Explore the vast range of titles available.

Purpose Randomised trials have shown that empiric ICD programming, using long detection times and high detection zones, reduces device therapy in ICD recipients. However, there is less data on its effectiveness in a “real-world” setting, especially secondary prevention patients. Our aim was to evaluate the introduction of a standardised programming protocol in a real-world setting of unselected ICD recipients. Methods We analysed 270 consecutive ICD recipients implanted in a single centre—135 implanted prior to protocol implementation (physician-led group) and 135 after (standardised group). The protocol included long arrhythmia detection times (30/40 or equivalent) and high rate detection zones (primary prevention lower treatment zone 200 bpm). Programming in the physician-led group was at the discretion of the implanter. The primary endpoint was time-to-any therapy (ATP or shocks). Secondary endpoints were time-to-inappropriate therapy and time-to-appropriate therapy. The safety endpoints were syncopal episodes, hospital admissions and death. Results At 12 months follow-up, 47 patients had received any ICD therapy (physician-led group, n  = 31 vs. standardised group, n  = 16). There was a 47 % risk reduction in any device therapy ( p  = 0.04) and an 86 % risk reduction in inappropriate therapy ( p  = 0.009) in the standardised compared to the physician-led group. There was a non-significant 30 % risk reduction in appropriate therapy ( p  = 0.32). Results were consistent across primary and secondary prevention patients. There were no significant differences in the rates of syncope, hospitalisation, and death. Conclusions In unselected patients in a real-world setting, introduction of a standardised programming protocol, using long detection times and high detection zones, significantly reduces the burden of ICD therapy without an increase in adverse outcomes.

Purpose Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) improves outcomes in patients with heart failure, yet response rates are variable. We sought to determine whether physician-specified CRT programming was associated with improved outcomes. Methods Using data from the ALTITUDE remote follow-up cohort, we examined sensed atrioventricular (AV) and ventricular-to-ventricular (VV) programming and their associated outcomes in patients with de novo CRT from 2009–2010. Outcomes included arrhythmia burden, left ventricular (LV) pacing, and all-cause mortality at 4 years. Results We identified 5709 patients with de novo CRT devices; at the time of implant, 34 % ( n  = 1959) had entirely nominal settings programmed, 40 % ( n  = 2294) had only AV timing adjusted, 11 % ( n  = 604) had only VV timing adjusted, and 15 % ( n  = 852) had both AV and VV adjusted from nominal programming. Suboptimal LV pacing (<95 %) during follow-up was similar across groups; however, the proportion with atrial fibrillation (AF) burden >5 % was lowest in the AV-only adjusted group (17.9 %) and highest in the nominal (27.7 %) and VV-only adjusted (28.3 %) groups. Adjusted all-cause mortality was significantly higher among patients with non-nominal AV delay >120 vs. <120 ms (adjusted heart rate (HR) 1.28, p  = 0.008) but similar when using the 180-ms cutoff (adjusted HR 1.13 for >180 vs. ≤180 ms, p  = 0.4). Conclusions Nominal settings for de novo CRT implants are frequently altered, most commonly the AV delay. There is wide variability in reprogramming. Patients with nominal or AV-only adjustments appear to have favorable pacing and arrhythmia outcomes. Sensed AV delays less than 120 ms are associated with improved survival.

Verbal autopsy is designed to ascertain causes of death that are not registered or certified. Verbal autopsy has been validated in multiple settings but has not been as widely evaluated for older populations as for younger age groups. This study aims to provide empirical evidence of the value of verbal autopsy interviews in the context of population-based surveys of older adults by comparing the cause-of-death assignments derived from two methods of interpreting verbal autopsy data. Data used in this study come from the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study, a nationally representative longitudinal survey of older Chinese. We compared 407 causes of death determined using InterVA, which is a computer-coded method, and causes of death as assigned by experts; then evaluated factors that affect the results of the two approaches. Among the 407 deaths, neoplasms, cardiac disease, and stroke are the leading causes of death according to both approaches. The consistency of the two approaches is about 45% at the individual level. The primary reason for the mismatch is that no cause of death could be assigned for more than 25% of the sample based on expert review. A higher likelihood of mismatch is associated with advanced age and a long period between death and verbal autopsy interview. Both approaches identify the same leading causes of death at the aggregate level, but consistency is relatively low at the individual level. InterVA works well when causes of death are characterized by distinctive signs and symptoms. Grouping the various causes of death with shared etiology or common risk factors may help improve the quality of the ascertainment of causes of death. Open-ended narratives are helpful because they provide information about the circumstances surrounding the death that are not available in the structured verbal autopsy interviews.

Intraoperative MRI is increasingly used in neurosurgery, although there is little evidence for its use. We aimed to assess efficacy of intraoperative MRI guidance on extent of resection in patients with glioma. In our prospective, randomised, parallel-group trial, we enrolled adults (≥18 years) with contrast enhancing gliomas amenable to radiologically complete resection who presented to Goethe University (Frankfurt, Germany). We randomly assigned patients (1:1) with computer-generated blocks of four and a sealed-envelope design to undergo intraoperative MRI-guided surgery or conventional microsurgery (control group). Surgeons and patients were unmasked to treatment group allocation, but an independent neuroradiologist was masked during analysis of all preoperative and postoperative imaging data. The primary endpoint was rate of complete resections as established by early postoperative high-field MRI (1·5 T or 3·0 T). Analysis was done per protocol. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01394692. We enrolled 58 patients between Oct 1, 2007, and July 1, 2010. 24 (83%) of 29 patients randomly allocated to the intraoperative MRI group and 25 (86%) of 29 controls were eligible for analysis (four patients in each group had metastasis and one patient in the intraoperative MRI group withdrew consent after randomisation). More patients in the intraoperative MRI group had complete tumour resection (23 [96%] of 24 patients) than did in the control group (17 [68%] of 25, p=0·023). Postoperative rates of new neurological deficits did not differ between patients in the intraoperative MRI group (three [13%] of 24) and controls (two [8%] of 25, p=1·0). No patient for whom use of intraoperative MRI led to continued resection of residual tumour had neurological deterioration. One patient in the control group died before 6 months. Our study provides evidence for the use of intraoperative MRI guidance in glioma surgery: such imaging helps surgeons provide the optimum extent of resection. None.

The management of childhood infections remains inadequate in resource-limited countries, resulting in high mortality and irrational use of antimicrobials. Current disease management tools, such as the Integrated Management of Childhood Illness (IMCI) algorithm, rely solely on clinical signs and have not made use of available point-of-care tests (POCTs) that can help to identify children with severe infections and children in need of antibiotic treatment. e-POCT is a novel electronic algorithm based on current evidence; it guides clinicians through the entire consultation and recommends treatment based on a few clinical signs and POCT results, some performed in all patients (malaria rapid diagnostic test, hemoglobin, oximeter) and others in selected subgroups only (C-reactive protein, procalcitonin, glucometer). The objective of this trial was to determine whether the clinical outcome of febrile children managed by the e-POCT tool was non-inferior to that of febrile children managed by a validated electronic algorithm derived from IMCI (ALMANACH), while reducing the proportion with antibiotic prescription. We performed a randomized (at patient level, blocks of 4), controlled non-inferiority study among children aged 2-59 months presenting with acute febrile illness to 9 outpatient clinics in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. In parallel, routine care was documented in 2 health centers. The primary outcome was the proportion of clinical failures (development of severe symptoms, clinical pneumonia on/after day 3, or persistent symptoms at day 7) by day 7 of follow-up. Non-inferiority would be declared if the proportion of clinical failures with e-POCT was no worse than the proportion of clinical failures with ALMANACH, within statistical variability, by a margin of 3%. The secondary outcomes included the proportion with antibiotics prescribed on day 0, primary referrals, and severe adverse events by day 30 (secondary hospitalizations and deaths). We enrolled 3,192 patients between December 2014 and February 2016 into the randomized study; 3,169 patients (e-POCT: 1,586; control [ALMANACH]: 1,583) completed the intervention and day 7 follow-up. Using e-POCT, in the per-protocol population, the absolute proportion of clinical failures was 2.3% (37/1,586), as compared with 4.1% (65/1,583) in the ALMANACH arm (risk difference of clinical failure -1.7, 95% CI -3.0, -0.5), meeting the prespecified criterion for non-inferiority. In a non-prespecified superiority analysis, we observed a 43% reduction in the relative risk of clinical failure when using e-POCT compared to ALMANACH (risk ratio [RR] 0.57, 95% CI 0.38, 0.85, p = 0.005). The proportion of severe adverse events was 0.6% in the e-POCT arm compared with 1.5% in the ALMANACH arm (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.20, 0.87, p = 0.02). The proportion of antibiotic prescriptions was substantially lower, 11.5% compared to 29.7% (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.33, 0.45, p < 0.001). Using e-POCT, the most common indication for antibiotic prescription was severe disease (57%, 103/182 prescriptions), while it was non-severe respiratory infections using the control algorithm (ALMANACH) (70%, 330/470 prescriptions). The proportion of clinical failures among the 544 children in the routine care cohort was 4.6% (25/544); 94.9% (516/544) of patients received antibiotics on day 0, and 1.1% (6/544) experienced severe adverse events. e-POCT achieved a 49% reduction in the relative risk of clinical failure compared to routine care (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.31, 0.84, p = 0.007) and lowered antibiotic prescriptions to 11.5% from 94.9% (p < 0.001). Though this safety study was an important first step to evaluate e-POCT, its true utility should be evaluated through future implementation studies since adherence to the algorithm will be an important factor in making use of e-POCT's advantages in terms of clinical outcome and antibiotic prescription. e-POCT, an innovative electronic algorithm using host biomarker POCTs, including C-reactive protein and procalcitonin, has the potential to improve the clinical outcome of children with febrile illnesses while reducing antibiotic use through improved identification of children with severe infections, and better targeting of children in need of antibiotic prescription. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02225769.

Complete revascularization in ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients with multivessel disease has resulted in reduction in composite clinical endpoints in medium sized trials. Only one trial showed an effect on hard clinical endpoints, but the revascularization procedure was guided by angiographic evaluation of stenosis severity. Consequently, it is not clear how Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) affects hard clinical endpoints in STEMI. The Ffr-gUidance for compLete non-cuLprit REVASCularization (FULL REVASC) – is a pragmatic, multicenter, international, registry-based randomized clinical trial designed to evaluate whether a strategy of FFR-guided complete revascularization of non-culprit lesions, reduces the combined primary endpoint of total mortality, non-fatal MI and unplanned revascularization. 1,545 patients were randomized to receive FFR-guided PCI during the index hospitalization or initial conservative management of non-culprit lesions. We found that in angiographically severe non-culprit lesions of 90-99% severity, 1 in 5 of these lesions were re-classified as non-flow limiting by FFR. Considering lesions of intermediate severity (70%-89%), half were re-classified as non-flow limiting by FFR. The study is event driven for an estimated follow-up of at least 2.75 years to detect a 9.9%/year>7.425%/year difference (HR = 0.74 at 80% power (α = .05)) for the combined primary endpoint. This large randomized clinical trial is designed and powered to evaluate the effect of complete revascularization with FFR-guided PCI during index hospitalization on total mortality, non-fatal MI and unplanned revascularization following primary PCI in STEMI patients with multivessel disease. Enrollment completed in September 2019 and follow-up is ongoing.

Suboptimal tuberculosis (TB) diagnostics and HIV contribute to the high global burden of TB. We investigated costs and yield from systematic HIV-TB screening, including computer-aided digital chest X-ray (DCXR-CAD). In this open, three-arm randomised trial, adults (≥18 years) with cough attending acute primary services in Malawi were randomised (1:1:1) to standard of care (SOC); oral HIV testing (HIV screening) and linkage to care; or HIV testing and linkage to care plus DCXR-CAD with sputum Xpert for high CAD4TBv5 scores (HIV-TB screening). Participants and study staff were not blinded to intervention allocation, but investigator blinding was maintained until final analysis. The primary outcome was time to TB treatment. Secondary outcomes included proportion with same-day TB treatment; prevalence of undiagnosed/untreated bacteriologically confirmed TB on day 56; and undiagnosed/untreated HIV. Analysis was done on an intention-to-treat basis. Cost-effectiveness analysis used a health-provider perspective. Between 15 November 2018 and 27 November 2019, 8,236 were screened for eligibility, with 473, 492, and 497 randomly allocated to SOC, HIV, and HIV-TB screening arms; 53 (11%), 52 (9%), and 47 (9%) were lost to follow-up, respectively. At 56 days, TB treatment had been started in 5 (1.1%) SOC, 8 (1.6%) HIV screening, and 15 (3.0%) HIV-TB screening participants. Median (IQR) time to TB treatment was 11 (6.5 to 38), 6 (1 to 22), and 1 (0 to 3) days (hazard ratio for HIV-TB versus SOC: 2.86, 1.04 to 7.87), with same-day treatment of 0/5 (0%) SOC, 1/8 (12.5%) HIV, and 6/15 (40.0%) HIV-TB screening arm TB patients (p = 0.03). At day 56, 2 SOC (0.5%), 4 HIV (1.0%), and 2 HIV-TB (0.5%) participants had undiagnosed microbiologically confirmed TB. HIV screening reduced the proportion with undiagnosed or untreated HIV from 10 (2.7%) in the SOC arm to 2 (0.5%) in the HIV screening arm (risk ratio [RR]: 0.18, 0.04 to 0.83), and 1 (0.2%) in the HIV-TB screening arm (RR: 0.09, 0.01 to 0.71). Incremental costs were US$3.58 and US$19.92 per participant screened for HIV and HIV-TB; the probability of cost-effectiveness at a US$1,200/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) threshold was 83.9% and 0%. Main limitations were the lower than anticipated prevalence of TB and short participant follow-up period; cost and quality of life benefits of this screening approach may accrue over a longer time horizon. DCXR-CAD with universal HIV screening significantly increased the timeliness and completeness of HIV and TB diagnosis. If implemented at scale, this has potential to rapidly and efficiently improve TB and HIV diagnosis and treatment. clinicaltrials.gov NCT03519425.

Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients often demonstrate varying clinical courses and outcomes, even within the same tumor stage. This study explores deep learning applications in medical imaging allowing for the automated quantification of radiographic characteristics and potentially improving patient stratification. We performed an integrative analysis on 7 independent datasets across 5 institutions totaling 1,194 NSCLC patients (age median = 68.3 years [range 32.5-93.3], survival median = 1.7 years [range 0.0-11.7]). Using external validation in computed tomography (CT) data, we identified prognostic signatures using a 3D convolutional neural network (CNN) for patients treated with radiotherapy (n = 771, age median = 68.0 years [range 32.5-93.3], survival median = 1.3 years [range 0.0-11.7]). We then employed a transfer learning approach to achieve the same for surgery patients (n = 391, age median = 69.1 years [range 37.2-88.0], survival median = 3.1 years [range 0.0-8.8]). We found that the CNN predictions were significantly associated with 2-year overall survival from the start of respective treatment for radiotherapy (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC] = 0.70 [95% CI 0.63-0.78], p < 0.001) and surgery (AUC = 0.71 [95% CI 0.60-0.82], p < 0.001) patients. The CNN was also able to significantly stratify patients into low and high mortality risk groups in both the radiotherapy (p < 0.001) and surgery (p = 0.03) datasets. Additionally, the CNN was found to significantly outperform random forest models built on clinical parameters-including age, sex, and tumor node metastasis stage-as well as demonstrate high robustness against test-retest (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.91) and inter-reader (Spearman's rank-order correlation = 0.88) variations. To gain a better understanding of the characteristics captured by the CNN, we identified regions with the most contribution towards predictions and highlighted the importance of tumor-surrounding tissue in patient stratification. We also present preliminary findings on the biological basis of the captured phenotypes as being linked to cell cycle and transcriptional processes. Limitations include the retrospective nature of this study as well as the opaque black box nature of deep learning networks. Our results provide evidence that deep learning networks may be used for mortality risk stratification based on standard-of-care CT images from NSCLC patients. This evidence motivates future research into better deciphering the clinical and biological basis of deep learning networks as well as validation in prospective data.

We did a systematic review to address the added value of intraoperative MRI (iMRI)-guided resection of glioblastoma multiforme compared with conventional neuronavigation-guided resection, with respect to extent of tumour resection (EOTR), quality of life, and survival. 12 non-randomised cohort studies matched all selection criteria and were used for qualitative synthesis. Most of the studies included descriptive statistics of patient populations of mixed pathology, and iMRI systems of varying field strengths between 0·15 and 1·5 Tesla. Most studies provided information on EOTR, but did not always mention how iMRI affected the surgical strategy. Only a few studies included information on quality of life or survival for subpopulations with glioblastoma multiforme or high-grade glioma. Several limitations and sources of bias were apparent, which affected the conclusions drawn and might have led to overestimation of the added value of iMRI-guided surgery for resection of glioblastoma multiforme. Based on the available literature, there is, at best, level 2 evidence that iMRI-guided surgery is more effective than conventional neuronavigation-guided surgery in increasing EOTR, enhancing quality of life, or prolonging survival after resection of glioblastoma multiforme.

AbstractClinical questionIn adult patients undergoing colonoscopy for any indication (screening, surveillance, follow-up of positive faecal immunochemical testing, or gastrointestinal symptoms such as blood in the stools) what are the benefits and harms of computer-aided detection (CADe)?Context and current practiceColorectal cancer (CRC), the third most common cancer and the second leading cause of cancer-related death globally, typically arises from adenomatous polyps. Detection and removal of polyps during colonoscopy can reduce the risk of cancer. CADe systems use artificial intelligence (AI) to assist endoscopists by analysing real-time colonoscopy images to detect potential polyps. Despite their increasing use in clinical practice, guideline recommendations that carefully balance all patient-important outcomes remain unavailable. In this first iteration of a living guideline, we address the use of CADe at the level of an individual patient.EvidenceEvidence for this recommendation is drawn from a living systematic review of 44 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving more than 30 000 participants and a companion microsimulation study simulating 10 year follow-up for 100 000 individuals aged 60-69 years to assess the impact of CADe on patient-important outcomes. While no direct evidence was found for critical outcomes of colorectal cancer incidence and post-colonoscopy cancer incidence, low certainty data from the trials indicate that CADe may increase positive endoscopy findings. The microsimulation modelling, however, suggests little to no effect on CRC incidence, CRC-related mortality, or colonoscopy-related complications (perforation and bleeding) over the 10 year follow-up period, although low certainty evidence indicates CADe may increase the number of colonoscopies performed per patient. A review of values and preferences identified that patients value mortality reduction and quality of care but worry about increased anxiety, overdiagnosis, and more frequent surveillance.RecommendationFor adults who have agreed to undergo colonoscopy, we suggest against the routine use of CADe (weak recommendation).How this guideline was createdAn international panel, including three patient partners, 11 healthcare providers, and seven methodologists, deemed by MAGIC and The BMJ to have no relevant competing interests, developed this recommendation. For this guideline the panel took an individual patient approach. The panel started by defining the clinical question in PICO format, and prioritised outcomes including CRC incidence and mortality. Based on the linked systematic review and microsimulation study, the panel sought to balance the benefits, harms, and burdens of CADe and assumed patient preferences when making this recommendationUnderstanding the recommendationThe guideline panel found the benefits of CADe on critical outcomes, such as CRC incidence and post-colonoscopy cancer incidence, over a 10 year follow up period to be highly uncertain. Low certainty evidence suggests little to no impact on CRC-related mortality, while the potential burdens—including more frequent surveillance colonoscopies—are likely to affect many patients. Given the small and uncertain benefits and the likelihood of burdens, the panel issued a weak recommendation against routine CADe use.The panel acknowledges the anticipated variability in values and preferences among patients and clinicians when considering these uncertain benefits and potential burdens. In healthcare settings where CADe is available, individual decision making may be appropriate.UpdatesThis is the first iteration of a living practice guideline. The panel will update this living guideline if ongoing evidence surveillance identifies new CADe trial data that substantially alters our conclusions about CRC incidence, mortality, or burdens, or studies that increase our certainty in values and preferences of individual patients. Updates will provide recommendations on the use of CADe from a healthcare systems perspective (including resource use, acceptability, feasibility, and equity), as well as the combined use of CADe and computer aided diagnosis (CADx). Users can access the latest guideline version and supporting evidence on MAGICapp, with updates periodically published in The BMJ.