Objective To evaluate the effects of therapeutic heparin compared with prophylactic heparin among moderately ill patients with covid-19 admitted to hospital wards. Design Randomised controlled, adaptive, open label clinical trial. Setting 28 hospitals in Brazil, Canada, Ireland, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and US. Participants 465 adults admitted to hospital wards with covid-19 and increased D-dimer levels were recruited between 29 May 2020 and 12 April 2021 and were randomly assigned to therapeutic dose heparin (n=228) or prophylactic dose heparin (n=237). Interventions Therapeutic dose or prophylactic dose heparin (low molecular weight or unfractionated heparin), to be continued until hospital discharge, day 28, or death. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was a composite of death, invasive mechanical ventilation, non-invasive mechanical ventilation, or admission to an intensive care unit, assessed up to 28 days. The secondary outcomes included all cause death, the composite of all cause death or any mechanical ventilation, and venous thromboembolism. Safety outcomes included major bleeding. Outcomes were blindly adjudicated. Results The mean age of participants was 60 years; 264 (56.8%) were men and the mean body mass index was 30.3 kg/m 2 . At 28 days, the primary composite outcome had occurred in 37/228 patients (16.2%) assigned to therapeutic heparin and 52/237 (21.9%) assigned to prophylactic heparin (odds ratio 0.69, 95% confidence interval 0.43 to 1.10; P=0.12). Deaths occurred in four patients (1.8%) assigned to therapeutic heparin and 18 patients (7.6%) assigned to prophylactic heparin (0.22, 0.07 to 0.65; P=0.006). The composite of all cause death or any mechanical ventilation occurred in 23 patients (10.1%) assigned to therapeutic heparin and 38 (16.0%) assigned to prophylactic heparin (0.59, 0.34 to 1.02; P=0.06). Venous thromboembolism occurred in two patients (0.9%) assigned to therapeutic heparin and six (2.5%) assigned to prophylactic heparin (0.34, 0.07 to 1.71; P=0.19). Major bleeding occurred in two patients (0.9%) assigned to therapeutic heparin and four (1.7%) assigned to prophylactic heparin (0.52, 0.09 to 2.85; P=0.69). Conclusions In moderately ill patients with covid-19 and increased D-dimer levels admitted to hospital wards, therapeutic heparin was not significantly associated with a reduction in the primary outcome but the odds of death at 28 days was decreased. The risk of major bleeding appeared low in this trial. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04362085 .

IMPORTANCE Early-stage chronic kidney disease (CKD) characterized by microalbuminuria is associated with future cardiovascular events, progression toward end-stage renal disease, and early mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes.OBJECTIVE To compare the albuminuria-lowering effects of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) surgery vs best medical treatment in patients with early-stage CKD, type 2 diabetes, and obesity.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS For this randomized clinical trial, patients with established type 2 diabetes and microalbuminuria were recruited from a single center from April 1, 2013, through March 31, 2016, with a 5-year follow-up, including prespecified intermediate analysis at 24-month follow-up.INTERVENTION A total of 100 patients with type 2 diabetes, obesity (body mass indexes of 30 to 35 [calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared]), and stage G1 to G3 and A2 to A3 CKD (urinary albumin-creatinine ratio [uACR] >30 mg/g and estimated glomerular filtration rate >30 mL/min) were randomized 1:1 to receive best medical treatment (n = 49) or RYGB (n = 51). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary outcome was remission of albuminuria (uACR <30 mg/g). Secondary outcomes were CKD remission rate, absolute change in uACR, metabolic control, other microvascular complications, quality of life, and safety.RESULTS A total of 100 patients (mean [SD] age, 51.4 [7.6] years; 55 [55%] male) were randomized: 51 to RYGB and 49 to best medical care. Remission of albuminuria occurred in 55% of patients (95% CI, 39%-70%) after best medical treatment and 82% of patients (95% CI, 72%-93%) after RYGB (P = .006), resulting in CKD remission rates of 48% (95% CI, 32%-64%) after best medical treatment and 82% (95% CI, 72%-92%) after RYGB (P = .002). The geometric mean uACRs were 55% lower after RYGB (10.7 mg/g of creatinine) than after best medical treatment (23.6 mg/g of creatinine) (P < .001). No difference in the rate of serious adverse events was observed. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEAfter 24 months, RYGB was more effective than best medical treatment for achieving remission of albuminuria and stage G1 to G3 and A2 to A3 CKD in patients with type 2 diabetes and obesity.

BackgroundThe role of the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score in predicting complications, such as Acute Kidney Injury (AKI), after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) has yet to be evaluated and serum creatinine may be too heavily weighted in the existing MELD formula, since it has many pitfalls in cirrhotic patients.MethodsRetrospective data of the perioperative period from consecutive adult OLTs performed from January to December 2009 were recorded. Univariate and multivariate analysis were performed to analyze the risk factors for AKI and mortality after OLT.ResultsThere were 114 OLTs performed in the study period, 22 (19,2%) were submitted to dialysis prior OLT and were excluded from the analysis for AKI. The median age was 52 years and 66% were male. Median creatinine value was 0.85mg/dL and MELD was 19. Fifty-two of the 92 patients (56,5%) developed AKI in the first 72 hours after OLT. The only independent risk factor for AKI was calculated MELD and when the components of the MELD score were analyzed, INR had a much stronger impact in predicting AKI then serum creatinine. Overall mortality rate was 32,5% and anesthesia duration was the only variable associated with higher mortality rate.ConclusionsAlthough MELD score seems to have a good performance in predicting AKI after OLT, serum creatinine had no impact on its prediction despite its importance on MELD calculation. Modifying the MELD score, which could include novel AKI biomarkers, may improve its prognostic accuracy and provide a better tool for public health planning.

Objectives To determine the effect of therapeutic anticoagulation, with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or unfractionated heparin (UFH, high dose nomogram), compared to standard care in hospitalized patients admitted for COVID-19 with an elevated D-dimer on the composite outcome of intensive care unit (ICU) admission, non-invasive positive pressure ventilation, invasive mechanical ventilation or death up to 28 days. Trial design Open-label, parallel, 1:1, phase 3, 2-arm randomized controlled trial Participants The study population includes hospitalized adults admitted for COVID-19 prior to the development of critical illness. Excluded individuals are those where the bleeding risk or risk of transfusion would generally be considered unacceptable, those already therapeutically anticoagulated and those who have already have any component of the primary composite outcome. Participants are recruited from hospital sites in Brazil, Canada, Ireland, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and the United States of America. The inclusion criteria are: Laboratory confirmed COVID-19 (diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 via reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction as per the World Health Organization protocol or by nucleic acid based isothermal amplification) prior to hospital admission OR within first 5 days (i.e. 120 hours) after hospital admission; Admitted to hospital for COVID-19; One D-dimer value above the upper limit of normal (ULN) (within 5 days (i.e. 120 hours) of hospital admission) AND EITHER: D-Dimer ≥2 times ULN OR D-Dimer above ULN and Oxygen saturation ≤ 93% on room air; > 18 years of age; Informed consent from the patient (or legally authorized substitute decision maker). The exclusion criteria are: pregnancy; hemoglobin <80 g/L in the last 72 hours; platelet count <50 x 109/L in the last 72 hours; known fibrinogen <1.5 g/L (if testing deemed clinically indicated by the treating physician prior to the initiation of anticoagulation); known INR >1.8 (if testing deemed clinically indicated by the treating physician prior to the initiation of anticoagulation); patient already prescribed intermediate dosing of LMWH that cannot be changed (determination of what constitutes an intermediate dose is to be at the discretion of the treating clinician taking the local institutional thromboprophylaxis protocol for high risk patients into consideration); patient already prescribed therapeutic anticoagulation at the time of screening [low or high dose nomogram UFH, LMWH, warfarin, direct oral anticoagulant (any dose of dabigatran, apixaban, rivaroxaban, edoxaban)]; patient prescribed dual antiplatelet therapy, when one of the agents cannot be stopped safely; known bleeding within the last 30 days requiring emergency room presentation or hospitalization; known history of a bleeding disorder of an inherited or active acquired bleeding disorder; known history of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia; known allergy to UFH or LMWH; admitted to the intensive care unit at the time of screening; treated with non-invasive positive pressure ventilation or invasive mechanical ventilation at the time of screening; Imminent death according to the judgement of the most responsible physician; enrollment in another clinical trial of antithrombotic therapy involving hospitalized patients. Intervention and comparator Intervention: Therapeutic dose of LMWH (dalteparin, enoxaparin, tinzaparin) or high dose nomogram of UFH. The choice of LMWH versus UFH will be at the clinician’s discretion and dependent on local institutional supply. Comparator: Standard care [thromboprophylactic doses of LMWH (dalteparin, enoxaparin, tinzaparin, fondaparinux)] or UFH. Administration of LMWH, UFH or fondaparinux at thromboprophylactic doses for acutely ill hospitalized medical patients, in the absence of contraindication, is generally considered standard care. Main outcomes The primary composite outcome of ICU admission, non-invasive positive pressure ventilation, invasive mechanical ventilation or death at 28 days. Secondary outcomes include (evaluated up to day 28): All-cause death Composite of ICU admission or all-cause death Composite of mechanical ventilation or all-cause death Major bleeding as defined by the ISTH Scientific and Standardization Committee (ISTH-SSC) recommendation; Red blood cell transfusion (>1 unit); Transfusion of platelets, frozen plasma, prothrombin complex concentrate, cryoprecipitate and/or fibrinogen concentrate; Renal replacement therapy; Hospital-free days alive; ICU-free days alive; Ventilator-free days alive; Organ support-free days alive; Venous thromboembolism (defined as symptomatic or incidental, suspected or confirmed via diagnostic imaging and/or electrocardiogram where appropriate); Arterial thromboembolism (defined as suspected or confirmed via diagnostic imaging and/or electrocardiogram where appropriate); Heparin induced thrombocytopenia; Trajectories of COVID-19 disease-related coagulation and inflammatory biomarkers. Randomisation Randomisation will be stratified by site and age (>65 versus ≤65 years) using a 1:1 computer-generated random allocation sequence with variable block sizes. Randomization will occur within the first 5 days (i.e. 120 hours) of participant hospital admission. However, it is recommended that randomization occurs as early as possible after hospital admission. Central randomization using an interactive web response system will ensure allocation concealment. Blinding (masking) No blinding involved. This is an open-label trial. Numbers to be randomised (sample size) 462 patients (231 per group) are needed to detect a 15% risk difference, from 50% in the control group to 35% in the experimental group, with power of 90% at a two-sided alpha of 0.05. Trial Status Protocol Version Number 1.4. Recruitment began on May 11th, 2020. Recruitment is expected to be completed March 2022. Recruitment is ongoing. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04362085 Date of Trial Registration: April 24, 2020 Full protocol The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). In the interest of expediting dissemination of this material, the familiar formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol.

BackgroundHeparin, in addition to its anticoagulant properties, has anti-inflammatory and potential anti-viral effects, and may improve endothelial function in patients with Covid-19. Early initiation of therapeutic heparin could decrease the thrombo-inflammatory process, and reduce the risk of critical illness or death.MethodsWe randomly assigned moderately ill hospitalized ward patients admitted for Covid-19 with elevated D-dimer level to therapeutic or prophylactic heparin. The primary outcome was a composite of death, invasive mechanical ventilation, non-invasive mechanical ventilation or ICU admission. Safety outcomes included major bleeding. Analysis was by intention-to-treat.ResultsAt 28 days, the primary composite outcome occurred in 37 of 228 patients (16.2%) assigned to therapeutic heparin, and 52 of 237 patients (21.9%) assigned to prophylactic heparin (odds ratio, 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.43 to 1.10; p=0.12). Four patients (1.8%) assigned to therapeutic heparin died compared with 18 patients (7.6%) assigned to prophylactic heparin (odds ratio, 0.22; 95%-CI, 0.07 to 0.65). The composite of all-cause mortality or any mechanical ventilation occurred in 23 (10.1%) in the therapeutic heparin group and 38 (16.0%) in the prophylactic heparin group (odds ratio, 0.59; 95%-CI, 0.34 to 1.02). Major bleeding occurred in 2 patients (0.9%) with therapeutic heparin and 4 patients (1.7%) with prophylactic heparin (odds ratio, 0.52; 95%-CI, 0.09 to 2.85).ConclusionsIn moderately ill ward patients with Covid-19 and elevated D-dimer level, therapeutic heparin did not significantly reduce the primary outcome but decreased the odds of death at 28 days.Trial registration numbers: NCT04362085; NCT04444700

IntroductionThere are several randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that have already shown that metabolic/bariatric surgery achieves short-term and long-term glycaemic control while there are no level 1A of evidence data regarding the effects of surgery on the microvascular complications of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).PurposeThe aim of this trial is to investigate the long-term efficacy and safety of the Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) plus the best medical treatment (BMT) versus the BMT alone to improve microvascular outcomes in patients with T2DM with a body mass index (BMI) of 30–34.9 kg/m2.Methods and analysisThis study design includes a unicentric randomised unblinded controlled trial. 100 patients (BMI from 30 to 34.9 kg/m2) will be randomly allocated to receive either RYGB plus BMT or BMT alone. The primary outcome is the change in the urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio (uACR) captured as the proportion of patients who achieved nephropathy remission (uACR<30 mg/g of albumin/mg of creatinine) in an isolated urine sample over 12, 24 and 60 months.Ethics and disseminationThe study was approved by the local Institutional Review Board. This study represents the first RCT comparing RYGB plus BMT versus BMT alone for patients with T2DM with a BMI below 35 kg/m2.Trial registration numberNCT01821508; Pre-results.

No abstract

No abstract