CASE REPORT: A 68-year-old lady with a history of multiple craniotomies and hemifacial resections for meningothelial meningioma currently underwent orbital exenteration, tumour debulking and cervical nodal excision for tumour recurrence. Histopathological examination of the tumour showed atypical meningioma, with cervical nodal metastasis.
DISCUSSION: This case report presents a rare finding of lymph node metastasis associated with atypical meningioma. The previous history of surgical resection is a known risk factor for metastasis for low to intermediate grade meningioma. Tumour biology and histology are predictors of metastasis. Haematogenous dissemination is the commonest route of metastasis. No standardised management protocol has been developed and the prognosis remains unknown.
Aim: To determine the incidence and associated risk of kidney injury following rhabdomyolysis in critically ill patients.
Methods: All critically ill patients admitted from January 2016 to December 2017 were screened. A creatinine kinase level of > 5 times the upper limit of normal (> 1000 U/L) was defined as rhabdomyolysis, and kidney injury was determined based on the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcome (KDIGO) score. In addition, trauma, prolonged surgery, sepsis, antipsychotic drugs, hyperthermia were included as risk factors for kidney injury.
Results: Out of 1620 admissions, 149 (9.2%) were identified as having rhabdomyolysis and 54 (36.2%) developed kidney injury. Acute kidney injury, by and large, was related to rhabdomyolysis followed a prolonged surgery (18.7%), sepsis (50.0%) or trauma (31.5%). The reduction in the creatinine kinase levels following hydration treatment was statistically significant in the non- kidney injury group (Z= -3.948, p<0.05) compared to the kidney injury group (Z= -0.623, p=0.534). Significantly, odds of developing acute kidney injury were 1.040 (p<0.001) for mean BW >50kg, 1.372(p<0.001) for SOFA Score >2, 5.333 (p<0.001) for sepsis and the multivariate regression analysis showed that SOFA scores >2 (p<0.001), BW >50kg (p=0.016) and sepsis (p<0.05) were independent risk factors. The overall mortality due to rhabdomyolysis was 15.4% (23/149), with significantly higher incidences of mortality in the kidney injury group (35.2%) vs the non- kidney injury (3.5%) [ p<0.001].
Conclusions: One-third of rhabdomyolysis patients developed acute kidney injury with a significantly high mortality rate. Sepsis was a prominent cause of acute kidney injury. Both sepsis and a SOFA score >2 were significant independent risk factors.
METHODS: This multinational, multicenter, cross-sectional survey was conducted among hospital HCWs from February to May 2020. We used a hierarchical logistic regression multivariate analysis to adjust the influence of variables based on awareness and preparedness. We then used association rule mining to identify relationships between HCW confidence in handling suspected COVID-19 patients and prior COVID-19 case-management training.
RESULTS: We surveyed 24,653 HCWs from 371 hospitals across 57 countries and received 17,302 responses from 70.2% HCWs overall. The median COVID-19 preparedness score was 11.0 (interquartile range [IQR] = 6.0-14.0) and the median awareness score was 29.6 (IQR = 26.6-32.6). HCWs at COVID-19 designated facilities with previous outbreak experience, or HCWs who were trained for dealing with the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak, had significantly higher levels of preparedness and awareness (p<0.001). Association rule mining suggests that nurses and doctors who had a 'great-extent-of-confidence' in handling suspected COVID-19 patients had participated in COVID-19 training courses. Male participants (mean difference = 0.34; 95% CI = 0.22, 0.46; p<0.001) and nurses (mean difference = 0.67; 95% CI = 0.53, 0.81; p<0.001) had higher preparedness scores compared to women participants and doctors.
INTERPRETATION: There was an unsurprising high level of awareness and preparedness among HCWs who participated in COVID-19 training courses. However, disparity existed along the lines of gender and type of HCW. It is unknown whether the difference in COVID-19 preparedness that we detected early in the pandemic may have translated into disproportionate SARS-CoV-2 burden of disease by gender or HCW type.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Master of Science postgraduate students in endodontics, prosthodontics, periodontics, oral surgery and implantology participated in a questionnaire-based cross-sectional study. The dental specialties were further categorised into restorative and surgical dentistry. A multiple-choice questionnaire with three clinical cases was distributed to the students. Data were analysed for trends using descriptive statistics.
RESULTS: There was a 44% response rate; the majority of respondents were from restorative dentistry specialties. Cases 1 and 2 were rated as moderate to high difficulty, and Case 3 was predominantly rated as high difficulty with procedure predictability being the main factor affecting their clinical decision-making in three cases. Endodontic retreatment was selected as the preferred treatment in Cases 1 and 2 and periradicular surgery in Case 3. The students were fairly confident in managing Cases 1 and 2, but not in Case 3. Referral patterns were consistent in Cases 1 and 2 with endodontists being the first choice of referral except for Case 3 where 48% preferred to refer to oral surgeons and 35% choosing endodontists. Some indication of differences between specialties were noted throughout. Years in practice appeared to be related to the importance of predictability in Case 3 only.
CONCLUSION: Considerable inter-clinician variability was noted whereby specialty postgraduate training impacted on clinical decision-making. Overall, procedural predictability, technical difficulty, risk of damage to the tooth and patient preference were the most highly ranked factors affecting clinical decision-making. Evidence-based treatment guidelines and dental curricula should be reviewed to enhance inter-clinician agreement in clinical decision-making, ultimately improving patient care.
METHODS: In a phase 2 trial, we randomly assigned patients with a GPP flare in a 2:1 ratio to receive a single 900-mg intravenous dose of spesolimab or placebo. Patients in both groups could receive an open-label dose of spesolimab on day 8, an open-label dose of spesolimab as a rescue medication after day 8, or both and were followed to week 12. The primary end point was a Generalized Pustular Psoriasis Physician Global Assessment (GPPGA) pustulation subscore of 0 (range, 0 [no visible pustules] to 4 [severe pustulation]) at the end of week 1. The key secondary end point was a GPPGA total score of 0 or 1 (clear or almost clear skin) at the end of week 1; scores range from 0 to 4, with higher scores indicating greater disease severity.
RESULTS: A total of 53 patients were enrolled: 35 were assigned to receive spesolimab and 18 to receive placebo. At baseline, 46% of the patients in the spesolimab group and 39% of those in the placebo group had a GPPGA pustulation subscore of 3, and 37% and 33%, respectively, had a pustulation subscore of 4. At the end of week 1, a total of 19 of 35 patients (54%) in the spesolimab group had a pustulation subscore of 0, as compared with 1 of 18 patients (6%) in the placebo group (difference, 49 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 21 to 67; P<0.001). A total of 15 of 35 patients (43%) had a GPPGA total score of 0 or 1, as compared with 2 of 18 patients (11%) in the placebo group (difference, 32 percentage points; 95% CI, 2 to 53; P = 0.02). Drug reactions were reported in 2 patients who received spesolimab, in 1 of them concurrently with a drug-induced hepatic injury. Among patients assigned to the spesolimab group, infections occurred in 6 of 35 (17%) through the first week; among patients who received spesolimab at any time in the trial, infections had occurred in 24 of 51 (47%) at week 12. Antidrug antibodies were detected in 23 of 50 patients (46%) who received at least one dose of spesolimab.
CONCLUSIONS: In a phase 2 randomized trial involving patients with GPP, the interleukin-36 receptor inhibitor spesolimab resulted in a higher incidence of lesion clearance at 1 week than placebo but was associated with infections and systemic drug reactions. Longer and larger trials are warranted to determine the effect and risks of spesolimab in patients with pustular psoriasis. (Funded by Boehringer Ingelheim; Effisayil 1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03782792.).