Cross-sectional characteristics of pediatric-onset discoid lupus erythematosus: Results of a multicenter, retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of systemic lupus in children with discoid lupus is unknown. OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the baseline characteristics of patients with pediatric discoid lupus erythematosus (pDLE). METHODS: Medical records at 17 sites were reviewed for pediatric dermatology and rheumatology patients with discoid lupus erythematosus. The inclusion criteria were clinical and/or histopathologic diagnosis of discoid lupus erythematosus with an age at onset of <18 years. Baseline data were collected at the first documented visit. Outcomes included diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) at the baseline visit using the 1997 American College of Rheumatology (primary) and the 2012 Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (secondary) criteria. RESULTS: Of the >1500 charts reviewed, 438 patients met the inclusion criteria. The cohort was predominantly female (72%) and racially/ethnically diverse. A diagnosis of SLE at the baseline visit (pDLE + SLE) was rendered in 162 (37%) patients using the American College of Rheumatology and in 181 (41%) patients using the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics criteria. Patients with pDLE + SLE were older at the time of rash onset (median, 12.9 vs 8.9 years; P < .001), with shorter time from discoid lupus erythematosus onset to diagnosis, compared with patients with pDLE-only (median, 2 vs 7 months; P < .001). Patients with pDLE + SLE were more likely to be female (P = .004), with generalized discoid lupus erythematosus and clinically aggressive disease, including end-organ involvement, positive serologies, and higher- titer levels of antinuclear antibodies (P < .001). LIMITATIONS: Retrospective study. CONCLUSION: A diagnosis of discoid lupus erythematosus in adolescence should prompt thorough screening for SLE.

A protocol for the Development of Core Outcome Sets for Endodontic Treatment modalities (COSET): an international consensus process.

BACKGROUND: The outcome of endodontic treatment is generally assessed using a range of patient and clinician-centred, non-standardised clinical and radiographic outcome measures. This makes it difficult to synthesise evidence for systematic analysis of the literature and the development of clinical guidelines. Core outcome sets (COS) represent a standardised list of outcomes that should be measured and reported in all clinical studies in a particular field. Recently, clinical researchers and guideline developers have focussed on the need for the integration of a patient-reported COS with clinician-centred measures. This study aims to develop a COS that includes both patient-reported outcomes and clinician-centred measures for various endodontic treatment modalities to be used in clinical research and practice. METHODS: To identify reported outcomes (including when and how they are measured), systematic reviews and their included clinical studies, which focus on the outcome of endodontic treatment and were published between 1990 and 2020 will be screened. The COSs will be defined by a consensus process involving key stakeholders using semi-structured interviews and an online Delphi methodology followed by an interactive virtual consensus meeting. A heterogeneous group of key 'stakeholders' including patients, general dental practitioners, endodontists, endodontic teachers, clinical researchers, students and policy-makers will be invited to participate. Patients will establish, via interactive interviews, which outcomes they value and feel should be included in a COS. In the Delphi process, other stakeholders will be asked to prioritise outcomes identified from the literature and patient interviews and will have the opportunity at the end of the first round to add outcomes that are not included, but which they consider relevant. Feedback will be provided in the second round, when participants will be asked to prioritise the list again. If consensus is reached, the remaining outcomes will be discussed at an online meeting and agreement established via defined consensus rules of outcome inclusion. If consensus is not reached after the second round, a third round will be conducted with feedback, followed by the online meeting. Following the identification of a COS, we will proceed to identify how and when these outcomes are measured. DISCUSSION: Using a rigorous methodology, the proposed consensus process aims to develop a COS for endodontic treatment that will be relevant to stakeholders. The results of the study will be shared with participants and COS users. To increase COS uptake, it will also be actively shared with clinical guideline developers, research funders and the editors of general dental and endodontology journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: COMET 1879. 21 May 2021.

Clinical relevance of nitrated beta 2-glycoprotein I in antiphospholipid syndrome: Implications for thrombosis risk.

Β2-Glycoprotein I (ß2GPI) is an important anti-thrombotic protein and is the major auto-antigen in the antiphospholipid syndrome (APS). The clinical relevance of nitrosative stress in post translational modification of ß2GPI was examined.The effects of nitrated (n)ß2GPI on its anti-thrombotic properties and its plasma levels in primary and secondary APS were determined with appropriate clinical control groups. ß2-glycoprotein I was nitrated at tyrosines 218, 275 and 309. ß2-glycoprotein I binds to lipid peroxidation modified products through Domains IV and V. Nitrated ß2GPI loses this binding (p < 0.05) and had diminished activity in inhibiting platelet adhesion to vWF under high shear flow (p < 0.01). Levels of nß2GPI were increased in patients with primary APS compared to patients with either secondary APS (p < 0.05), autoimmune disease without APS (p < 0.05) or non-autoimmune patients with arterial thrombosis (p < 0.01) and healthy individuals (p < 0.05).In conclusion tyrosine nitration of plasma ß2GPI is demonstrated and has important implications with regards to the pathophysiology of platelet mediated thrombosis in APS. Elevated plasma levels of nß2GPI in primary APS may be a risk factor for thrombosis warranting further investigation.

Comparison of a commercial real-time PCR panel to routine laboratory methods for the diagnosis of meningitis-encephalitis.

Meningitis-encephalitis can range from a mild, self limiting illness to a life threatening disease. Rapid microbial diagnosis allows for early targeted management. This study aimed to compare the BioFire FilmArray Meningitis/Encephalitis multiplex PCR panel (ME panel) to traditional testing algorithms for accuracy and turnaround time in the diagnosis of meningitis-encephalitis. From April to November 2018, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples meeting existing laboratory testing criteria for suspected community acquired meningitis-encephalitis were tested on the ME panel and by routine laboratory methods. The methods were compared for accuracy of diagnosis and turnaround time. Where an organism was not identified, the study investigators came to a consensus on whether an infective aetiology was likely based on CSF parameters, clinical features, management and final discharge diagnosis. A total of 147 CSF samples met criteria for testing. Results were concordant in 143 (97%) of cases, including 27 samples where the same organism was identified by both methods. Of the four discordant samples, three organisms identified by the ME panel alone were considered clinically insignificant. One sample, which was culture and antigen positive for Cryptococcus neoformans, was not detected on the ME panel. The ME panel and routine methods identified an organism in 55% and 58% of clinically compatible cases of infection, respectively. The median turnaround time for the ME panel was 2.9 hours, compared to 21.1 hours for routine testing. The ME panel showed high concordance with traditional testing, simplified laboratory workflow, and significantly reduced turnaround time. The failure of the ME panel to detect Cryptococcus spp. is concerning. When cryptococcal meningitis is suspected, we would recommend using culture and cryptococcal antigen testing as the investigations of choice. Despite the availability of molecular assays targeting the common causes of CNS infection, the diagnostic yield remains suboptimal.

Modular gene analysis reveals distinct molecular signatures for subsets of patients with cutaneous lupus erythematosus.

BACKGROUND: Cutaneous lupus erythematosus (CLE) is a heterogeneous autoimmune disease with clinical sequelae such as itching, dyspigmentation and scarring. OBJECTIVES: We applied a previously described modular analysis approach to assess the molecular heterogeneity of patients with CLE. METHODS: Whole-blood transcriptomes of RNA sequencing data from a racially and ethnically diverse group of patients with CLE (n = 62) were used to calculate gene co-expression module scores. An unsupervised cluster analysis and k-means clustering based on these module scores were then performed. We used Fisher's exact tests and Kruskal-Wallis tests to compare characteristics between patient clusters. RESULTS: Six unique clusters of patients with CLE were identified from the cluster analysis. We observed that seven inflammation modules were elevated in two clusters of patients with CLE. Additionally, these clusters were characterized by interferon, neutrophil and cell-death signatures, suggesting that interferon-related proteins, neutrophils and cell-death processes could be driving the inflammatory response in these subgroups. Three different clusters had a predominant T-cell signature, which were supported by lymphocyte counts. CONCLUSIONS: Our data support a diverse molecular profile in CLE that further adds to the clinical variations of this skin disease, and may affect disease course and treatment selection. Future studies with a larger and diverse cohort of patients with CLE are warranted to confirm these findings.

Comparison of two case difficulty assessment methods on cohorts of undergraduate dental students - a multi-centre study.

AIM: To compare the educational benefits and user friendliness of two anonymized endodontic case difficulty assessment (CDA) methods. METHODOLOGY: A cohort (n = 206) of fourth-year undergraduate dental students were recruited from four different Dental Schools and divided randomly into two groups (Group A and B). The participants assessed six test endodontic cases using anonymized versions of the American Association of Endodontists (AAE) case difficulty assessment form (AAE Endodontic Case Difficulty Assessment Form and Guidelines, 2006) and EndoApp, a web-based CDA tool. Group A (n = 107) used the AAE form for assessment of the first three cases, followed by EndoApp for the latter. Group B (n = 99) used EndoApp for the initial three cases and switched to the AAE form for the remainder. Data were collected online and analysed to assess participants' knowledge reinforcement and agreement with the recommendation generated. Statistical analysis was performed using the two-way mixed model anova, Cohen's Kappa (κ) and independent t-tests, with the levels of significance set at P < 0.05. Additionally, participants' feedback and preference for CDA was also gathered. RESULTS: There was a significant increase in knowledge reinforcement for the AAE form and EndoApp (P = 0.001) after assessment of the first three test cases. However, this increase was not significant (P = 0.842) between the CDA methods. Overall, the AAE form and EndoApp had slight (κ = 0.176, P < 0.001) and substantial (κ = 0.668, P < 0.001) levels of agreement, respectively, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.001). Participants' feedback on user friendliness favoured EndoApp for all parameters measured. EndoApp was preferred by 65% of the cohort, whereas only 11% chose the AAE form for CDA. CONCLUSIONS: Both the AAE form and EndoApp were beneficial for dental education. EndoApp was reliable in helping with decisions to treat or refer, and combined with user friendliness, it was the preferred choice for CDA.

PRICE 2020 guidelines for reporting case reports in Endodontics: explanation and elaboration.

Case reports play a key role in showcasing new, unusual or rare disease(s), and the impact of newer therapeutic approaches or interventions. The Preferred Reporting Items for Case reports in Endodontics (PRICE) 2020 guidelines are being introduced exclusively for Endodontics by adapting and integrating the CAse REport (CARE) guidelines and Clinical and Laboratory Images in Publications principles. The PRICE 2020 guidelines have been developed to help authors improve the completeness, accuracy and transparency of case reports in Endodontics and thus enhance the standard of manuscripts submitted for publication. The aim of this document is to provide a comprehensive explanation for each item in the PRICE 2020 checklist along with examples from the literature that demonstrate compliance with these guidelines. This information will highlight the importance of each item and provide practical examples to help authors understand the necessity of providing comprehensive information when preparing case reports. A link to this PRICE 2020 explanation and elaboration document is available on the Preferred Reporting Items for study Designs in Endodontology website at http://www.pride-endodonticguidelines.org.

PRICE 2020 guidelines for reporting case reports in Endodontics: a consensus-based development.

Case reports can provide early information about new, unusual or rare disease(s), newer treatment strategies, improved therapeutic benefits and adverse effects of interventions or medications. This paper describes the process that led to the development of the Preferred Reporting Items for Case reports in Endodontics (PRICE) 2020 guidelines through a consensus-based methodology. A steering committee was formed with eight members (PD, VN, BC, PM, PS, EP, JJ and SP), including the project leaders (PD, VN). The steering committee developed an initial checklist by combining and modifying the items from the Case Report (CARE) guidelines and Clinical and Laboratory Images in Publications (CLIP) principles. A PRICE Delphi Group (PDG) and PRICE Face-to-Face Meeting Group (PFMG) were then formed. The members of the PDG were invited to participate in an online Delphi process to achieve consensus on the wording and utility of the checklist items and the accompanying flow chart that was created to complement the PRICE 2020 guidelines. The revised PRICE checklist and flow chart developed by the online Delphi process was discussed by the PFMG at a meeting held during the 19th European Society of Endodontology (ESE) Biennial Congress in Vienna, Austria, in September 2019. Following the meeting, the steering committee created a final version of the guidelines, which were piloted by several authors during the writing of a case report. In order to help improve the clarity, completeness and quality of case reports in Endodontics, we encourage authors to use the PRICE 2020 guidelines.

Comparative outcomes of robot-assisted minimally invasive versus open esophagectomy in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a propensity score-weighted analysis.

Robots are increasingly used in minimally invasive surgery. We evaluated the clinical benefits of robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) in comparison with the conventional open esophageal surgery. From 2012 to 2016, 371 patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma underwent an Ivor Lewis or McKeown procedure at our institution. Of these, 130 patients underwent laparoscopic gastric conduit formation followed by RAMIE, whereas 241 patients underwent conventional esophageal surgery, including laparotomy and open esophagectomy (OE). We compared the short- and long-term clinical outcomes of these patients using the propensity score-based inverse probability of treatment weighting technique (IPTW). Among the early outcomes, the OE group showed a higher incidence of pneumonia (P = 0.035) and a higher requirement for vasopressors (P = 0.001). Regarding the long-term outcomes, all-cause mortality was significantly higher (P = 0.001) and disease-free survival was lower (P = 0.006) in the OE group. Wound-related problems also occurred more frequently in the OE group (P = 0.020) during the long-term follow-up. There was no statistical intergroup difference in the recurrence rates (P = 0.191). The Cox proportional-hazard analysis demonstrated that wound problems (HR 0.16, 95% CI 0.02-0.57; P = 0.017), pneumonia (HR 0.23, 95% CI 0.06-0.68; P = 0.019), and use of vasopressors (HR 0.14, 95% CI 0.08-0.25; P = 0.001) were independent predictors of mortality. RAMIE could be a better surgical option for selected patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

A Rare Case of Neurenteric Cyst of Spinal Cord with Thoracic Vertebra Fusion Successfully Managed with Spinal Cyst Excision and Posterior Instrumentation Surgery

@#The incidence of neurenteric cyst (NC) is rare amongst spine tumors. It is most often asymptomatic but may present with sensory and motor symptoms. When associated with thoracic vertebra fusion it is not reported before, this complicates the placement of pedicle screw during posterior instrumentation. Herein, we report a case of thoracic spinal neurenteric cyst in a 40-year-old man that presents with chronic back pain, left lower limb weakness and numbness. Elective excision of NC over T6-T7 with laminectomy and multilevel posterior instrumentation was successfully performed with significant improvement of the symptoms. Neurenteric cyst is a rare spinal cord lesion which may cause permanent neurological sequalae. Complete surgical excision with spine fixation in this case provides good long-term outcome.

A Multicenter Pilot Study on the Clinical Utility of Computational Modeling for Flow-Diverter Treatment Planning.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Selection of the correct flow-diverter size is critical for cerebral aneurysm treatment success, but it remains challenging due to the interplay of device size, anatomy, and deployment. Current convention does not address these challenges well. The goals of this pilot study were to determine whether computational modeling improves flow-diverter sizing over current convention and to validate simulated deployments. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seven experienced neurosurgeons and interventional neuroradiologists used computational modeling to prospectively plan 19 clinical interventions. In each patient case, physicians simulated 2-4 flow-diverter sizes that were under consideration based on preprocedural imaging. In addition, physicians identified a preferred device size using the current convention. A questionnaire on the impact of computational modeling on the procedure was completed immediately after treatment. Rotational angiography image data were acquired after treatment and compared with flow-diverter simulations to validate the output of the software platform. RESULTS: According to questionnaire responses, physicians found the simulations useful for treatment planning, and they increased their confidence in device selection in 94.7% of cases. After viewing the simulations results, physicians selected a device size that was different from the original conventionally planned device size in 63.2% of cases. The average absolute difference between clinical and simulated flow-diverter lengths was 2.1 mm. In 57% of cases, average simulated flow-diverter diameters were within the measurement uncertainty of clinical flow-diverter diameters. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians found computational modeling to be an impactful and useful tool for flow-diverter treatment planning. Validation results showed good agreement between simulated and clinical flow-diverter diameters and lengths.

Practice-based differences in paediatric discoid lupus erythematosus.

BACKGROUND: Children with discoid lupus erythematosus (DLE) are at risk for disfigurement and progression to systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Consensus is lacking regarding optimal care for children with DLE. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare practice patterns among paediatric dermatologists/rheumatologists treating paediatric DLE. METHODS: An online survey was sent to 292 paediatric rheumatologists in the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance and 200 paediatric dermatologists in the Pediatric Dermatology Research Alliance. Consensus was defined as ≥ 70% agreement. RESULTS: Survey response rates were 38% (76 of 200) for dermatology and 21% (60 of 292) for rheumatology. Both specialties agreed that screening labs should include complete blood counts with differential, urinalysis, complement levels, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, antinuclear antibody and other autoantibodies, hepatic function and renal function/electrolytes. Both specialties agreed that arthritis or nephritis should prompt intensified evaluation for SLE. No other patient features achieved consensus as disease-modifying risk factors. Hydroxychloroquine was agreed upon as first-line systemic therapy, but consensus was lacking for second- or third-line treatment. CONCLUSIONS: We found few areas of consensus and significant practice differences between paediatric dermatologists and rheumatologists treating DLE. Knowledge gaps include risk factors for SLE, optimal screening and treatment of refractory skin disease.