Bioethics in medical care rationing during the coronavirus disease-19 pandemic

ABSTRACT Background: Coronavirus (CoV) disease (COVID)-19 poses difficult situations in which the ethical course of action is not clear, or choices are made between equally unacceptable responses. Methods: A web search was performed using the terms “bioethics; COVID-19; ethics; severe acute respiratory syndrome CoV-2; emergent care; pandemic; and public health emergencies.” Results: Protection from COVID-19 has resulted in the cancellation of necessary medical interventions, lengthened suffering, and potential non-COVID-19 deaths. Prolonged lockdown reduced well-being, triggering or aggravating mental illnesses and violence, and escalated medical risks. Collateral damage includes restrictions on visitations to hospitals, alienation from the deceased relative, or lack of warm caring of patients. Finally, in a public health crisis, public health interest overrides individual rights if it results in severe harm to the community. Conclusion: Balancing ethical dilemmas are one more challenge in the COVID-19 pandemic. (REV INVEST CLIN. 2021;73(1):1-5)

Bioethics in the COVID-19 Pandemic Research: Challenges and Strategies

As all other aspects in times of the coronavirus disease (COVID)-19 pandemic, carrying-out quality clinical research has been challenging. Many well-established paradigms have shifted as a consequence of the rapid demand for new knowledge. New treatments are fast-moving, informed consent forms are difficult to obtain, a competitive invitation from researchers to participate in different studies is common, and non-COVID-19 research protocols are suffering continuity. However, these challenges should not imply taking shortcuts or accepting deficiencies in bioethical standards, but rather enhance the alertness for rigorous ethical approaches despite these less than ideal circumstances. In this manuscript, we point out some interrogates in COVID-19 research and outline possible strategies to overcome the difficult task to continue with high-quality research without violating the ethical principles. (REV INVEST CLIN. 2020;72(5):265-70)

Left atrial function and volume by magnetic resonance in patients with hereditary amyloidosis

ABSTRACT Background Left atrial (LA) enlargement is a reliable predictor of adverse cardiovascular events, and reduced atrial function is an independent risk factor for mortality in patients with amyloidosis. The objective of this study was to characterize the LA function in Mexican patients with a confirmed diagnosis of hereditary transthyretin amyloidosis (amyloid transthyretin [ATTR]) Methods All consecutive patients with diagnosis of hereditary ATTR who underwent a cardiac magnetic resonance study in the period from March 2016 to June 2017 were included in the study; the volumes and function of the left atrium were evaluated Results Patients were divided into two groups, one with and one without cardiac amyloidosis. Statistically significant differences were observed between both groups in terms of indexed maximal LA volume, 26 mL versus 35.9mL, p = 0.03; indexed minimal LA volume, 10.7 mL versus 13.6mL, p = 0.03; and indexed LA pre-contraction volume, 17 mL versus 22.4mL, p = 0.03. No statistically significant differences were observed between both groups when comparing neither different ejection volumes nor the different ejection fractions Conclusions Patients with hereditary ATTR with cardiac involvement have remodeling of the left atrium, with increased atrial volumes, without diminishing its function.

III. The role of the Research Ethics Committees in the regulation of Pharma-Sponsored studies

Participants of Pharma-sponsored research are exposed to risks, benefits, and uncertainties that do not occur in other forms of clinical studies. Ethics committees represent the subjects’ first line of protection. This responsibility begins with the study review and ends after all study subjects finish the intervention. The objective of this paper is to review the most common controversial issues found in Pharma-sponsored studies. Potential solutions are proposed to prevent or resolve the polemical aspects. However, different challenges will be faced in the near future (e.g., when new therapies reach their late stage of development). All parties involved in research should work together to guarantee the protection of participants, the paramount principle on which clinical investigation is based. Pharma-sponsored research is a crucial driver to develop and implement innovative approaches to improve the informed consent process and the execution of the studies.

II. The research ethics involving vulnerable groups

Abstract Vulnerability in research occurs when the participant is incapable of protecting his or her interests and therefore, has an increased probability of being intentionally or unintentionally harmed. This manuscript aims to discuss the conditions that make a group vulnerable and the tools and requirements that can be used to reduce the ethical breaches when including them in research protocols. The vulnerability can be due either to an inability to understand and give informed consent or to unequal power relationships that hinder basic rights. Excluding subjects from research for the only reason of belonging to a vulnerable group is unethical and will bias the results of the investigation. To consider a subject or group as vulnerable depends on the context, and the investigator should evaluate each case individually.

I. The role of research ethics committees in observational studies: epidemiological registries, case reports, interviews, and retrospective studies

Abstract It is often unclear to the clinical investigator whether observational studies should be submitted to a research ethics committee (REC), mostly because, in general, no active or additional interventions are performed. Moreover, obtaining an informed consent under these circumstances may be challenging, either because these are very large epidemiological registries, or the subject may no longer be alive, is too ill to consent, or is impossible to contact after being discharged. Although observational studies do not involve interventions, they entail ethical concerns, including threats such as breaches in confidentiality and autonomy, and respect for basic rights of the research subjects according to the good clinical practices. In this context, in addition to their main function as evaluators from an ethical, methodological, and regulatory point of view, the RECs serve as mediators between the research subjects, looking after their basic rights, and the investigator or institution, safeguarding them from both legal and unethical perils that the investigation could engage, by ensuring that all procedures are performed following the international standards of care for research. The aim of this manuscript is to provide information on each type of study and its risks, along with actions to prevent such risks, and the function of RECs in each type of study.

Antiagregantes plaquetarios en la prevención de la enfermedad vascular cerebral / Antiplatelates cerebral infartion prevention

Los mecanismos productores de isquemia cerebral son múltiples; sin embargo, el tromboembolismo explica una gran proporción de los casos de isquemia cerebral. El papel de los antiagregantes plaquetarios en la prevención secundaria del infarto cerebral esta bien definido. La presente revisión analiza los mecanismos de acción y la eficacia de las tres únicas drogas antiagregantes plaquetarias con efectividad demostrada en la prevención del infarto cerebral. Se analizan las relaciones riesgo-beneficio en cada uno de los agentes farmacológicos, así como también se discuten aspectos en cuanto a la dosis "ideal" de aspirina para esta indicación