Layer-specific and whole wall global longitudinal strain predict major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with stable angina pectoris

The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging - Global longitudinal strain (GLS) has proven to be a powerful prognostic marker in various patient populations, but the prognostic value of...     

The effect of experimental diabetes and membrane occlusiveness on guided bone regeneration: A proof of principle study

Clinical Oral Investigations - To evaluate the effect of membrane occlusiveness and experimental diabetes on early and late healing following guided bone regeneration. A total of 30 Wistar rats...     

Principles of environmentally-sustainable anaesthesia: a global consensus statement from the World Federation of Societies of Anaesthesiologists

The Earth’s mean surface temperature is already approximately 1.1°C higher than pre-industrial levels. Exceeding a mean 1.5°C rise by 2050 will make global adaptation to the consequences of climate change less possible. To protect public health, anaesthesia providers need to reduce the contribution their practice makes to global warming. We convened a Working Group of 45 anaesthesia providers with a recognised interest in sustainability, and used a three-stage modified Delphi consensus process to agree on principles of environmentally sustainable anaesthesia that are achievable worldwide. The Working Group agreed on the following three important underlying statements: patient safety should not be compromised by sustainable anaesthetic practices; high-, middle- and low-income countries should support each other appropriately in delivering sustainable healthcare (including anaesthesia); and healthcare systems should be mandated to reduce their contribution to global warming. We set out seven fundamental principles to guide anaesthesia providers in the move to environmentally sustainable practice, including: choice of medications and equipment; minimising waste and overuse of resources; and addressing environmental sustainability in anaesthetists’ education, research, quality improvement and local healthcare leadership activities. These changes are achievable with minimal material resource and financial investment, and should undergo re-evaluation and updates as better evidence is published. This paper discusses each principle individually, and directs readers towards further important references.     

How can hospitals change practice to better implement smoking cessation interventions? A systematic review

Smoking cessation reduces the risk of death, improves recovery, and reduces the risk of hospital readmission. Evidence and policy support hospital admission as an ideal time to deliver smoking-cessation interventions. However, this is not well implemented in practice. In this systematic review, the authors summarize the literature on smoking-cessation implementation strategies and evaluate their success to guide the implementation of best-practice smoking interventions into hospital settings. The CINAHL Complete, Embase, MEDLINE Complete, and PsycInfo databases were searched using terms associated with the following topics: smoking cessation, hospitals, and implementation. In total, 14,287 original records were identified and screened, resulting in 63 eligible articles from 56 studies. Data were extracted on the study characteristics, implementation strategies, and implementation outcomes. Implementation outcomes were guided by Proctor and colleagues' framework and included acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, cost, feasibility, fidelity, penetration, and sustainability. The findings demonstrate that studies predominantly focused on the training of staff to achieve implementation. Brief implementation approaches using a small number of implementation strategies were less successful and poorly sustained compared with well resourced and multicomponent approaches. Although brief implementation approaches may be viewed as advantageous because they are less resource-intensive, their capacity to change practice in a sustained way lacks evidence. Attempts to change clinician behavior or introduce new models of care are challenging in a short time frame, and implementation efforts should be designed for long-term success. There is a need to embrace strategic, well planned implementation approaches to embed smoking-cessation interventions into hospitals and to reap and sustain the benefits for people who smoke.     

Sickle cell nephropathy: A review of novel biomarkers and their potential roles in early detection of renal involvement

Whether the underlying mutations are homozygous, heterozygous, or co-inherited with other hemoglobinopathies, sickle cell disease is known to afflict the kidneys, leading to the clinical entity known as sickle cell nephropathy (SCN). Although common, SCN remains diagnostically elusive. Conventional studies performed in the context of renal disorders often fail to detect early stage SCN. This makes the quest for early diagnosis and treatment more challenging, and it increases the burden of chronic kidney disease-related morbidity among patients. Novel diagnostic tools have been employed to overcome this limitation. In this study, we discuss various biomarkers of SCN, including those employed in clinical practice and others recently identified in experimental settings, such as markers of vascular injury, endothelial dysfunction, tubulo-glomerular damage, and oxidative stress. These include kidney injury molecule-1, monocyte chemoattractant protein-1, N-acetyl-B-D-glucosaminidase, ceruloplasmin, orosomucoid, nephrin, and cation channels, among others. Furthermore, we explore the potential of novel biomarkers for refining diagnostic and therapeutic approaches and describe some obstacles that still need to be overcome. We highlight the importance of a collaborative approach to standardize the use of promising new biomarkers. Finally, we outline the limitations of conventional markers of renal damage as extensions of the pathogenic process occurring at the level of the organ and its functional subunits, with a discussion of the expected pattern of clinical and biochemical progression among patients with SCN.     

Glycaemic control for patients with severe acute brain injury: Protocol for a systematic review

Background

Hyperglycaemia is common in patients with acute brain injury admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU). Many studies have found associations between development of hyperglycaemia and increased mortality in hospitalised patients. However, the optimal target for blood glucose control is unknown. We want to conduct a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis to explore the beneficial and harmful effects of restrictive versus liberal glucose control on patient outcomes in adults with severe acute brain injury.

Methods

We will systematically search medical databases including CENTRAL, Embase, MEDLINE and trial registries. We will search the following websites for ongoing or unpublished trials: http://www.controlled-trials.com/ , http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ , www.eudraCT.com , http://centerwatch.com/ , The Cochrane Library's CENTRAL, PubMed, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded and CINAHL. Two authors will independently review and select trials and extract data. We will include randomised trials comparing levels of glucose control in our analyses and observational studies will be included to address potential harms. The primary outcomes are defined as all-cause mortality, functional outcome and health-related quality of life. Secondary outcomes include serious adverse events including hypoglycaemia, length of ICU stay and duration of mechanical ventilation, and explorative outcomes including intracranial pressure and infection. Trial Sequential Analysis will be used to investigate the risk of type I error due to repetitive testing and to further explore imprecision. Quality of trials will be evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, and quality of evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach.

Discussion

The results of the systematic review will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication. With the review, we hope to inform future randomised clinical trials and improve clinical practice.