marked KCCQ improvements, and remission of depressive symptoms.
Introduction: Acute stroke care delivered by interdisciplinary teams is time-sensitive. Simulation-based team training is a promising tool to improve team performance in medical operations. It has the potential to improve process times, team communication, patient safety, and staff satisfaction. We aim to assess whether a multi-level approach consisting of a stringent workflow revision based on peer-to-peer review and 2–3 one-day in situ simulation trainings can improve acute stroke care processing times in high volume neurocenters within a 6 months period.
Methods and Analysis: The trial is being carried out in a pre-test-post-test design at 7 tertiary care university hospital neurocenters in Germany. The intervention is directed at the interdisciplinary multiprofessional stroke teams. Before and after the intervention, process times of all direct-to-center stroke patients receiving IV thrombolysis (IVT) and/or endovascular therapy (EVT) will be recorded. The primary outcome measure will be the “door-to-needle” time of all consecutive stroke patients directly admitted to the neurocenters who receive IVT. Secondary outcome measures will be intervention-related process times of the fraction of patients undergoing EVT and effects on team communication, perceived patient safety, and staff satisfaction via a staff questionnaire.
Interventions: We are applying a multi-level intervention in cooperation with three “STREAM multipliers” from each center. First step is a central meeting of the multipliers at the sponsor's institution with the purposes of algorithm review in a peer-to-peer process that is recorded in a protocol and an introduction to the principles of simulation training and debriefing as well as crew resource management and team communication. Thereafter, the multipliers cooperate with the stroke team trainers from the sponsor's institution to plan and execute 2–3 one-day simulation courses in situ in the emergency department and CT room of the trial centers whereupon they receive teaching materials to perpetuate the trainings.
Clinical Trial Registration: STREAM is a registered trial at https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03228251.
Background: The objective of the STREAM Trial was to evaluate the effect of simulation training on process times in acute stroke care.
Methods: The multicenter prospective interventional STREAM Trial was conducted between 10/2017 and 04/2019 at seven tertiary care neurocenters in Germany with a pre- and post-interventional observation phase. We recorded patient characteristics, acute stroke care process times, stroke team composition and simulation experience for consecutive direct-to-center patients receiving intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and/or endovascular therapy (EVT). The intervention consisted of a composite intervention centered around stroke-specific in situ simulation training. Primary outcome measure was the ‘door-to-needle’ time (DTN) for IVT. Secondary outcome measures included process times of EVT and measures taken to streamline the pre-existing treatment algorithm.
Results: The effect of the STREAM intervention on the process times of all acute stroke operations was neutral. However, secondary analyses showed a DTN reduction of 5 min from 38 min pre-intervention (interquartile range [IQR] 25–43 min) to 33 min (IQR 23–39 min, p = 0.03) post-intervention achieved by simulation-experienced stroke teams. Concerning EVT, we found significantly shorter door-to-groin times in patients who were treated by teams with simulation experience as compared to simulation-naive teams in the post-interventional phase (−21 min, simulation-naive: 95 min, IQR 69–111 vs. simulation-experienced: 74 min, IQR 51–92, p = 0.04).
Conclusion: An intervention combining workflow refinement and simulation-based stroke team training has the potential to improve process times in acute stroke care.