Le Mariale lyonnais (Paris, BNF, fr. 818). Édition, traduction et étude linguistique

Le manuscrit de Paris, BNF, fr. 818, connu des francoprovençalistes pour sa collection de légendes hagiographiques en scripta lyonnaise, renferme également l'une des plus amples collections de miracles de Notre-Dame en langue vernaculaire du XIIIe siècle. À la différence des Légendes en prose, ce « Mariale » en vers (probablement dû au même auteur anonyme) a été rédigé dans une scripta 'francoprovençalisante', soit dans une langue qui se veut française, mais qui laisse transparaître un bon nombre de traits de l'idiome natal de l'auteur. Longtemps demeuré dans l'ombre des Légendes, le Mariale lyonnais restait jusqu'ici partiellement inédit, et sa langue n'avait jamais fait l'objet d'une étude exhaustive. Le présent ouvrage comble cette double lacune en proposant d'une part l'édition, la traduction et le glossaire des miracles qui restaient à faire connaître, d'autre part une étude linguistique portant sur l'ensemble du corpus et mettant en lumière la richesse des matériaux francoprovençaux offerts par ce recueil.

Prediction of multiple infections after severe burn trauma: a prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To develop predictive models for early triage of burn patients based on hypersusceptibility to repeated infections. BACKGROUND: Infection remains a major cause of mortality and morbidity after severe trauma, demanding new strategies to combat infections. Models for infection prediction are lacking. METHODS: Secondary analysis of 459 burn patients (≥16 years old) with 20% or more total body surface area burns recruited from 6 US burn centers. We compared blood transcriptomes with a 180-hour cutoff on the injury-to-transcriptome interval of 47 patients (≤1 infection episode) to those of 66 hypersusceptible patients [multiple (≥2) infection episodes (MIE)]. We used LASSO regression to select biomarkers and multivariate logistic regression to built models, accuracy of which were assessed by area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and cross-validation. RESULTS: Three predictive models were developed using covariates of (1) clinical characteristics; (2) expression profiles of 14 genomic probes; (3) combining (1) and (2). The genomic and clinical models were highly predictive of MIE status [AUROCGenomic = 0.946 (95% CI: 0.906-0.986); AUROCClinical = 0.864 (CI: 0.794-0.933); AUROCGenomic/AUROCClinical P = 0.044]. Combined model has an increased AUROCCombined of 0.967 (CI: 0.940-0.993) compared with the individual models (AUROCCombined/AUROCClinical P = 0.0069). Hypersusceptible patients show early alterations in immune-related signaling pathways, epigenetic modulation, and chromatin remodeling. CONCLUSIONS: Early triage of burn patients more susceptible to infections can be made using clinical characteristics and/or genomic signatures. Genomic signature suggests new insights into the pathophysiology of hypersusceptibility to infection may lead to novel potential therapeutic or prophylactic targets.

Impact of early valve surgery on outcome of Staphylococcus aureus prosthetic valve infective endocarditis: analysis in the International Collaboration of Endocarditis-Prospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: The impact of early valve surgery (EVS) on the outcome of Staphylococcus aureus (SA) prosthetic valve infective endocarditis (PVIE) is unresolved. The objective of this study was to evaluate the association between EVS, performed within the first 60 days of hospitalization, and outcome of SA PVIE within the International Collaboration on Endocarditis-Prospective Cohort Study. METHODS: Participants were enrolled between June 2000 and December 2006. Cox proportional hazards modeling that included surgery as a time-dependent covariate and propensity adjustment for likelihood to receive cardiac surgery was used to evaluate the impact of EVS and 1-year all-cause mortality on patients with definite left-sided S. aureus PVIE and no history of injection drug use. RESULTS: EVS was performed in 74 of the 168 (44.3%) patients. One-year mortality was significantly higher among patients with S. aureus PVIE than in patients with non-S. aureus PVIE (48.2% vs 32.9%; P = .003). Staphylococcus aureus PVIE patients who underwent EVS had a significantly lower 1-year mortality rate (33.8% vs 59.1%; P = .001). In multivariate, propensity-adjusted models, EVS was not associated with 1-year mortality (risk ratio, 0.67 [95% confidence interval, .39-1.15]; P = .15). CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective, multinational cohort of patients with S. aureus PVIE, EVS was not associated with reduced 1-year mortality. The decision to pursue EVS should be individualized for each patient, based upon infection-specific characteristics rather than solely upon the microbiology of the infection causing PVIE.

Predicting recurrence after unprovoked venous thromboembolism: prospective validation of the updated Vienna Prediction Model.

The updated Vienna Prediction Model for estimating recurrence risk after an unprovoked venous thromboembolism (VTE) has been developed to identify individuals at low risk for VTE recurrence in whom anticoagulation (AC) therapy may be stopped after 3 months. We externally validated the accuracy of the model to predict recurrent VTE in a prospective multicenter cohort of 156 patients aged ≥65 years with acute symptomatic unprovoked VTE who had received 3 to 12 months of AC. Patients with a predicted 12-month risk within the lowest quartile based on the updated Vienna Prediction Model were classified as low risk. The risk of recurrent VTE did not differ between low- vs higher-risk patients at 12 months (13% vs 10%; P = .77) and 24 months (15% vs 17%; P = 1.0). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for predicting VTE recurrence was 0.39 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.25-0.52) at 12 months and 0.43 (95% CI, 0.31-0.54) at 24 months. In conclusion, in elderly patients with unprovoked VTE who have stopped AC, the updated Vienna Prediction Model does not discriminate between patients who develop recurrent VTE and those who do not. This study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT00973596.