METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of PEW prevalence from contemporary studies including more than 50 subjects with kidney disease, published during 2000-2014 and reporting on PEW prevalence by subjective global assessment or malnutrition-inflammation score. Data were reviewed throughout different strata: (1) acute kidney injury (AKI), (2) pediatric chronic kidney disease (CKD), (3) nondialyzed CKD 3-5, (4) maintenance dialysis, and (5) subjects undergoing kidney transplantation (Tx). Sample size, period of publication, reporting quality, methods, dialysis technique, country, geographical region, and gross national income were a priori considered factors influencing between-study variability.
RESULTS: Two studies including 189 AKI patients reported a PEW prevalence of 60% and 82%. Five studies including 1776 patients with CKD stages 3-5 reported PEW prevalence ranging from 11% to 54%. Finally, 90 studies from 34 countries including 16,434 patients on maintenance dialysis were identified. The 25th-75th percentiles range in PEW prevalence among dialysis studies was 28-54%. Large variation in PEW prevalence across studies remained even when accounting for moderators. Mixed-effects meta-regression identified geographical region as the only significant moderator explaining 23% of the observed data heterogeneity. Finally, two studies including 1067 Tx patients reported a PEW prevalence of 28% and 52%, and no studies recruiting pediatric CKD patients were identified.
CONCLUSION: By providing evidence-based ranges of PEW prevalence, we conclude that PEW is a common phenomenon across the spectrum of AKI and CKD. This, together with the well-documented impact of PEW on patient outcomes, justifies the need for increased medical attention.
PURPOSE: To review and generate consensus on best practices of fracture liaison service (FLS) in the Asia-Pacific (AP) region.
METHODS: In October 2017, the Taiwanese Osteoporosis Association (TOA) invited experts from the AP region (n = 23), the Capture the Fracture Steering Committee (n = 2), and the USA (n = 1) to join the AP region FLS Consensus Meeting in Taipei. After two rounds of consensus generation, the recommendations on the 13 Best Practice Framework (BPF) standards were reported and reviewed by the attendees. Experts unable to attend the on-site meeting reviewed the draft, made suggestions, and approved the final version.
RESULTS: Because the number of FLSs in the region is rapidly increasing, experts agreed that it was timely to establish consensus on benchmark quality standards for FLSs in the region. They also agreed that the 13 BPF standards and the 3 levels of standards were generally applicable, but that some clarifications were necessary. They suggested, for example, that patient and family education be incorporated into the current standards and that communication with the public to promote FLSs be increased.
CONCLUSIONS: The consensus on the 13 BPF standards reviewed in this meeting was that they were generally applicable and required only a few advanced clarifications to increase the quality of FLSs in the region.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to review the typical and relatively atypical CXR manifestations of COVID-19 pneumonia in a tertiary care hospital.
METHODS: The CXRs of 136 COVID-19 patients confirmed through real-time RT-PCR from March to May 2020 were reviewed. A literature search was performed using PubMed.
RESULTS: A total of 54 patients had abnormal CXR whilst the others were normal. Typical CXR findings included pulmonary consolidation or ground-glass opacities in a multifocal, bilateral peripheral, or lower zone distribution, whereas atypical CXR features comprised cavitation and pleural effusion.
CONCLUSION: Typical findings of COVID-19 infection in chest computed tomography studies can also be seen in CXR. The presence of atypical features associated with worse disease outcome. Recognition of these features on CXR will improve the accuracy and speed of diagnosing COVID-19 patients.
METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was carried out among spine surgeons in Asia Pacific. The questionnaires were focused on the usage, recycling and disposal of PPE.
RESULTS: Two hundred and twenty-two surgeons from 19 countries participated in the survey. When we sub-analysed the differences between countries, the provision of adequate PPE by hospitals ranged from 37.5% to 100%. The usage of PPE was generally high. The most used PPE were surgical face masks (88.7%), followed by surgical caps (88.3%), gowns (85.6%), sterile gloves (83.3%) and face shields (82.0%). The least used PPE were powered air-purifying respirators (PAPR) (23.0%) and shoes/boots (45.0%). The commonly used PPE for surgeries involving COVID-19 positive patients were N95 masks (74.8%), sterile gloves (73.0%), gowns (72.1%), surgical caps (71.6%), face shields (64.4%), goggles (64.0%), shoe covers (58.6%), plastic aprons (45.9%), shoes/boots (45.9%), surgical face masks (36.5%) and PAPRs (21.2%). Most PPE were not recycled. Biohazard bins were the preferred method of disposal for all types of PPE items compared to general waste.
CONCLUSIONS: The usage of PPE was generally high among most countries especially for surgeries involving COVID-19 positive patients except for Myanmar and Nepal. Overall, the most used PPE were surgical face masks. For surgeries involving COVID-19 positive patients, the most used PPE were N95 masks. Most PPE were not recycled. Biohazard bins were the preferred method of disposal for all types of PPE.
METHODS: ASCO convened a multidisciplinary, multinational Expert Panel that reviewed existing guidelines and conducted a modified ADAPTE process and a formal consensus process with additional experts for one round of formal ratings.
RESULTS: Existing sets of guidelines from 12 guideline developers were identified and reviewed; adapted recommendations from six guidelines form the evidence base and provide evidence to inform the formal consensus process, which resulted in agreement of 75% or more on all recommendations.
RECOMMENDATIONS: For nonmaximal settings, the recommended treatments for colon cancer stages nonobstructing, I-IIA: in basic and limited, open resection; in enhanced, adequately trained surgeons and laparoscopic or minimally invasive surgery, unless contraindicated. Treatments for IIB-IIC: in basic and limited, open en bloc resection following standard oncologic principles, if not possible, transfer to higher-level facility; in emergency, limit to life-saving procedures; in enhanced, laparoscopic en bloc resection, if not possible, then open. Treatments for obstructing, IIB-IIC: in basic, resection and/or diversion; in limited or enhanced, emergency surgical resection. Treatment for IIB-IIC with left-sided: in enhanced, may place colonic stent. Treatment for T4N0/T3N0 high-risk features or stage II high-risk obstructing: in enhanced, may offer adjuvant chemotherapy. Treatment for rectal cancer cT1N0 and cT2n0: in basic, limited, or enhanced, total mesorectal excision principles. Treatment for cT3n0: in basic and limited, total mesorectal excision, if not, diversion. Treatment for high-risk patients who did not receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy: in basic, limited, or enhanced, may offer adjuvant therapy. Treatment for resectable cT3N0 rectal cancer: in enhanced, base neoadjuvant chemotherapy on preoperative factors. For post-treatment surveillance, a combination of medical history, physical examination, carcinoembryonic antigen testing, imaging, and endoscopy is performed. Frequency depends on setting. Maximal setting recommendations are in the guideline. Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/resource-stratified-guidelines .
NOTICE: It is the view of the American Society of Clinical Oncology that health care providers and health care system decision makers should be guided by the recommendations for the highest stratum of resources available. The guidelines are intended to complement but not replace local guidelines.
METHODS: The Federation of International Societies of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition (FISPGHAN) Working Group (WG) selected care protocols on the management of acute diarrhea in infants and children aged between 1 month and 18 years. The WG used a 3-step approach consisting of: systematic review and comparison of published guidelines, agreement on draft recommendations using Delphi methodology, and external peer-review and validation of recommendations.
RESULTS: A core of recommendations including definition, diagnosis, nutritional management, and active treatment of AGE was developed with an overall agreement of 91% (range 80%-96%). A total of 28 world experts in pediatric gastroenterology and emergency medicine successively validated the set of 23 recommendations with an agreement of 87% (range 83%-95%). Recommendations on the use of antidiarrheal drugs and antiemetics received the lowest level of agreement and need to be tailored at local level. Oral rehydration and probiotics were the only treatments recommended.
CONCLUSIONS: Universal recommendations to assist health care practitioners in managing children with AGE may improve practitioners' compliance with guidelines, reduce inappropriate interventions, and significantly impact clinical outcome and health care-associated costs.