SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We are recruiting study participants from 12 tertiary care hospitals in 10 countries on 5 continents.
PARTICIPANTS: We are enrolling patients ≥65 years of age, requiring hospital admission after non-cardiac surgery, who have an anticipated length of hospital stay of at least 2 days after elective non-cardiac surgery that occurs under general or neuraxial anaesthesia.
PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Patients are recruited before elective non-cardiac surgery, and their cognitive function is measured using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) instrument. After surgery, a brain MRI study is performed between postoperative days 2 and 9 to determine the presence of acute brain infarction. One year after surgery, the MoCA is used to assess postoperative cognitive function. Physicians and patients are blinded to the MRI study results until after the last patient follow-up visit to reduce outcome ascertainment bias.We will undertake a multivariable logistic regression analysis in which the dependent variable is the change in cognitive function 1 year after surgery, and the independent variables are acute perioperative covert stroke as well as other clinical variables that are associated with cognitive dysfunction.
CONCLUSIONS: The NeuroVISION study will characterise the epidemiology of covert stroke and its clinical consequences. This will be the largest and the most comprehensive study of perioperative stroke after non-cardiac surgery.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01980511; Pre-results.
Methods: A survey regarding the practice of EUS in the evaluation of PCLs was drafted by the committee member of the International Society of EUS Task Force (ISEUS-TF). It was disseminated to experts of EUS who were also members of the ISEUS-TF. In some cases, percentage agreement with some statements was calculated; in others, the options with the greatest numbers of responses were summarized.
Results: Fifteen questions were extracted and disseminated among 60 experts for the survey. Fifty-three experts completed the survey within the specified time frame. The average volume of EUS cases at the experts' institutions is 988.5 cases per year.
Conclusion: Despite the limitations of EUS alone in the morphologic diagnosis of PCLs, the results of the survey indicate that EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration is widely expected to become a more valuable method.
METHODS: A total of 1402 ACLF patients, enrolled in the APASL-ACLF Research Consortium (AARC) with 90-day follow-up, were analyzed. An ACLF score was developed in a derivation cohort (n = 480) and was validated (n = 922).
RESULTS: The overall survival of ACLF patients at 28 days was 51.7%, with a median of 26.3 days. Five baseline variables, total bilirubin, creatinine, serum lactate, INR and hepatic encephalopathy, were found to be independent predictors of mortality, with AUROC in derivation and validation cohorts being 0.80 and 0.78, respectively. AARC-ACLF score (range 5-15) was found to be superior to MELD and CLIF SOFA scores in predicting mortality with an AUROC of 0.80. The point scores were categorized into grades of liver failure (Gr I: 5-7; II: 8-10; and III: 11-15 points) with 28-day cumulative mortalities of 12.7, 44.5 and 85.9%, respectively. The mortality risk could be dynamically calculated as, with each unit increase in AARC-ACLF score above 10, the risk increased by 20%. A score of ≥11 at baseline or persisting in the first week was often seen among nonsurvivors (p = 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The AARC-ACLF score is easy to use, dynamic and reliable, and superior to the existing prediction models. It can reliably predict the need for interventions, such as liver transplant, within the first week.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the prescribed and measured gain of hearing aids fit according to the NAL-NL1 and the DSL v5 procedure for children with moderately severe to profound hearing loss; and to examine the impact of choice of prescription on predicted speech intelligibility and loudness.
RESEARCH DESIGN: Participants were fit with Phonak Naida V SP hearing aids according to the NAL-NL1 and DSL v5 procedures. The Speech Intelligibility Index (SII) and estimated loudness were calculated using published models.
STUDY SAMPLE: The sample consisted of 16 children (30 ears) aged between 7 and 17 yr old.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The measured hearing aid gains were compared with the prescribed gains at 50 (low), 65 (medium), and 80 dB SPL (high) input levels. The goodness of fit-to-targets was quantified by calculating the average root-mean-square (RMS) error of the measured gain compared with prescriptive gain targets for 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz. The significance of difference between prescriptions for hearing aid gains, SII, and loudness was examined by performing analyses of variance. Correlation analyses were used to examine the relationship between measures.
RESULTS: The DSL v5 prescribed significantly higher overall gain than the NAL-NL1 procedure for the same audiograms. For low and medium input levels, the hearing aids of all children fit with NAL-NL1 were within 5 dB RMS of prescribed targets, but 33% (10 ears) deviated from the DSL v5 targets by more than 5 dB RMS on average. For high input level, the hearing aid fittings of 60% and 43% of ears deviated by more than 5 dB RMS from targets of NAL-NL1 and DSL v5, respectively. Greater deviations from targets were associated with more severe hearing loss. On average, the SII was higher for DSL v5 than for NAL-NL1 at low input level. No significant difference in SII was found between prescriptions at medium or high input level, despite greater loudness for DSL v5 than for NAL-NL1.
CONCLUSIONS: Although targets between 0.25 and 2 kHz were well matched for both prescriptions in commercial hearing aids, gain targets at 4 kHz were matched for NAL-NL1 only. Although the two prescriptions differ markedly in estimated loudness, they resulted in comparable predicted speech intelligibility for medium and high input levels.