Feldmanherman6440

The COVID-19 pandemic has introduced a global public health threat unparalleled in our history. The most severe cases are marked by ARDS attributed to microvascular thrombosis. Hypercoagulability, resulting in a profoundly prothrombotic state, is a distinct feature of COVID-19 and is accentuated by a high incidence of fibrinolysis shutdown. The aims of this review were to describe the manifestations of fibrinolysis shutdown in COVID-19 and its associated outcomes, review the molecular mechanisms of dysregulated fibrinolysis associated with COVID-19, and discuss potential implications and therapeutic targets for patients with severe COVID-19.

A growing body of evidence supports the efficacy of surgical treatments for lymphedema. This study reports the outcomes of vascularized lymph node transplantation (VLNT) for the treatment of patients with lymphedema compared with maximal conservative treatment alone.

Consecutive patients undergoing VLNT to treat primary and secondary lymphedema affecting the upper or lower extremities were included. All patients were optimized preoperatively with conservative therapy. Demographic and treatment information was collected, and outcomes data were electronically captured prospectively; descriptive statistics were performed.

There were 134 patients included that had achieved maximal reductions by conservative therapy preoperatively. This series included jejunal mesenteric (n= 25), groin (n= 43), lateral thoracic (n= 31), omental or right gastroepiploic (n= 21), and submental (n= 14) VLN flaps. At 24 months postoperatively, there were significant reductions in limb volume change (mean [SD] 45.7% [8.7%]; p= 0.0litis, with improved patient-reported outcomes and limb function measures compared with maximal conservative therapy alone. The complication rate was low and there were no significant outcomes differences between the VLNT types.

Volume of operative cases may be an important factor associated with improved survival for early-stage pancreatic cancer. Most high-volume pancreatic centers are also academic institutions, which have been associated with additional healthcare costs. We hypothesized that at high-volume centers, the value of the extra survival outweighs the extra cost.

This retrospective cohort study used data from the California Cancer Registry linked to the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development database from January 1, 2004 through December 31, 2012. Stage I-II pancreatic cancer patients who underwent resection were included. Multivariable analyses estimated overall survival and 30-day costs at low- vs high-volume pancreatic surgery centers. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and incremental net benefit (INB) were estimated, and statistical uncertainty was characterized using net benefit regression.

Of 2,786 patients, 46.5% were treated at high-volume centers and 53.5% at low-volume centers. There was a 0.45-year (5.4 months) survival benefit (95% CI 0.21-0.69) and a $7,884 extra cost associated with receiving surgery at high-volume centers (95% CI $4,074-$11,694). The ICER was $17,529 for an additional year of survival (95% CI $7,997-$40,616). For decision-makers willing to pay more than $20,000 for an additional year of life, high-volume centers appear cost-effective.

Although healthcare costs were greater at high-volume centers, patients undergoing pancreatic surgery at high-volume centers experienced a survival benefit (5.4 months). The extra cost of $17,529 per additional year is quite modest for improved survival and is economically attractive by many oncology standards.

Although healthcare costs were greater at high-volume centers, patients undergoing pancreatic surgery at high-volume centers experienced a survival benefit (5.4 months). The extra cost of $17,529 per additional year is quite modest for improved survival and is economically attractive by many oncology standards.Longitudinal cohort studies present unique methodological challenges, especially when they focus on vulnerable populations, such as pregnant women. The purpose of this review is to synthesize the existing knowledge on recruitment and retention (RR) of pregnant women in birth cohort studies and to make recommendations for researchers to improve research engagement of this population. A scoping review and content analysis were conducted to identify facilitators and barriers to the RR of pregnant women in cohort studies. The search retrieved 574 articles, with 38 meeting eligibility criteria and focused on RR among English-speaking, adult women, who are pregnant or in early postpartum period, enrolled in birth cohort studies. Saracatinib Selected studies were birth cohort (including longitudinal) (n = 20), feasibility (n = 14), and other (n = 4) non-interventional study designs. The majority were from low-risk populations. Abstracted data were coded according to emergent theme clusters. The majority of abstracted data (79%) focused on recruitment practices, with only 21% addressing retention strategies. Overall, facilitators were reported more often (75%) than barriers (25%). Building trusting relationships and employing diverse recruitment methods emerged as major recruitment facilitators; major barriers included heterogeneous participant reasons for refusal and cultural factors. Key retention facilitators included flexibility with scheduling, frequent communication, and culturally sensitive practices, whereas participant factors such as loss of interest, pregnancy loss, relocation, multiple caregiver shifts, and substance use/psychiatric problems were cited as major barriers. Better understanding of facilitators and barriers of RR can help enhance the internal and external validity of future birth/pre-birth cohorts. Strategies presented in this review can help inform investigators and funding agencies of best practices for RR of pregnant women in longitudinal studies.The opioid epidemic in the United States has led to a significant increase in the incidence of neonatal opioid withdrawal syndrome (NOWS); however, the understanding of long-term consequences of NOWS is limited. The objective of this study was to evaluate post-discharge healthcare utilization in infants with NOWS and examine the association between NOWS severity and healthcare utilization. A retrospective cohort design was used to ascertain healthcare utilization in the first year after birth-related discharge using the CERNER Health Facts® database. ICD-9/ICD-10 diagnostic codes were used to identify live births and to classify infants into two study groups NOWS and uncomplicated births (a 25% random sample). Evaluated outcomes included rehospitalization, emergency department (ED) visits within 30-days and one-year after discharge, and a composite one-year utilization event (either hospitalization or emergency department visit during that year). NOWS severity was operationalized as pharmacologic treatment, land management of infants with NOWS.Arsenic (As) is an endocrine disrupting chemical that can disturb the male reproductive system. In a previous study, it was suggested that testicular macrophages could display a role in endocrine disruption induced by As exposure. This work aimed to evaluate the effects of chronic As exposure in the testis function of Wistar rats and examine the participation of macrophage activation and inflammatory response in these processes. We examined gene expression of steroidogenic machinery and immunological markers by RT-QPCR, plasma testosterone concentrations, sperm count and morphology, and histomorphometrical parameters after 60-days exposure to 1 or 5 mg.kg-1.day-1 of sodium arsenite, combined or not with 50 μg.kg-1 of LPS administered one day before euthanasia. We have demonstrated that As exposure reduced the weight of androgen-dependent organs and induced changes in spermatogenesis, in particular at the highest dose. LPS and As co-exposure promoted a decrease in testosterone synthesis, but did not increase the overexpression of markers of macrophage activation seen in LPS-only rats. Our results suggest that As does not alter the testicular macrophage function, but under immunological challenges LPS and As can display a complex interaction, which could lead to endocrine disruption.

To determine prevalence of hyperprolactinemia and prolactinoma among men presenting for initial fertility evaluation.

We performed a retrospective review of men presenting for initial fertility evaluation at a tertiary care, academic health system between 1999 and 2018. Men with measured prolactin levels were analyzed to determine prevalence of hyperprolactinemia and prolactinoma. We compared clinical characteristics of men with and without hyperprolactinemia. Univariable and multivariable analysis were used to determine factors associated with hyperprolactinemia. We assessed effects of hyperprolactinemia and prolactinoma on testosterone levels, semen parameters and pregnancy outcomes after treatment.

3,101 men had serum prolactin level measured. 65 (2.1%) had hyperprolactinemia. Patients with hyperprolactinemia had lower testosterone (median 280 ng/dL vs. 313 ng/dL, p=0.038) and lower total motile sperm count (TMSC) (median 7.0 million vs. 34.7 million, p=0.001) compared to men without hyperprolactinemia. 43.1% of men with hyperprolactinemia had oligospermia versus 21.5% of men without hyperprolactinemia (p<0.001). Univariable analysis demonstrated that men with elevated luteinizing hormone (LH) (OR 1.077, p=0.001) and follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) (OR 1.032, p=0.002) were more likely to have hyperprolactinemia. Men with oligospermia were more likely to have hyperprolactinemia (OR 2.334, p=0.004). On multivariable analysis, neither hormone parameters nor oligospermia were associated with elevated prolactin (p>0.05). Of the 65 men with hyperprolactinemia, 11 (17%) were diagnosed with a prolactinoma, resulting in an overall prevalence of 11 in 3,101 (0.35%).

The overall prevalence of prolactinoma in our cohort of men undergoing fertility evaluation was 35-fold higher than the prevalence in the general male population.

The overall prevalence of prolactinoma in our cohort of men undergoing fertility evaluation was 35-fold higher than the prevalence in the general male population.

To determine the response to a virtual educational curriculum in reconstructive urology presented during the COVID-19 pandemic. To assess learner satisfaction with the format and content of the curriculum, including relevance to learners' education and practice.

A webinar curriculum of fundamental reconstructive urology topics was developed through the Society of Genitourinary Reconstructive Surgeons and partnering institutions. Expert-led sessions were broadcasted. Registered participants were asked to complete a survey regarding the curriculum. Responses were used to assess the quality of the curriculum format and content, as well as participants' practice demographics.

Our survey yielded a response rate of 34%. Survey responses showed >50% of practices offer reconstructive urologic services, with 37% offered by providers without formal fellowship training. A difference in self-reported baseline knowledge was seen amongst junior residents and attendings (P < .05). Regardless of level of training, all participants rated the topics presented as relevant to their education/practice (median response=5/5).