-
Transplant Infectious Disease : An... Dec 2022West Nile virus (WNv) is a major cause of viral encephalitis in the United States. WNv infection is usually asymptomatic or a limited febrile illness in the...
UNLABELLED
West Nile virus (WNv) is a major cause of viral encephalitis in the United States. WNv infection is usually asymptomatic or a limited febrile illness in the immunocompetent hosts, although a small percentage can develop neuroinvasive disease. Neuroinvasive disease due to WNv in solid organ transplant recipients occurs at higher rates than observed in the general population and can have long term neurological sequalae.
METHODS
We retrospectively reviewed medical records of all solid organ transplant recipients at our institution who tested positive for WNv from 2010 to 2018. Two reviewers performed electronic searches of Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library of literature of WNv infections in SOT. Descriptive statistics were performed on key variables.
RESULTS
Eight recipients (mean age 54, five males) were diagnosed with neuroinvasive WNv infection at our institution. Distribution of infection was as follows: five kidney transplants, one in each kidney-pancreas, liver, and lung. Diagnoses included meningitis (3), encephalitis (1), meningo-encephalitis (4). Median time from transplant to infection was 49.8 months (2.7-175.4). No infections were considered donor-derived. Five patients received treatment with IVIG. Six patients were alive at median follow-up of 49.5 months (21.7-116.8). We identified 29 studies published from 2002 to 2019. Median time from transplant to infection was 14.2 months, with similar allograft distribution; 53% were donor-derived infections.
CONCLUSION
WNv infections in solid organ transplant recipients can be a consequence of organ donation or can be acquired via the community. Infections can be more severe in SOT recipients and lead to neuroinvasive disease.
Topics: Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Kidney Transplantation; Organ Transplantation; Retrospective Studies; United States; West Nile Fever; West Nile virus
PubMed: 35980220
DOI: 10.1111/tid.13929 -
Transplant Infectious Disease : An... Dec 2022We aimed to analyze the humoral and cellular response to standard and booster (additional doses) COVID-19 vaccination in solid organ transplantation (SOT) and the risk... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
We aimed to analyze the humoral and cellular response to standard and booster (additional doses) COVID-19 vaccination in solid organ transplantation (SOT) and the risk factors involved for an impaired response.
METHODS
We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies published up until January 11, 2022, that reported immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccine among SOT. The study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42022300547.
RESULTS
Of the 1527 studies, 112 studies, which involved 15391 SOT and 2844 healthy controls, were included. SOT showed a low humoral response (effect size [ES]: 0.44 [0.40-0.48]) in overall and in control studies (log-Odds-ratio [OR]: -4.46 [-8.10 to -2.35]). The humoral response was highest in liver (ES: 0.67 [0.61-0.74]) followed by heart (ES: 0.45 [0.32-0.59]), kidney (ES: 0.40 [0.36-0.45]), kidney-pancreas (ES: 0.33 [0.13-0.53]), and lung (0.27 [0.17-0.37]). The meta-analysis for standard and booster dose (ES: 0.43 [0.39-0.47] vs. 0.51 [0.43-0.54]) showed a marginal increase of 18% efficacy. SOT with prior infection had higher response (ES: 0.94 [0.92-0.96] vs. ES: 0.40 [0.39-0.41]; p-value < .01). The seroresponse with mRNA-12723 mRNA was highest 0.52 (0.40-0.64). Mycophenolic acid (OR: 1.42 [1.21-1.63]) and Belatacept (OR: 1.89 [1.3-2.49]) had highest risk for nonresponse. SOT had a parallelly decreased cellular response (ES: 0.42 [0.32-0.52]) in overall and control studies (OR: -3.12 [-0.4.12 to -2.13]).
INTERPRETATION
Overall, SOT develops a suboptimal response compared to the general population. Immunosuppression including mycophenolic acid, belatacept, and tacrolimus is associated with decreased response. Booster doses increase the immune response, but further upgradation in vaccination strategy for SOT is required.
Topics: Humans; Abatacept; COVID-19; COVID-19 Vaccines; Mycophenolic Acid; Organ Transplantation; Transplant Recipients
PubMed: 35924679
DOI: 10.1111/tid.13926 -
Journal of Gastroenterology and... Sep 2022Antibioprohylaxis (ABP) for pancreatic cystic lesion is still a debated clinical indication. Although professional societies guidelines still recommend ABP in endoscopic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Antibioprohylaxis (ABP) for pancreatic cystic lesion is still a debated clinical indication. Although professional societies guidelines still recommend ABP in endoscopic ultrasound-fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) for pancreatic cystic lesions (PCL), this standard of care recommendation was based on old and weakly planned studies with a small number of patients. Herein, in this work, we provide a critical review with pooled data analysis of the available literature. Overall, the studies reported are weak and limited with small number of patients, the absence of exact definition of infection and the heterogenicity of the type and the duration of the ABP used. Pooled data analysis showed that the effect of ABP on the rate of cyst infection was not significant (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.17-1.2), with no significant heterogenicity between the results of the studies reviewed and reported (as assessed by Breslow Day test for homogeneity of OR's [P = 0.15]). The pooled infection rate without ABP was 0.89% and 0.36% in the ABP group. Moreover, according to the pooled data infection rate, sample size calculation demonstrated that 6954 patients are needed to show superiority of ABP, with a number needed to treat of 179 patients to prevent single infection. However, through the literature only six studies (1660 patients) reported the cyst infection rate among ABP versus control, making these results scarce and biased by a small number of patients. Therefore, we suggest the need to revise the guidelines, until performing well organized large international study to solve this controversy.
Topics: Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration; Endosonography; Humans; Pancreas; Pancreatic Cyst; Pancreatic Neoplasms
PubMed: 35912889
DOI: 10.1111/jgh.15972 -
International Journal of Surgery... Jul 2022To evaluate the effectiveness of pancreatic duct stent placement for preventing postoperative pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
To evaluate the effectiveness of pancreatic duct stent placement for preventing postoperative pancreatic fistula after pancreaticoduodenectomy.
METHODS
PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched up to February 26, 2022. Studies comparing outcomes following pancreaticoduodenectomy with or without pancreatic duct stents were included. The primary outcome measured was postoperative pancreatic fistula rate, and secondary outcomes were in-hospital mortality rate, reoperation rate, delayed gastric emptying rate and wound infection rate.
RESULTS
Seven RCTs involving 847 patients met the inclusion criteria. No statistically significant difference between the stent group and non-stent group was detected in the incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistula (RR = 0.85, 95%CI: 0.57-1.26, P = 0.41), in-hospital mortality, reoperation, delayed gastric emptying rate and wound infection. Subgroup analyses revealed that use of an external stent significantly reduced the incidence of pancreatic fistula (RR = 0.61, 95%CI: 0.43-0.86, P = 0.005).
CONCLUSIONS
Our preliminary results from this systematic review and meta-analysis revealed that pancreatic duct stents did not reduce the risk of POPF and other complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy compared with no stents. External stents were associated with a reduced POPF rate compared with no stents. Large-scale RCTs are required to assess the effectiveness and assist in clarifying the real role of pancreatic duct stents with respect to the POPF rates after pancreaticoduodenectomy.
Topics: Gastroparesis; Humans; Pancreatic Ducts; Pancreatic Fistula; Pancreaticoduodenectomy; Pancreaticojejunostomy; Postoperative Complications; Stents; Wound Infection
PubMed: 35697324
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2022.106707 -
The British Journal of Nutrition May 2022Severe acute malnutrition may lead both concurrently and subsequently to malabsorption and impaired glucose metabolism from pancreatic dysfunction. We conducted a...
Severe acute malnutrition may lead both concurrently and subsequently to malabsorption and impaired glucose metabolism from pancreatic dysfunction. We conducted a systematic review to investigate the associations of current and prior postnatal wasting malnutrition with pancreatic endocrine and exocrine functions in humans. We searched PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science and reference lists of retrieved articles, limited to articles in English published before 1 February 2022. We included sixty-eight articles, mostly cross-sectional or cohort studies from twenty-nine countries including 592 530 participants, of which 325 998 were from a single study. Many were small clinical studies from decades ago and rated poor quality. Exocrine pancreas function, indicated by duodenal fluid or serum enzymes, or faecal elastase, was generally impaired in malnutrition. Insulin production was usually low in malnourished children and adults. Glucose disappearance during oral and intravenous glucose tolerance tests was variable. Upon treatment of malnutrition, most abnormalities improved but frequently not to control levels. Famine survivors studied decades later showed ongoing impaired glucose tolerance with some evidence of sex differences. The similar findings from anorexia nervosa, famine survivors and poverty- or infection-associated malnutrition in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) lend credence to results being due to malnutrition itself. Research using large, well-documented cohorts and considering sexes separately, is needed to improve prevention and treatment of exocrine and endocrine pancreas abnormalities in LMIC with a high burden of malnutrition and diabetes.
PubMed: 35504844
DOI: 10.1017/S0007114522001404 -
Annals of Palliative Medicine Jul 2022We aimed to identify studies systematically that describe the incidence and outcome of COVID-19-related pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Incidence and outcomes of patients with COVID-19 associated pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA) in intensive care units: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 31 cohort studies.
BACKGROUND
We aimed to identify studies systematically that describe the incidence and outcome of COVID-19-related pulmonary aspergillosis (CAPA).
METHODS
We searched ScienceDirect, PubMed, CNKI, and MEDLINE (OVID) from December 31, 2019 to November 20, 2021 for all eligible studies. Random-model was used to reported the incidence, all-cause case fatality rate (CFR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The meta-analysis was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021242179).
RESULTS
In all, thirty-one cohort studies were included in this study. A total of 3,441 patients with severe COVID-19 admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) were investigated and 442 cases of CAPA were reported (30 studies). The pooled incidence rate of CAPA was 0.14 (95% CI: 0.11-0.17, I2=0.0%). Twenty-eight studies reported 287 deceased patients and 269 surviving patients. The pooled CFR of CAPA was 0.52 (95% CI: 0.47-0.56, I2=3.9%). Interestingly, patients with COVID19 would develop CAPA at 7.28 days after mechanical ventilation (range, 5.48-9.08 days). No significant publication bias was detected in this meta-analysis.
DISCUSSION
Patients with COVID-19 admitted to an ICU might develop CAPA and have high all-cause CFR. We recommend conducting prospective screening for CAPA among patients with severe COVID-19, especially for those who receive mechanical ventilation over 7 days.
Topics: COVID-19; Humans; Incidence; Intensive Care Units; Prospective Studies; Pulmonary Aspergillosis
PubMed: 35272474
DOI: 10.21037/apm-21-2043 -
Legal Medicine (Tokyo, Japan) Feb 2022The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is responsible for the ongoing pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Almost 17 months after...
The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is responsible for the ongoing pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Almost 17 months after the first COVID-19 case was reported, the exact pathogenesis of the virus is still open to interpretation. Postmortem studies have been relatively scarce due to the high infectivity rate of the virus. We systematically reviewed the literature available for studies that reported gross, histological, microscopic, and immunohistochemical findings in COVID-19 fatalities with the aim of reporting any recurrent findings among different demographics. PubMed and Scopus were searched up till the second of May 2021 and 46 studies with a total of 793 patients were shortlisted after the application of inclusion and exclusion criteria. The selected studies reported gross, histological, microscopic, and immunohistochemical autopsy findings in the lungs, heart, liver, gallbladder, bowels, kidney, spleen, bone marrow, lymph nodes, CNS, pancreas, endocrine/exocrine glands, and a few other miscellaneous locations. The SARS-CoV-2 virus was detected in multiple organs and so was the presence of widespread microthrombi. This finding suggests that the pathogenesis of this highly infectious virus might be linked to some form of coagulopathy. Further studies should focus on analyzing postmortem findings in a larger number of patients from different demographics in order to obtain more generalizable results.
Topics: Autopsy; COVID-19; Humans; Lung; Pandemics; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 34952452
DOI: 10.1016/j.legalmed.2021.102001 -
The Journal of Trauma and Acute Care... May 2022Acute pancreatitis is a potentially life-threatening condition with a wide spectrum of clinical presentation and illness severity. An infection of pancreatic necrosis... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
Acute pancreatitis is a potentially life-threatening condition with a wide spectrum of clinical presentation and illness severity. An infection of pancreatic necrosis (IPN) results in a more than twofold increase in mortality risk as compared with patients with sterile necrosis. We sought to identify prognostic factors for the development of IPN among adult patients with severe or necrotizing pancreatitis.
METHODS
We conducted this prognostic review in accordance with systematic review methodology guidelines. We searched six databases from inception through March 21, 2021. We included English language studies describing prognostic factors associated with the development of IPN. We pooled unadjusted odds ratio (uOR) and adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for prognostic factors using a random-effects model. We assessed risk of bias using the Quality in Prognosis Studies tool and certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach.
RESULTS
We included 31 observational studies involving 5,210 patients. Factors with moderate or higher certainty of association with increased IPN risk include older age (uOR, 2.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.39-3.45, moderate certainty), gallstone etiology (aOR, 2.35; 95% CI, 1.36-4.04, high certainty), greater than 50% necrosis of the pancreas (aOR, 3.61; 95% CI, 2.15-6.04, high certainty), delayed enteral nutrition (aOR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.26-3.47, moderate certainty), multiple or persistent organ failure (aOR, 11.71; 95% CI, 4.97-27.56, high certainty), and invasive mechanical ventilation (uOR, 12.24; 95% CI, 2.28-65.67, high certainty).
CONCLUSION
This meta-analysis confirms the association between several clinical early prognostic factors and the risk of IPN development among patients with severe or necrotizing pancreatitis. These findings provide the foundation for the development of an IPN risk stratification tool to guide more targeted clinical trials for prevention or early intervention strategies.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Systematic review and meta-analysis, Level IV.
Topics: Acute Disease; Adult; Humans; Intraabdominal Infections; Necrosis; Pancreatitis, Acute Necrotizing; Prognosis
PubMed: 34936587
DOI: 10.1097/TA.0000000000003502 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2021The use of surgical drains is a very common practice after pancreatic surgery. The role of prophylactic abdominal drainage to reduce postoperative complications after... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The use of surgical drains is a very common practice after pancreatic surgery. The role of prophylactic abdominal drainage to reduce postoperative complications after pancreatic surgery is controversial. This is the third update of a previously published Cochrane Review to address the uncertain benifits of prophylactic abdominal drainage in pancreatic surgery.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefits and harms of routine abdominal drainage after pancreatic surgery, compare the effects of different types of surgical drains, and evaluate the optimal time for drain removal.
SEARCH METHODS
In this updated review, we re-searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, and the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) on 08 February 2021.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared abdominal drainage versus no drainage in people undergoing pancreatic surgery. We also included RCTs that compared different types of drains and different schedules for drain removal in people undergoing pancreatic surgery.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently identified the studies for inclusion, collected the data, and assessed the risk of bias. We conducted the meta-analyses using Review Manager 5. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and the mean difference (MD) or standardized mean difference (SMD) for continuous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI). For all analyses, we used the random-effects model. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for important outcomes.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified a total of nine RCTs with 1892 participants. Drain use versus no drain use We included four RCTs with 1110 participants, randomised to the drainage group (N = 560) and the no drainage group (N = 550) after pancreatic surgery. Low-certainty evidence suggests that drain use may reduce 90-day mortality (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.90; two studies, 478 participants). Compared with no drain use, low-certainty evidence suggests that drain use may result in little to no difference in 30-day mortality (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.99; four studies, 1055 participants), wound infection rate (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.41; four studies, 1055 participants), length of hospital stay (MD -0.14 days, 95% CI -0.79 to 0.51; three studies, 876 participants), the need for additional open procedures for postoperative complications (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.23; four studies, 1055 participants), and quality of life (105 points versus 104 points; measured with the pancreas-specific quality of life questionnaire (scale 0 to 144, higher values indicating a better quality of life); one study, 399 participants). There was one drain-related complication in the drainage group (0.2%). Moderate-certainty evidence suggests that drain use probably resulted in little to no difference in morbidity (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.13; four studies, 1055 participants). The evidence was very uncertain about the effect of drain use on intra-abdominal infection rate (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.80; four studies, 1055 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and the need for additional radiological interventions for postoperative complications (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.87; three studies, 660 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Active versus passive drain We included two RCTs involving 383 participants, randomised to the active drain group (N = 194) and the passive drain group (N = 189) after pancreatic surgery. Compared with a passive drain, the evidence was very uncertain about the effect of an active drain on 30-day mortality (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.30 to 5.06; two studies, 382 participants; very low-certainty evidence), intra-abdominal infection rate (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.21 to 3.66; two studies, 321 participants; very low-certainty evidence), wound infection rate (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.90; two studies, 321 participants; very low-certainty evidence), morbidity (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.77; two studies, 382 participants; very low-certainty evidence), length of hospital stay (MD -0.79 days, 95% CI -2.63 to 1.04; two studies, 321 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and the need for additional open procedures for postoperative complications (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.11 to 1.83; two studies, 321 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There was no drain-related complication in either group. Early versus late drain removal We included three RCTs involving 399 participants with a low risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula, randomised to the early drain removal group (N = 200) and the late drain removal group (N = 199) after pancreatic surgery. Compared to late drain removal, the evidence was very uncertain about the effect of early drain removal on 30-day mortality (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.06 to 15.45; three studies, 399 participants; very low-certainty evidence), wound infection rate (RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.45 to 3.85; two studies, 285 participants; very low-certainty evidence), hospital costs (SMD -0.22, 95% CI -0.59 to 0.14; two studies, 258 participants; very low-certainty evidence), the need for additional open procedures for postoperative complications (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.28 to 2.10; three studies, 399 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and the need for additional radiological procedures for postoperative complications (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.21 to 4.79; one study, 144 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We found that early drain removal may reduce intra-abdominal infection rate (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.89; two studies, 285 participants; very low-certainty evidence), morbidity (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.81; two studies, 258 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and length of hospital stay (MD -2.20 days, 95% CI -3.52 to -0.87; three studies, 399 participants; very low-certainty evidence), but the evidence was very uncertain. None of the studies reported on drain-related complications.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Compared with no drain use, it is unclear whether routine drain use has any effect on mortality at 30 days or postoperative complications after pancreatic surgery. Compared with no drain use, low-certainty evidence suggests that routine drain use may reduce mortality at 90 days. Compared with a passive drain, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of an active drain on mortality at 30 days or postoperative complications. Compared with late drain removal, early drain removal may reduce intra-abdominal infection rate, morbidity, and length of hospital stay for people with low risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula, but the evidence is very uncertain.
Topics: Abdomen; Drainage; Humans; Length of Stay; Pancreas; Pancreatic Fistula
PubMed: 34921395
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010583.pub5 -
European Journal of Radiology Nov 2021The main goal of this systematic review was to assess the technical and clinical success, adverse events (AEs), surgery, and overall mortality proportion after... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
The main goal of this systematic review was to assess the technical and clinical success, adverse events (AEs), surgery, and overall mortality proportion after percutaneous catheter drainage (PCD) of two pancreatic lesions.
METHODS
An extant search in online databases including Scopus, PubMed (Medline), Embase (Elsevier), Web of Science, Cochrane library, and Google Scholar, was conducted to recognize all studies that used PCD intervention in the management of pancreatic necrosis (PN) and pancreatic pseudocysts (PP). Random effects meta-analysis was performed, and Cochrane's Q test and Istatistic were utilized to determine heterogeneity. In addition, meta-regression was used to explore the influence of categorical variables on heterogeneity.
RESULTS
Thirty-two studies (1398 patients) including PN in 26 (1256 cases, 89.8%) studies and PP in 6 (142 cases, 10.2%) studies were identified. Technical success proportion was 100% (95% confidence interval [CI] 100%-100%, I: 0.0%), clinical success 63% (95% CI 55%-71%, I: 92.9%), AEs 26% (95% CI 21%-31%, I: 78%), surgery after PCD intervention 33% (95% CI 25%-40%, I: 92.4%), and overall mortality was 13% (95% CI 9%-17%, I: 82.8%). The most common ADs after PCD intervention were development of fistula (106, 42.6%), hemorrhage (44, 17.7%), sepsis (40, 16.1%).
CONCLUSION
A significant clinical success proportion with low AEs, surgery, and overall mortality proportion after PCD intervention was found, although the results should be interpreted with caution due to the high heterogeneity.
Topics: Catheters; Drainage; Humans; Pancreas; Pancreatic Pseudocyst; Pancreatitis, Acute Necrotizing; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34607289
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2021.109978