METHODS: This randomized trial was conducted in a tertiary university hospital in Malaysia from September 2020 to February 2022. A total of 330 nulliparous women at term with unripe cervices (Bishop score ≤5), singleton viable fetus in cephalic presentation, reassuring preinduction fetal heart rate tracing and intact membranes who underwent planned outpatient Foley catheter induction of labor (IOL) were included. Women were randomized to expectant or immediate return to hospital if the Foley was spontaneously expelled at home before their scheduled hospital admission the following day. Primary outcomes were amniotomy-titrated oxytocin infusion to delivery interval and maternal satisfaction on the induction process (assessed by 0-10 visual numerical rating scale [VNRS]).
RESULTS: Amniotomy-titrated oxytocin infusion to delivery interval was 8.7 ± 4.1 versus 8.9 ± 3.9 h, P = 0.605 (mean difference - 0.228 95% CI: -1.1 to +0.6 h) and maternal satisfaction VNRS score was median (interquartile range) 8 (7-9) versus 8 (7-9), P = 0.782. Early return to hospital rates were 37/165 (22.4%) versus 72/165 (43.6%), RR 0.51 (95% CI: 0.37-0.72), P ≤ 0.001, Cesarean delivery rates were 80/165 (48.5%) versus 80/165 (48.5%), RR 1.00 (95% CI: 0.80-1.25), P = 1.00 and duration of hospital stay was 54.4 ± 22.9 versus 56.7 ± 22.8 h, P = 0.364 for the expectant versus immediate return groups respectively.
CONCLUSION: In outpatient Foley catheter IOL, expectant compared to immediate return to hospital following Foley dislodgement results in similarly high maternal satisfaction. The amniotomy-titrated oxytocin to delivery duration is non-inferior with expectant management.
BACKGROUND: Treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR) remains challenging. PCBs are an established treatment option outside the United States with a Class I, Level of Evidence: A recommendation in the European guidelines. However, their efficacy is better in bare-metal stent (BMS) ISR compared with drug-eluting stent (DES) ISR.
METHODS: Fifty patients with DES ISR were enrolled in a randomized, multicenter trial to compare a novel SCB (SeQuent SCB, 4 μg/mm2) with a clinically proven PCB (SeQuent Please Neo, 3 μg/mm2) in coronary DES ISR. The primary endpoint was angiographic late lumen loss at 6 months. Secondary endpoints included procedural success, major adverse cardiovascular events, and individual clinical endpoints such as stent thrombosis, cardiac death, target lesion myocardial infarction, clinically driven target lesion revascularization, and binary restenosis.
RESULTS: Quantitative coronary angiography revealed no differences in baseline parameters. After 6 months, in-segment late lumen loss was 0.21 ± 0.54 mm in the PCB group versus 0.17 ± 0.55 mm in the SCB group (p = NS; per-protocol analysis). Clinical events up to 12 months also did not differ between the groups.
CONCLUSIONS: This first-in-man comparison of a novel SCB with a crystalline coating shows similar angiographic outcomes in the treatment of coronary DES ISR compared with a clinically proven PCB. (Treatment of Coronary In-Stent Restenosis by a Sirolimus [Rapamycin] Coated Balloon or a Paclitaxel Coated Balloon [FIM LIMUS DCB]; NCT02996318).
Materials and methods: We analysed prospectively collected TPE data for patients treated with centrifugation TPE at our non-acute neurology TPE unit in Kuala Lumpur Hospital between May 2015 and June 2018.
Results: A total of 245 TPE procedures were performed in 55 patients for nine neurological indications, predominantly the central nervous system (79%). Twenty four per cent (n=13) had category I and 73% (n=40) had category II indication (American Society for Apheresis (ASFA) 2019). Others (4%) were not in ASFA indications. Neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorders accounted for half (51%) of the total patients. Twenty-three (41.8%) patients experienced adverse events, with hypotensive episodes being the the most common (n=12/55, 21.8%). Five (9.1%) patients had catheter-related blood stream infection, correlating with higher exchange plasma volume (p=0.023). Symptomatic hypocalcaemia was less common (n=5/55, 9.1%) and allergic reaction to human albumin was rare (n=1/55, 1.8%). Four technical errors detected. Three involved centrifugation sets manufacturing defects and one involved error in centrifugation set installation. Seven (2.9%) procedures were terminated: 5 for adverse effects and 2 for technical errors.
Conclusion: Performing TPE among semi-critical patients with neurology manifestations in basic non-acute set-up proved safe, with predictable complications. This set-up reduced the reliance on critical care services for TPE procedures.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to report the worldwide experience with successful retrieval of the Micra TPS.
METHODS: A list of all successful retrievals of the currently available leadless pacemakers (LPs) was obtained from the manufacturer of Micra TPS. Pertinent details of retrieval, such as indication, days postimplantation, equipment used, complications, and postretrieval management, were obtained from the database collected by the manufacturer. Other procedural details were obtained directly from the operators at each participating site.
RESULTS: Data from the manufacturer consisted of 40 successful retrievals of the Micra TPS. Operators for 29 retrievals (73%) provided the consent and procedural details. Of the 29 retrievals, 11 patients underwent retrieval during the initial procedure (immediate retrieval); the other 18 patients underwent retrieval during a separate procedure (delayed retrieval). Median duration before delayed retrieval was 46 days (range 1-95 days). The most common reason for immediate retrieval was elevated pacing threshold after tether removal. The most common reasons for delayed retrieval included elevated pacing threshold at follow-up, endovascular infection, and need for transvenous device. Mean procedure duration was 63.11 ± 56 minutes. All retrievals involved snaring via a Micra TPS delivery catheter or steerable sheath. No serious complications occurred during the reported retrievals.
CONCLUSION: Early retrieval of the Micra TPS is feasible and safe.
METHODS: A randomized trial was performed in a university hospital in Malaysia. Participants were nulliparas at term with unripe cervixes (Bishop Score ≤ 5) admitted for IoL who were randomized to digital or speculum-aided transcervical Foley catheter insertion in lithotomy position. Primary outcomes were insertion duration, pain score [11-point Visual Numerical Rating Scale (VNRS)], and failure. All primary outcomes were recorded after the first insertion.
RESULTS: Data from 86 participants were analysed. Insertion duration (with standard deviation) was 2.72 ± 1.85 vs. 2.25 ± 0.55 min p = 0.12, pain score (VNRS) median [interquartile range] 3.5 [2-5] vs. 3 [2-5] p = 0.72 and failure 2/42 (5%) vs. 0/44 (0%) p = 0.24 for digital vs speculum respectively. There was no significant difference found between the two groups for all three primary outcomes. Induction to delivery 30.7 ± 9.4 vs 29.6 ± 11.5 h p = 0.64, Cesarean section 25/60 (64%) vs 28/64 (60%) RR 0.9 95% CI p = 0.7 and maternal satisfaction VNRS score with the birth process 7 [IQR 6-8] vs 7 [7-8] p = 0.97 for digital vs. speculum arms respectively. Other labor, delivery and neonatal secondary outcomes were not significantly different.
CONCLUSION: Digital and speculum insertion in nulliparas with unripe cervixes had similar insertion performance. As digital insertion required less equipment and consumables, it could be the preferred insertion method for the equally adept and the insertion technique to train towards.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered with ISRCTN registration number 13804902 on 15 November 2017.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of skin antisepsis as part of CVC care for reducing catheter-related BSIs, catheter colonisation, and patient mortality and morbidities.
SEARCH METHODS: In May 2016 we searched: The Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library); Ovid MEDLINE (including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Epub Ahead of Print); Ovid EMBASE and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trial registries for ongoing and unpublished studies. There were no restrictions with respect to language, date of publication or study setting.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed any type of skin antiseptic agent used either alone or in combination, compared with one or more other skin antiseptic agent(s), placebo or no skin antisepsis in patients with a CVC in place.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed the studies for their eligibility, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We expressed our results in terms of risk ratio (RR), absolute risk reduction (ARR) and number need to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) for dichotomous data, and mean difference (MD) for continuous data, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
MAIN RESULTS: Thirteen studies were eligible for inclusion, but only 12 studies contributed data, with a total of 3446 CVCs assessed. The total number of participants enrolled was unclear as some studies did not provide such information. The participants were mainly adults admitted to intensive care units, haematology oncology units or general wards. Most studies assessed skin antisepsis prior to insertion and regularly thereafter during the in-dwelling period of the CVC, ranging from every 24 h to every 72 h. The methodological quality of the included studies was mixed due to wide variation in their risk of bias. Most trials did not adequately blind the participants or personnel, and four of the 12 studies had a high risk of bias for incomplete outcome data.Three studies compared different antisepsis regimens with no antisepsis. There was no clear evidence of a difference in all outcomes examined, including catheter-related BSI, septicaemia, catheter colonisation and number of patients who required systemic antibiotics for any of the three comparisons involving three different antisepsis regimens (aqueous povidone-iodine, aqueous chlorhexidine and alcohol compared with no skin antisepsis). However, there were great uncertainties in all estimates due to underpowered analyses and the overall very low quality of evidence presented.There were multiple head-to-head comparisons between different skin antiseptic agents, with different combinations of active substance and base solutions. The most frequent comparison was chlorhexidine solution versus povidone-iodine solution (any base). There was very low quality evidence (downgraded for risk of bias and imprecision) that chlorhexidine may reduce catheter-related BSI compared with povidone-iodine (RR of 0.64, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.99; ARR 2.30%, 95% CI 0.06 to 3.70%). This evidence came from four studies involving 1436 catheters. None of the individual subgroup comparisons of aqueous chlorhexidine versus aqueous povidone-iodine, alcoholic chlorhexidine versus aqueous povidone-iodine and alcoholic chlorhexidine versus alcoholic povidone-iodine showed clear differences for catheter-related BSI or mortality (and were generally underpowered). Mortality was only reported in a single study.There was very low quality evidence that skin antisepsis with chlorhexidine may also reduce catheter colonisation relative to povidone-iodine (RR of 0.68, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.84; ARR 8%, 95% CI 3% to 12%; ; five studies, 1533 catheters, downgraded for risk of bias, indirectness and inconsistency).Evaluations of other skin antiseptic agents were generally in single, small studies, many of which did not report the primary outcome of catheter-related BSI. Trials also poorly reported other outcomes, such as skin infections and adverse events.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: It is not clear whether cleaning the skin around CVC insertion sites with antiseptic reduces catheter related blood stream infection compared with no skin cleansing. Skin cleansing with chlorhexidine solution may reduce rates of CRBSI and catheter colonisation compared with cleaning with povidone iodine. These results are based on very low quality evidence, which means the true effects may be very different. Moreover these results may be influenced by the nature of the antiseptic solution (i.e. aqueous or alcohol-based). Further RCTs are needed to assess the effectiveness and safety of different skin antisepsis regimens in CVC care; these should measure and report critical clinical outcomes such as sepsis, catheter-related BSI and mortality.
METHODS: Prospective, surveillance study on PVCR-BSI conducted from September 1, 2013, to May 31, 2019, in 727 intensive care units (ICUs), by members of the International Nosocomial Infection Control Consortium (INICC), from 268 hospitals in 141 cities of 42 countries of Africa, the Americas, Eastern Mediterranean, Europe, South East Asia, and Western Pacific regions. For this research, we applied definition and criteria of the CDC NHSN, methodology of the INICC, and software named INICC Surveillance Online System.
RESULTS: We followed 149,609 ICU patients for 731,135 bed days and 743,508 short-term peripheral venous catheter (PVC) days. We identified 1,789 PVCR-BSIs for an overall rate of 2.41 per 1,000 PVC days. Mortality in patients with PVC but without PVCR-BSI was 6.67%, and mortality was 18% in patients with PVC and PVCR-BSI. The length of stay of patients with PVC but without PVCR-BSI was 4.83 days, and the length of stay was 9.85 days in patients with PVC and PVCR-BSI. Among these infections, the microorganism profile showed 58% gram-negative bacteria: Escherichia coli (16%), Klebsiella spp (11%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (6%), Enterobacter spp (4%), and others (20%) including Serratia marcescens. Staphylococcus aureus were the predominant gram-positive bacteria (12%).
CONCLUSIONS: PVCR-BSI rates in INICC ICUs were much higher than rates published from industrialized countries. Infection prevention programs must be implemented to reduce the incidence of PVCR-BSIs in resource-limited countries.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare Foley balloon placement for 6 vs 12 hours in the labor induction of multiparas with unfavorable cervixes.
STUDY DESIGN: A randomized controlled trial was conducted in a university hospital in Malaysia from January to October of 2022. Eligible multiparous women admitted for induction of labor for various indications were enrolled. Participant inclusion criteria were multiparity (at least 1 previous vaginal delivery of ≥24 weeks' gestation), age ≥18 years, term pregnancy >37 weeks' gestation, singleton pregnancy, cephalic presentation, intact membranes, normal fetal heart rate tracing, no significant contractions (< 2 in 10 minutes), and unfavorable cervix (Bishop score < 6). Participants were randomized after successful Foley balloon insertion for the balloon to be left in place for 6 or 12 hours of passive ripening before removal to check cervical suitability for amniotomy. The primary outcomes were the induction-to-delivery interval and maternal satisfaction with the allocated intervention assessed using a visual numerical rating scale (0-10). Secondary outcomes were derived in part from the core outcome set for trials on induction of labor (Core Outcomes in Women's and Newborn Health [CROWN]). Maternal outcomes were change in first Bishop score after intervention, use of additional method for cervical ripening, time to delivery after balloon removal, mode of delivery, indication for cesarean delivery, duration of oxytocin infusion, blood loss during delivery, presence of third- or fourth-degree perineal tear, maternal infection, use of regional analgesia in labor, length of hospital stay, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, cardiorespiratory arrest, and need for hysterectomy. The secondary neonatal outcomes were Apgar score at 1 and 5 minutes, neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission, cord blood pH, neonatal sepsis, birthweight, birth trauma, hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy, or need for therapeutic hypothermia. Analyses were conducted with the t-test, Mann-Whitney U test, chi-square test, and Fisher exact test, as appropriate.
RESULTS: A total of 220 women were randomized (110 to each intervention). Regarding the 2 primary outcomes, the induction-to-delivery intervals were a median (interquartile range) of 15.9 (12.0-24.0) and 21.6 (17.3-26.0) hours (P