Effect of C282Y Genotype on Self-Reported Musculoskeletal Complications in Hereditary Hemochromatosis

OBJECTIVE: Arthropathy that mimics osteoarthritis (OA) and osteoporosis (OP) is considered a complication of hereditary hemochromatosis (HH). We have limited data comparing OA and OP prevalence among HH patients with different hemochromatosis type 1 (HFE) genotypes. We investigated the prevalence of OA and OP in patients with HH by C282Y homozygosity and compound heterozygosity (C282Y/H63D) genotype. METHODS: A total of 306 patients with HH completed a questionnaire. Clinical and demographic characteristics and presence of OA, OP and related complications were compared by genotype, adjusting for age, sex, body mass index (BMI), current smoking and menopausal status. RESULTS: In total, 266 of the 306 patients (87%) were homozygous for C282Y, and 40 (13%) were compound heterozygous. The 2 groups did not differ by median age [60 (interquartile range [IQR] 53 to 68) vs. 61 (55 to 67) years, P=0.8], sex (female: 48.8% vs. 37.5%, P=0.18) or current smoking habits (12.4% vs. 10%, P=0.3). As compared with compound heterozygous patients, C282Y homozygous patients had higher median serum ferritin concentration at diagnosis [1090 (IQR 610 to 2210) vs. 603 (362 to 950) µg/L, P<0.001], higher median transferrin saturation [80% (IQR 66 to 91%) vs. 63% (55 to 72%), P<0.001]) and lower median BMI [24.8 (22.1 to 26.9) vs. 26.2 (23.5 to 30.3) kg/m2, P<0.003]. The overall prevalence of self-reported OA was significantly higher with C282Y homozygosity than compound heterozygosity (53.4% vs. 32.5%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.4 [95% confidence interval 1.2-5.0]), as was self-reported OP (25.6% vs. 7.5%; aOR 3.5 [1.1-12.1]). CONCLUSION: Patients with C282Y homozygosity may be at increased risk of musculoskeletal complications of HH.

American Society of Anesthesiologists Score: Still Useful After 60 Years? Results of the EuSOS Study

OBJECTIVE: The European Surgical Outcomes Study described mortality following in-patient surgery. Several factors were identified that were able to predict poor outcomes in a multivariate analysis. These included age, procedure urgency, severity and type and the American Association of Anaesthesia score. This study describes in greater detail the relationship between the American Association of Anaesthesia score and postoperative mortality. METHODS: Patients in this 7-day cohort study were enrolled in April 2011. Consecutive patients aged 16 years and older undergoing inpatient non-cardiac surgery with a recorded American Association of Anaesthesia score in 498 hospitals across 28 European nations were included and followed up for a maximum of 60 days. The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality. Decision tree analysis with the CHAID (SPSS) system was used to delineate nodes associated with mortality. RESULTS: The study enrolled 46,539 patients. Due to missing values, 873 patients were excluded, resulting in the analysis of 45,666 patients. Increasing American Association of Anaesthesia scores were associated with increased admission rates to intensive care and higher mortality rates. Despite a progressive relationship with mortality, discrimination was poor, with an area under the ROC curve of 0.658 (95% CI 0.642 - 0.6775). Using regression trees (CHAID), we identified four discrete American Association of Anaesthesia nodes associated with mortality, with American Association of Anaesthesia 1 and American Association of Anaesthesia 2 compressed into the same node. CONCLUSION: The American Association of Anaesthesia score can be used to determine higher risk groups of surgical patients, but clinicians cannot use the score to discriminate between grades 1 and 2. Overall, the discriminatory power of the model was less than acceptable for widespread use.

Validation of Two US Risk Scores for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in a Single-Center Portuguese Population of Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome

INTRODUCTION: New scores have been developed and validated in the US for in-hospital mortality risk stratification in patients undergoing coronary angioplasty: the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) risk score and the Mayo Clinic Risk Score (MCRS). We sought to validate these scores in a European population with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and to compare their predictive accuracy with that of the GRACE risk score. METHODS: In a single-center ACS registry of patients undergoing coronary angioplasty, we used the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), a graphical representation of observed vs. expected mortality, and net reclassification improvement (NRI)/integrated discrimination improvement (IDI) analysis to compare the scores. RESULTS: A total of 2148 consecutive patients were included, mean age 63 years (SD 13), 74% male and 71% with ST-segment elevation ACS. In-hospital mortality was 4.5%. The GRACE score showed the best AUC (0.94, 95% CI 0.91-0.96) compared with NCDR (0.87, 95% CI 0.83-0.91, p=0.0003) and MCRS (0.85, 95% CI 0.81-0.90, p=0.0003). In model calibration analysis, GRACE showed the best predictive power. With GRACE, patients were more often correctly classified than with MCRS (NRI 78.7, 95% CI 59.6-97.7; IDI 0.136, 95% CI 0.073-0.199) or NCDR (NRI 79.2, 95% CI 60.2-98.2; IDI 0.148, 95% CI 0.087-0.209). CONCLUSION: The NCDR and Mayo Clinic risk scores are useful for risk stratification of in-hospital mortality in a European population of patients with ACS undergoing coronary angioplasty. However, the GRACE score is still to be preferred.