Tenofovir-containing nucleoside/nucleotide-only antiretroviral maintenance therapy: decision making and virological outcome

OBJECTIVE: To assess the virological outcome of patients with undetectable human immunodeficiency (HI) viremia switched to tenofovir (TDF)-containing nucleosideonly (NUKE-only) treatments and to investigate the factors influencing the physicians' decision for application of a nonestablished therapy. METHOD: Patients' characteristics and history were taken from the cohort database. To study the decision-making process, questionnaires were sent to all treating physicians. RESULTS: 49 patients were changed to TDF-containing NUKE-only treatment and 46 had a follow-up measurement of HI viremia. Virological failure occurred in 16 (35%) patients. Virological failure was associated with previous mono or dual therapy and with a regimen including didanosine or abacavir. No failure occurred in 15 patients without these predisposing factors. The main reasons for change to TDF-containing NUKE-only treatment were side effects and presumed favorable toxicity profile. The rationale behind this decision was mainly analogy to the zidovudine/lamivudine/abacavir maintenance therapy. CONCLUSION: TDF-containing NUKE-only treatment is associated with high early failure rates in patients with previous nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor mono or dual therapy and in drug combinations containing didanosine or abacavir but not in patients without these predisposing factors. In HIV medicine, treatment strategies that are not evidence-based are followed by a minority of experienced physicians and are driven by patients' needs, mainly to minimize treatment side effects.

Contrast-enhanced 3-D MRA in decision making for carotid endarterectomy: a 6-year experience

BACKGROUND: Systematic need for angiography in diagnosis of carotid artery stenosis and indication of surgical therapy is still debated. Noninvasive imaging techniques such as MR angiography (MRA) or CT angiography (CTA) offer an alternative to digital subtraction angiography (DSA) and are increasingly used in clinical practice. In this study, we present the radiological characteristics and clinical results of a series of patients operated on the basis of combined ultrasonography (US)/MRA. METHODS: This observational study included all the patients consecutively operated for a carotid stenosis in our Department from October 1998 to December 2004. The applied MRA protocol had previously been established in a large correlation study with DSA. DSA was used only in case of discordance between US and MRA. The preoperative radiological information furnished by MRA was compared with intraoperative findings. The outcome of the operation was assessed according to ECST criteria. RESULTS: Among 327 patients, preoperative MRA was performed in 278 (85%), DSA in 44 (13.5%) and CT angiography in 5 (1.5%). Most of DSA studies were performed as emergency for preparation of endovascular therapy or for reasons other than carotid stenosis. Eleven additional DSA (3.3%) complemented US/MRA, mostly because diverging diagnosis of subocclusion of ICA. No direct morbidity or intraoperative difficulty was related to preoperative MRA. Combined mortality/major morbidity rate was 0.9% (3 patients) and minor morbidity rate 5.5% (18 patients). CONCLUSIONS: This observational study describes a well-established practice of carotid surgery and supports the exclusive use of non invasive diagnostic imaging for indicating and deciding the operation.

The radiographic assessment of implant patients: decision-making criteria

Indications for the most frequently used imaging modalities in implant dentistry are proposed based on clinical need and biologic risk for the patient. To calculate the biologic risk, the authors carried out dose measurements. They demonstrated that the risk from a periapical radiograph is 20% of that from a panoramic radiograph. A panoramic radiograph and a series of 4 conventional tomographs of a single-tooth gap in the molar region carry 5% and 13% of the risk from computed tomography of the maxilla, respectively. Panoramic radiography is considered the standard radiographic examination for treatment planning of implant patients, because it imparts a low dose while giving the best radiographic survey. Periapical radiographs are used to elucidate details or to complete the findings obtained from the panoramic radiograph. Other radiographic methods, such as conventional film tomography or computed tomography, are applied only in special circumstances, film tomography being preferred for smaller regions of interest and computed tomography being justified for the complete maxilla or mandible when methods for dose reduction are followed. During follow-up, intraoral radiography is considered the standard radiographic examination, particularly for implants in the anterior region of the maxilla or for scientific studies. In patients requiring more than 5 periapical images, panoramic radiography is preferred.

From Statistical Data to Spatial Knowledge - informing decision making in Vietnam

Vietnam has developed rapidly over the past 15 years. However, progress was not uniformly distributed across the country. Availability, adequate visualization and analysis of spatially explicit data on socio-economic and environmental aspects can support both research and policy towards sustainable development. Applying appropriate mapping techniques allows gleaning important information from tabular socio-economic data. Spatial analysis of socio-economic phenomena can yield insights into locally-specifi c patterns and processes that cannot be generated by non-spatial applications. This paper presents techniques and applications that develop and analyze spatially highly disaggregated socioeconomic datasets. A number of examples show how such information can support informed decisionmaking and research in Vietnam.

Decision making in patients with acute abdominal pain at a university and at a rural hospital: Does the value of abdominal sonography differ?

Introduction and objectives Abdominal sonography is regarded as a quick and effective diagnostic tool for acute abdominal pain in emergency medicine. However, final diagnosis is usually based on a combination of various clinical examinations and radiography. The role of sonography in the decision making process at a hospital with advanced imaging capabilities versus a hospital with limited imaging capabilities but more experienced clinicians is unclear. The aim of this pilot study was to assess the relative importance of sonography and its influence on the clinical management of acute abdominal pain, at two Swiss hospitals, a university hospital (UH) and a rural hospital (RH). Methods 161 patients were prospectively examined clinically. Blood tests and sonography were performed in all patients. Patients younger than 18 years and patients with trauma were excluded. In both hospitals, the diagnosis before and after ultrasonography was registered in a protocol. Certainty of the diagnosis was expressed on a scale from 0% to 100%. The decision processes used to manage patients before and after they underwent sonography were compared. The diagnosis at discharge was compared to the diagnosis 2 – 6 weeks thereafter. Results Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of sonography were high: 94%, 88% and 91%, respectively. At the UH, management after sonography changed in only 14% of cases, compared to 27% at the RH. Additional tests were more frequently added at the UH (30%) than at the RH (18%), but had no influence on the decision making process-whether to operate or not. At the UH, the diagnosis was missed in one (1%) patient, but in three (5%) patients at the RH. No significant difference was found between the two hospitals in frequency of management changes due to sonography or in the correctness of the diagnosis. Conclusion Knowing that sonography has high sensitivity, specificity and accuracy in the diagnosis of acute abdominal pain, one would assume it would be an important diagnostic tool, particularly at the RH, where tests/imaging studies are rare. However, our pilot study indicates that sonography provides important diagnostic information in only a minority of patients with acute abdominal pain. Sonography was more important at the rural hospital than at the university hospital. Further costly examinations are generally ordered for verification, but these additional tests change the final treatment plan in very few patients.

Can decision making in general surgery be based on evidence? An empirical study of Cochrane Reviews

BACKGROUND: This empirical study analyzes the current status of Cochrane Reviews (CRs) and their strength of recommendation for evidence-based decision making in the field of general surgery. METHODS: Systematic literature search of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the Cochrane Collaboration's homepage to identify available CRs on surgical topics. Quantitative and qualitative characteristics, utilization, and formulated treatment recommendations were evaluated by 2 independent reviewers. Association of review characteristics with treatment recommendation was analyzed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression models. RESULTS: Ninety-three CRs, including 1,403 primary studies and 246,473 patients, were identified. Mean number of included primary studies per CR was 15.1 (standard deviation [SD] 14.5) including 2,650 (SD 3,340) study patients. Two and a half (SD 8.3) nonrandomized trials were included per analyzed CR. Seventy-two (77%) CRs were published or updated in 2005 or later. Explicit treatment recommendations were given in 45 (48%). Presence of a treatment recommendation was associated with the number of included primary studies and the proportion of randomized studies. Utilization of surgical CRs remained low and showed large inter-country differences. The most surgical CRs were accessed in UK, USA, and Australia, followed by several Western and Eastern European countries. CONCLUSION: Only a minority of available CRs address surgical questions and their current usage is low. Instead of unsystematically increasing the number of surgical CRs it would be far more efficient to focus the review process on relevant surgical questions. Prioritization of CRs needs valid methods which should be developed by the scientific surgical community.