Risk Factors for Latex Sensitization in Children with Spina Bifida

Background: Children with spina bifida represent the major risk group for latex sensitization. Purpose: To determine the prevalence of latex sensitization in these children and to identify risk factors. Material and methods: We studied 57 patients with spina bifida. The mean age was 5.6 years and the male/female ratio was 0.8/1. In all patients a questionnaire, skin prick test (SPT) with latex (UCBStallergènes, Lofarma and ALK-Abelló), common aeroallergens and fruits (UCB-Stallergènes) and serum determination of total IgE (AlaSTAT) were performed. Results: The prevalence of latex sensitization was 30 %; only two sensitized children (12 %) had symptoms after exposure. Risk factors for latex sensitization were age 5 years (p = 0.008; OR = 6.0; 95% CI = 1.7-22.1), having at least four previous surgical interventions (p < 0.0001; OR = 18.5; 95% CI = 3.6-94.8), having undergone surgery in the first 3 months of life (p = 0.008; OR = 5.4; 95% CI = 0.7-29.2) and total serum IgE 44 IU/ml (p = 0.03; OR = 3.8; 95 %CI = 1.1-13.1). Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that only a history of four or more surgical interventions (p < 0.0001; OR = 26.3; 95 %CI = 2.9-234.2) and total serum IgE 44 IU/ml (p = 0.02; OR = 8.6; 95% CI = 1.4-53.4) were independently associated with latex sensitization. Sex, family and personal allergic history, hydrocephalus with ventriculoperitoneal shunt, cystourethrograms, intermittent bladder catheterization and atopy were not related to latex sensitization. Conclusions: In children with spina bifida, significant and independent risk factors identified for latex sensitization were multiple interventions and higher levels of total serum IgE. A prospective study will clarify the clinical evolution of assymptomatic children sensitized to latex.

Clinical Outcome and Morphologic Analysis after Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Using the Excluder Endograft

OBJECTIVE: Long-term follow-up after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is very scarce, and doubt remains regarding the durability of these procedures. We designed a retrospective cohort study to assess long-term clinical outcome and morphologic changes in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) treated by EVAR using the Excluder endoprosthesis (W. L. Gore and Associates, Flagstaff, Ariz). METHODS: From 2000 to 2007, 179 patients underwent EVAR in a tertiary institution. Clinical data were retrieved from a prospective database. All patients treated with the Excluder endoprosthesis were included. Computed tomography angiography (CTA) scans were retrospectively analyzed preoperatively, at 30 days, and at the last follow-up using dedicated tridimensional reconstruction software. For patients with complications, all remaining CTAs were also analyzed. The primary end point was clinical success. Secondary end points were freedom from reintervention, sac growth, types I and III endoleak, migration, conversion to open repair, and AAA-related death or rupture. Neck dilatation, renal function, and overall survival were also analyzed. RESULTS: Included were 144 patients (88.2% men; mean age, 71.6 years). Aneurysms were ruptured in 4.9%. American Society of Anesthesiologists classification was III/IV in 61.8%. No patients were lost during a median follow-up of 5.0 years (interquartile range, 3.1-6.4; maximum, 11.2 years). Two patients died of medical complications ≤ 30 days after EVAR. The estimated primary clinical success rates at 5 and 10 years were 63.5% and 41.1%, and secondary clinical success rates were 78.3% and 58.3%, respectively. Sac growth was observed in 37 of 142 patients (26.1%). Cox regression showed type I endoleak during follow-up (hazard ratio, 3.74; P = .008), original design model (hazard ratio, 3.85; P = .001), and preoperative neck diameter (1.27 per mm increase, P = .006) were determinants of sac growth. Secondary interventions were required in 32 patients (22.5%). The estimated 10-year rate of AAA-related death or rupture was 2.1%. Overall life expectancy after AAA repair was 6.8 years. CONCLUSIONS: EVAR using the Excluder endoprosthesis provides a safe and lasting treatment for AAA, despite the need for maintained surveillance and secondary interventions. At up to 11 years, the risk of AAA-related death or postimplantation rupture is remarkably low. The incidences of postimplantation sac growth and secondary intervention were greatly reduced after the introduction of the low-permeability design in 2004.

Induced Labor– Is There an Increased Risk of Perinatal Infection?

Objectives: To assess induced labor-associated perinatal infection risk at Hospital D.Estefânia from January to June of 2010 at Hospital de D. Estefânia’s delivery rooms, reviewing the indications for inducing labor as well as the techniques used. Material and Methods: Performing an historical prospective study searching the clinical processes as well as the mother and newborn’s computer database from January to June of 2010. An exposed and an unexposed group were created; the first group comprises pregnant women and their newborns whose labor was induced. The unexposed group is constituted by newborns and pregnant women whose labor was spontaneous. Labor induction was performed using intra-vaginal prostaglandins in women who didn’t start it spontaneously; perinatal infection was defined either clinically or using blood tests. The gestational age was ≥ 37 weeks for both groups. 19 variables were studied for both groups. Results: A total of 190 mother-newborn pairs were included: 55 in the exposed group and 135 in the unexposed group. 3 cases of perinatal infection were reported, two in the exposed group and one in the unexposed group. Preliminary data resulted in a perinatal infection rate of 3.6% in the exposed group and 0.7% in the unexposed group; preliminary data suggest that the risk of perinatal infection may be increased in up to 5-fold when labor is inducted. Conclusions: A larger series of patients and a multivariable analysis using logistic regression are both necessary in order to perform a more thorough assessment of labor induction’s role in perinatal infection risk. One must also try to distinguish labor inducing- and clinical practicesrelated factors.

The Use of Statins in People at Risk of Developing Diabetes Mellitus: Evidence and Guidance for Clinical Practice

Reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels using statins is associated with significant reductions in cardiovascular (CV) events in a wide range of patient populations. Although statins are generally considered to be safe, recent studies suggest they are associated with an increased risk of developing Type 2 diabetes (T2D). This led the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to change their labelling requirements for statins to include a warning about the possibility of increased blood sugar and HbA1c levels and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) to issue guidance on a small increased risk of T2D with the statin class. This review examines the evidence leading to these claims and provides practical guidance for primary care physicians on the use of statins in people with or at risk of developing T2D. Overall, evidence suggests that the benefits of statins for the reduction of CV risk far outweigh the risk of developing T2D, especially in individuals with higher CV risk. To reduce the risk of developing T2D, physicians should assess all patients for T2D risk prior to starting statin therapy, educate patients about their risks, and encourage risk-reduction through lifestyle changes. Whether some statins are more diabetogenic than others requires further study. Statin-treated patients at high risk of developing T2D should regularly be monitored for changes in blood glucose or HbA1c levels, and the risk of conversion from pre-diabetes to T2D should be reduced by intensifying lifestyle changes. Should a patient develop T2D during statin treatment, physicians should continue with statin therapy and manage T2D in accordance with relevant national guidelines.

Early Sac Shrinkage Predicts a Low Risk of Late Complications After Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair

BACKGROUND: Aneurysm shrinkage has been proposed as a marker of successful endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Patients with early postoperative shrinkage may experience fewer subsequent complications, and consequently require less intensive surveillance. METHODS: Patients undergoing EVAR from 2000 to 2011 at three vascular centres (in 2 countries), who had two imaging examinations (postoperative and after 6-18 months), were included. Maximum diameter, complications and secondary interventions during follow-up were registered. Patients were categorized according to early sac dynamics. The primary endpoint was freedom from late complications. Secondary endpoints were freedom from secondary intervention, postimplant rupture and direct (type I/III) endoleaks. RESULTS: Some 597 EVARs (71.1 per cent of all EVARs) were included. No shrinkage was observed in 284 patients (47.6 per cent), moderate shrinkage (5-9 mm) in 142 (23.8 per cent) and major shrinkage (at least 10 mm) in 171 patients (28.6 per cent). Four years after the index imaging, the rate of freedom from complications was 84.3 (95 per cent confidence interval 78.7 to 89.8), 88.1 (80.6 to 95.5) and 94.4 (90.1 to 98.7) per cent respectively. No shrinkage was an independent risk factor for late complications compared with major shrinkage (hazard ratio (HR) 3.11; P < 0.001). Moderate compared with major shrinkage (HR 2.10; P = 0.022), early postoperative complications (HR 3.34; P < 0.001) and increasing abdominal aortic aneurysm baseline diameter (HR 1.02; P = 0.001) were also risk factors for late complications. Freedom from secondary interventions and direct endoleaks was greater for patients with major sac shrinkage. CONCLUSION: Early change in aneurysm sac diameter is a strong predictor of late complications after EVAR. Patients with major sac shrinkage have a very low risk of complications for up to 5 years. This parameter may be used to tailor postoperative surveillance.

Low Socioeconomic Status is an Independent Risk Factor for Survival After Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair and Open Surgery for Peripheral Artery Disease

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND: The association between socioeconomic status (SES), presentation, and outcome after vascular surgery is largely unknown. This study aimed to determine the influence of SES on post-operative survival and severity of disease at presentation among vascular surgery patients in the Dutch setting of equal access to and provision of care. METHODS: Patients undergoing surgical treatment for peripheral artery disease (PAD), abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), or carotid artery stenosis between January 2003 and December 2011 were retrospectively included. The association between SES, quantified by household income, disease severity at presentation, and survival was studied using logistic and Cox regression analysis adjusted for demographics, and medical and behavioral risk factors. RESULTS: A total of 1,178 patients were included. Low income was associated with worse post-operative survival in the PAD cohort (n = 324, hazard ratio 1.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.00-1.10, per 5,000 Euro decrease) and the AAA cohort (n = 440, quadratic relation, p = .01). AAA patients in the lowest income quartile were more likely to present with a ruptured aneurysm (odds ratio [OR] 2.12, 95% CI 1.08-4.17). Lowest income quartile PAD patients presented more frequently with symptoms of critical limb ischemia, although no significant association could be established (OR 2.02, 95% CI 0.96-4.26). CONCLUSIONS: The increased health hazards observed in this study are caused by patient related factors rather than differences in medical care, considering the equality of care provided by the study setting. Although the exact mechanism driving the association between SES and worse outcome remains elusive, consideration of SES as a risk factor in pre-operative decision making and focus on treatment of known SES related behavioral and psychosocial risk factors may improve the outcome of patients with vascular disease.

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.