scholarly journals OP0222 IS REFERRING EARLY ARTHRITIS PATIENTS WITHIN 6 WEEKS ASSOCIATED WITH BETTER LONG-TERM OUTCOMES THAN REFERRING WITHIN 12 WEEKS AFTER SYMPTOM ONSET? – INVESTIGATING THE EVIDENCE FOR THE FIRST EULAR RECOMMENDATION FOR EARLY ARTHRITIS IN TWO OBSERVATIONAL COHORTS

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 138-138
Author(s):  
E. Niemantsverdriet ◽  
M. Dougados ◽  
B. Combe ◽  
A. Van der Helm - van Mil
Keyword(s):  
Symptom Onset ◽  
Radiographic Progression ◽  
Cox Regression ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Early Arthritis ◽  
Long Term Outcomes ◽  
Research Support ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Better Than

Background:EULAR- recommendations for management of early arthritis formulated that patients should be referred to, and seen by a rheumatologist, within 6-weeks after symptom onset. The mentioned period of ≤6-weeks after symptom onset is shorter than ≤12-weeks, the period that is generally considered as the ‘window-of-opportunity’. Because implementation provides challenges, and evidence supporting that referral ≤6-weeks is better than e.g. <12-weeks is missing, we investigated if ≤6-weeks relates to improved long-term outcomes.Objectives:We used an observational study design to investigate in two cohorts if time-to-encounter (TtE) a rheumatologist ≤6-weeks, compared to 7-12-weeks, results in better disease long-term outcomes, measured with sustained DMARD-free remission (SDFR) and radiographic progression.Methods:Consecutive 1987-RA patients of the Leiden EAC (n=1025) and ESPOIR (n=514) were studied during median 7 and 10 years follow-up. Patients were categorized on duration between symptom onset and first encounter with a rheumatologist; ≤6-, 7-12-, and >12-weeks. Multivariable Cox regression (SDFR), linear mixed models (radiographic progression), and meta-analyses were used.Results:Leiden RA-patients encountered the rheumatologist within 6-weeks obtained SDFR more often than patients seen within 7-12-weeks (HR 1·59, 95%CI:1·02-2·49), and >12-weeks (HR 1·54, 95%CI:1·04-2·29). In ESPOIR, similar but non-significant effects were observed; meta-analysis showed that within 6-weeks was better than 7-12-weeks (HR 1·69, 95%CI:1·10-2·57, Figure 1-A) and >12-weeks (HR 1·67, 95%CI:1·08-2·58). Patients encountered the rheumatologist within 6-weeks had similar radiographic progression than those seen 7-12-weeks, in any cohort, or meta-analysis (Figure 1-B).Figure 1Meta-analyses of time-to-encounter the rheumatologist and the chance of achieving sustained DMARD-free remission (A) and radiographic progression (B)Conclusion:Scientific evidence underlying the first EULAR recommendation depends on the outcome of interest; visiting a rheumatologist within 6-weeks of symptom-onset had clear benefits for achieving SDFR, but not for radiographic progression.References:None.Disclosure of Interests:Ellis Niemantsverdriet: None declared, Maxime Dougados Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB Pharma, Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB Pharma, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB Pharma, Bernard Combe Grant/research support from: Novartis, Pfizer, Roche-Chugai, Consultant of: AbbVie; Gilead Sciences, Inc.; Janssen; Eli Lilly and Company; Pfizer; Roche-Chugai; Sanofi, Speakers bureau: Bristol-Myers Squibb; Gilead Sciences, Inc.; Eli Lilly and Company; Merck Sharp & Dohme; Pfizer; Roche-Chugai; UCB, Annette van der Helm - van Mil: None declared

scholarly journals Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jianglei Ma ◽  
Xiaoyao Li ◽  
Shifu Zhao ◽  
Ruifu Zhang ◽  
Dejun Yang
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Robotic Surgery ◽  
Laparoscopic Gastrectomy ◽  
Resection Margin ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Long Term Outcomes ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract Background To date, robotic surgery has been widely used worldwide. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate short-term and long-term outcomes of robotic gastrectomy (RG) in gastric cancer patients to determine whether RG can replace laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG). Methods The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement was applied to perform the study. Pubmed, Cochrane Library, WanFang, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and VIP databases were comprehensively searched for studies published before May 2020 that compared RG with LG. Next, two independent reviewers conducted literature screening and data extraction. The quality of the literature was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS), and the data analyzed using the Review Manager 5.3 software. Random effects or fixed effects models were applied according to heterogeneity. Results A total of 19 studies including 7275 patients were included in the meta-analyses, of which 4598 patients were in the LG group and 2677 in the RG group. Compared with LG, RG was associated with longer operative time (WMD = −32.96, 95% CI −42.08 ~ −23.84, P < 0.001), less blood loss (WMD = 28.66, 95% CI 18.59 ~ 38.73, P < 0.001), and shorter time to first flatus (WMD = 0.16 95% CI 0.06 ~ 0.27, P = 0.003). There was no significant difference between RG and LG in terms of the hospital stay (WMD = 0.23, 95% CI −0.53 ~ 0.98, P = 0.560), overall postoperative complication (OR = 1.07, 95% CI 0.91 ~ 1.25, P = 0.430), mortality (OR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.24 ~ 1.90, P = 0.450), the number of harvested lymph nodes (WMD = −0.96, 95% CI −2.12 ~ 0.20, P = 0.100), proximal resection margin (WMD = −0.10, 95% CI −0.29 ~ 0.09, P = 0.300), and distal resection margin (WMD = 0.15, 95% CI −0.21 ~ 0.52, P = 0.410). No significant differences were found between the two treatments in overall survival (OS) (HR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.76 ~ 1.18, P = 0.640), recurrence-free survival (RFS) (HR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.69 ~ 1.21, P = 0.530), and recurrence rate (OR = 0.90, 95% CI 0.67 ~ 1.21, P = 0.500). Conclusions The results of this study suggested that RG is as acceptable as LG in terms of short-term and long-term outcomes. RG can be performed as effectively and safely as LG. Moreover, more randomized controlled trials comparing the two techniques with rigorous study designs are still essential to evaluate the value of the robotic surgery for gastric cancer.

scholarly journals Long Term Surgical Outcomes For Infective Endocarditis In People Who Inject Drugs: A Systematic Review And Meta-Analysis

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Goodman-Meza ◽  
Robert E Weiss ◽  
Sebastian Gamboa ◽  
Abel Gallegos ◽  
Alex AT Bui ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cardiac Surgery ◽  
Infective Endocarditis ◽  
People Who Inject Drugs ◽  
Cox Regression ◽  
Individual Patient Data ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Patient Data ◽  
Long Term Outcomes

Abstract Background: In recent years, the number of infective endocarditis (IE) cases associated with injection drug use has increased. Clinical guidelines suggest deferring surgery for IE in people who inject drugs (PWID) due to a concern for worse outcomes in comparison to non-injectors (non-PWID). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of long-term outcomes in PWID who underwent cardiac surgery and compared these outcomes to non-PWID. Methods: We systematically searched for studies reported between 1965 and 2018. We used an algorithm to estimate individual patient data (eIPD) from Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves and combined it with published individual patient data (IPD) to analyze long-term outcomes after cardiac surgery for IE in PWID . Our primary outcome was survival. Secondary outcomes were reoperation and mortality at 30-days, one-, five-, and 10-years. Random effects Cox regression was used for estimating survival. Results: We included 27 studies in the systematic review and 19 provided data (KM or IPD) for the meta-analysis. PWID were younger and more likely to have S. aureus than non-PWID. Survival at 30-days, one-, five-, and 10-years was 94.3%, 81.0%, 62.1%, and 56.6% in PWID, respectively; and 96.4%, 85.0%, 70.3%, and 63.4% in non-PWID. PWID had 47% greater hazard of death (HR 1.47, 95% CI, 1.05-2.05) and more than twice the hazard of reoperation (HR 2.37, 95% CI, 1.25-4.50) than non-PWID. Conclusion: PWID had shorter survival that non-PWID. Implementing evidence-based interventions and testing new modalities are urgently needed to improve outcomes in PWID after cardiac surgery.

scholarly journals Long term surgical outcomes for infective endocarditis in people who inject drugs: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
David Goodman-Meza ◽  
Robert E. Weiss ◽  
Sebastián Gamboa ◽  
Abel Gallegos ◽  
Alex A. T. Bui ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cardiac Surgery ◽  
Infective Endocarditis ◽  
People Who Inject Drugs ◽  
Cox Regression ◽  
Individual Patient Data ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Patient Data ◽  
Long Term Outcomes

Abstract Background In recent years, the number of infective endocarditis (IE) cases associated with injection drug use has increased. Clinical guidelines suggest deferring surgery for IE in people who inject drugs (PWID) due to a concern for worse outcomes in comparison to non-injectors (non-PWID). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of long-term outcomes in PWID who underwent cardiac surgery and compared these outcomes to non-PWID. Methods We systematically searched for studies reported between 1965 and 2018. We used an algorithm to estimate individual patient data (eIPD) from Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves and combined it with published individual patient data (IPD) to analyze long-term outcomes after cardiac surgery for IE in PWID. Our primary outcome was survival. Secondary outcomes were reoperation and mortality at 30-days, one-, five-, and 10-years. Random effects Cox regression was used for estimating survival. Results We included 27 studies in the systematic review and 19 provided data (KM or IPD) for the meta-analysis. PWID were younger and more likely to have S. aureus than non-PWID. Survival at 30-days, one-, five-, and 10-years was 94.3, 81.0, 62.1, and 56.6% in PWID, respectively; and 96.4, 85.0, 70.3, and 63.4% in non-PWID. PWID had 47% greater hazard of death (HR 1.47, 95% CI, 1.05–2.05) and more than twice the hazard of reoperation (HR 2.37, 95% CI, 1.25–4.50) than non-PWID. Conclusion PWID had shorter survival that non-PWID. Implementing evidence-based interventions and testing new modalities are urgently needed to improve outcomes in PWID after cardiac surgery.

scholarly journals Long Term Surgical Outcomes for Infective Endocarditis in People Who Inject Drugs: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Goodman-Meza ◽  
Robert E Weiss ◽  
Sebastian Gamboa ◽  
Abel Gallegos ◽  
Alex AT Bui ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cardiac Surgery ◽  
Infective Endocarditis ◽  
People Who Inject Drugs ◽  
Cox Regression ◽  
Individual Patient Data ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Patient Data ◽  
Long Term Outcomes

Abstract Background: In recent years, the number of infective endocarditis (IE) cases associated with injection drug use has increased. Clinical guidelines suggest deferring surgery for IE in people who inject drugs (PWID) due to a concern for worse outcomes in comparison to non-injectors (non-PWID). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of long-term outcomes in PWID who underwent cardiac surgery and compared these outcomes to non-PWID. Methods: We systematically searched for studies reported between 1965 and 2018. We used an algorithm to estimate individual patient data (eIPD) from Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves and combined it with published individual patient data (IPD) to analyze long-term outcomes after cardiac surgery for IE in PWID . Our primary outcome was survival. Secondary outcomes were reoperation and mortality at 30-days, one-, five-, and 10-years. Random effects Cox regression was used for estimating survival. Results: We included 27 studies in the systematic review and 19 provided data (KM or IPD) for the meta-analysis. PWID were younger and more likely to have S. aureus than non-PWID. Survival at 30-days, one-, five-, and 10-years was 94.3%, 81.0%, 62.1%, and 56.6% in PWID, respectively; and 96.4%, 85.0%, 70.3%, and 63.4% in non-PWID. PWID had 47% greater hazard of death (HR 1.47, 95% CI, 1.05-2.05) and more than twice the hazard of reoperation (HR 2.37, 95% CI, 1.25-4.50) than non-PWID. Conclusion: PWID had shorter survival that non-PWID. Implementing evidence-based interventions and testing new modalities are urgently needed to improve outcomes in PWID after cardiac surgery.

Endoscopic Endonasal Approach for Craniopharyngiomas with Intraventricular Extension: Long-Term Outcomes and Meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hanna Algattas ◽  
Pradeep Setty ◽  
Ezequiel Goldschmidt ◽  
Eric W. Wang ◽  
Elizabeth Tyler-Kabara ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Endoscopic Endonasal Approach ◽  
Endonasal Approach ◽  
Long Term Outcomes ◽  
Endoscopic Endonasal

scholarly journals FRI0457 LONG-TERM OUTCOMES AND TREATMENT EFFICACY IN PATIENTS WITH TNF RECEPTOR-ASSOCIATED AUTOINFLAMMATORY SYNDROME (TRAPS) FROM THE EUROFEVER INTERNATIONAL REGISTRY

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 825.2-826
Author(s):  
R. Papa ◽  
T. Lane ◽  
F. Bovis ◽  
K. Minden ◽  
I. Touitou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Complete Response ◽  
European Federation ◽  
Efficacy Rate ◽  
Autoinflammatory Syndrome ◽  
Tnf Receptor ◽  
Aa Amyloidosis ◽  
Long Term Outcomes ◽  
Research Support ◽  
International Registry

Background:Tumour necrosis factor (TNF) receptor-associated periodic syndrome (TRAPS) is one of the best-known monogenic auto-inflammatory disorders resulting from an autosomal dominant variation in the TNF super family receptor 1A (TNFRSF1A) gene (1).Objectives:To define best treatment approach in patients with TRAPS and effect on long-term outcomes.Methods:We reviewed all data on patients with TRAPS enrolled in the Eurofever international registry according the INSAID gene variant classification and the new Eurofever/PRINTO classification criteria (EPCC).Results:Data on 226 patients were available. Patients not fulfilling the EPCC carrying likely benign/benign variants (21 patients, 9%) or VOUS/not classified variants (40 patients, 18%) displayed a milder disease than the patients fulfilling the EPCC with VOUS/not classified variants (38 patients, 17%) or pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants (127 patients, 56%). In particular, in patients not fulfilling the EPCC, less frequent abdominal pain and skin rashes, higher efficacy rate of colchicine and no development of AA amyloidosis have been reported. Almost 90% of patients fulfilling the EPCC required maintenance therapy and anti-interleukin (IL)-1 drugs were the most frequently used, with the highest efficacy rate (>85% complete response), while Etanercept was less effectively used and discontinued in 65% of patients.Conclusion:Anti-IL-1 drugs are the best maintenance treatment in TRAPS with potential to reverse the most serious disease complications of AA amyloidosis and infertility. The diagnosis of TRAPS should be considered very carefully in patients carrying VOUS/not classified variants not fulfilling the EPCC.References:[1]Lachmann HJ, Papa R, Gerhold K, Obici L, Touitou I, Cantarini L, et al. The phenotype of TNF receptor-associated autoinflammatory syndrome (TRAPS) at presentation: a series of 158 cases from the Eurofever/EUROTRAPS international registry. Annals of the rheumatic diseases 2014;73:2160-7.Acknowledgments:RP would like to thank the European Federation of Immunology (EFIS) for the short-term bursary and HL for her continuous support and guidance during the fellowship at the National Amyloidosis Centre in London.Disclosure of Interests:Riccardo Papa: None declared, Thirusha Lane: None declared, Francesca Bovis: None declared, Kirsten Minden Consultant of: GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi, Speakers bureau: Roche, Isabelle Touitou: None declared, Luca Cantarini: None declared, Marco Cattalini: None declared, Laura Obici: None declared, Annette Jansson: None declared, Alexander Belot: None declared, Beata Woska-Kuśnierz: None declared, Rainer Berendes: None declared, Agustin Remesal: None declared, Marija Jelusic: None declared, Graciela Espada: None declared, Irina Nikishina: None declared, Esther Hoppenreijs: None declared, Maria Cristina Maggio: None declared, Taryn Youngstein: None declared, Tamer Rezk: None declared, Charalampia Papadopoulou: None declared, Paul Brogan Grant/research support from: Roche, Novartis, SOBI, Chemocentryx, Novimmune, Consultant of: Roche, SOBI, UCB, Novartis, Speakers bureau: Roche, SOBI, UCB, Novartis, Philip N Hawkins: None declared, Patricia Woo: None declared, Nicolino Ruperto Grant/research support from: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lily, F Hoffmann-La Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sobi (paid to institution), Consultant of: Ablynx, AbbVie, AstraZeneca-Medimmune, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lily, EMD Serono, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, R-Pharma, Sanofi, Servier, Sinergie, Sobi, Takeda, Speakers bureau: Ablynx, AbbVie, AstraZeneca-Medimmune, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lily, EMD Serono, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, R-Pharma, Sanofi, Servier, Sinergie, Sobi, Takeda, Marco Gattorno Consultant of: Sobi, Novartis, Speakers bureau: Sobi, Novartis, Helen J. Lachmann: None declared

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document