Objective: To evaluate the impact of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) before confirmatory prostate biopsy in patients under active surveillance (AS). Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included 170 patients with Gleason grade 6 prostate cancer initially enrolled in an AS program between 2011 and 2019. Prostate mpMRI was performed using a 1.5 tesla (T) magnetic resonance imaging system with a 16-channel phased-array body coil. The protocol included T1-weighted, T2-weighted, diffusion-weighted, and dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging sequences. Uroradiology reports generated by a specialist were based on prostate imagingreporting and data system (PI-RADS) version 2. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed based on regression models. Results: The reclassification rate at confirmatory biopsy was higher in patients with suspicious lesions on mpMRI (PI-RADS score ≥ 3) (n = 47) than in patients with non-suspicious mpMRIs (n = 61) and who did not undergo mpMRIs (n = 62) (66%, 26.2%, and 24.2%, respectively; p < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, presence of a suspicious mpMRI finding (PI-RADS score ≥ 3) was associated (adjusted odds ratio: 4.72) with the risk of reclassification at confirmatory biopsy after adjusting for the main variables (age, prostate-specific antigen density, number of positive cores, number of previous biopsies, and clinical stage). Presence of a suspicious mpMRI finding (adjusted hazard ratio: 2.62) was also associated with the risk of progression to active treatment during the follow-up. Conclusion: Inclusion of mpMRI before the confirmatory biopsy is useful to stratify the risk of reclassification during the biopsy as well as to evaluate the risk of progression to active treatment during follow-up.
The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has caused an increase in antibiotic use in different settings. We describe the antibiotic prescribing prevalence, associated factors and trends, as well as concomitant bacterial infections in children hospitalized with COVID-19 or multisystemic inflammatory syndrome related to SARS-CoV-2 in Spain.
Introduction. Our aim was to assess the value of adding standard biopsy to targeted biopsy in cases of suspicious multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mp-MRI) and also to evaluate when a biopsy of a PI-RADS 3 lesion could be avoided. Methods: A retrospective study of patients who underwent targeted biopsy plus standard systematic biopsy between 2016–2019 was performed. All the 1.5 T magnetic resonance images were evaluated according to PI-RADSv.2. An analysis focusing on the clinical scenario, lesion location, and PI-RADS score was performed. Results. A total of 483 biopsies were evaluated. The mean age was 65 years, with a PSA density of 0.12 ng/mL/cc. One-hundred and two mp-MRIs were categorized as PI-RADS-3. Standard biopsy was most helpful in detecting clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) in patients in the active surveillance (AS) cohort (increasing the detection rate 12.2%), and in peripheral lesions (6.5%). Adding standard biopsy showed no increase in the detection rate for csPCa in patients with PI-RADS-5 lesions. Considering targeted biopsy in patients with PI-RADS 3 lesions, a higher detection rate was shown in biopsy-naïve patients versus AS and in patients with a previous negative biopsy (p = 0.002). Furthermore, in these patients, the highest rate of csPCa detection was in anterior lesions [42.9% (p = 0.067)]. Conclusions. Our results suggest that standard biopsy could be safely omitted in patients with anterior lesions and in those with PI-RADS-5 lesions. Targeted biopsy for PI-RADS-3 lesions would be less effective in peripheral lesions with a previous negative biopsy.
ObjectivesTo evaluate the performance of oral saliva swab (OSS) reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) compared with RT-PCR and antigen rapid diagnostic test (Ag-RDT) on nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) for SARS-CoV-2 in children.DesignCross-sectional multicentre diagnostic study.SettingStudy nested in a prospective, observational cohort (EPICO-AEP) performed between February and March 2021 including 10 hospitals in Spain.PatientsChildren from 0 to 18 years with symptoms compatible with Covid-19 of ≤5 days of duration were included. Two NPS samples (Ag-RDT and RT-PCR) and one OSS sample for RT-PCR were collected.Main outcomePerformance of Ag-RDT and RT-PCR on NPS and RT-PCR on OSS sample for SARS-CoV-2.Results1174 children were included, aged 3.8 years (IQR 1.7–9.0); 73/1174 (6.2%) patients tested positive by at least one of the techniques. Sensitivity and specificity of OSS RT-PCR were 72.1% (95% CI 59.7 to 81.9) and 99.6% (95% CI 99 to 99.9), respectively, versus 61.8% (95% CI 49.1 to 73) and 99.9% (95% CI 99.4 to 100) for the Ag-RDT. Kappa index was 0.79 (95% CI 0.72 to 0.88) for OSS RT-PCR and 0.74 (95% CI 0.65 to 0.84) for Ag-RDT versus NPS RT-PCR.ConclusionsRT-PCR on the OSS sample is an accurate option for SARS-CoV-2 testing in children. A less intrusive technique for younger patients, who usually are tested frequently, might increase the number of patients tested.
The massive number of infected individuals who have to be tested for SARS-CoV-2 has attracted the attention to novel diagnostic approaches, focusing on symptom-based screening. 1 Some countries have emerged national testing policies, but a large number of positive children do not report any of the included symptoms in those guidelines. 2 This study aimed to analyse symptoms/signs associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection among symptomatic children screened for COVID-19 and define clinical phenotypes that could differentiate COVID-19 from other infections. We performed a cross-sectional multicentre study, nested in a prospective, observational cohort, EPICO-AEP (Epidemiological Study of COVID-19 in Children of the Spanish Society of Paediatric). 3 Eligible participants were children <18 years old with symptoms compatible with SARS-CoV-2 infection lasting ≤5 days (Table 1) 1 attended at 10 emergency departments in Spain, from 2 March to 15 June 2021 (third epidemic wave in Spain; >70% SARS-CoV-2 isola-
Scarce evidence exists about the best treatment for multi-system inflammatory syndrome (MIS-C). We analyzed the effects of steroids, intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), and their combination on the probability of discharge over time, the probability of switching to second-line treatment over time, and the persistence of fever 2 days after treatment. We did a retrospective study to investigate the effect of different treatments on children with MIS-C from 1 March 2020 to 1 June 2021. We estimated the time-to-event probability using a Cox model weighted by propensity score to balance the baseline characteristics. Thirty of 132 (22.7%) patients were initially treated with steroids alone, 29/132 (21.9%) with IVIG alone, and 73/132 (55%) with IVIG plus steroids. The probability of early discharge was higher with IVIG than with IVIG plus steroids (hazard ratio [HR] 1.65, 95% CI 1.11–2.45, p = 0.013), but with a higher probability of needing second-line therapy compared to IVIG plus steroids (HR 3.05, 95% CI 1.12–8.25, p = 0.028). Patients on IVIG had a higher likelihood of persistent fever than patients on steroids (odds ratio [OR] 4.23, 95% CI 1.43–13.5, p = 0.011) or on IVIG plus steroids (OR 4.4, 95% CI 2.05–9.82, p < 0.001). No differences were found for this endpoint between steroids or steroids plus IVIG. Conclusions : The benefits of each approach may vary depending on the outcome assessed. IVIG seemed to increase the probability of earlier discharge over time but also of needing second-line treatment over time. Steroids seemed to reduce persistent fever, and combination therapy reduced the need for escalating treatment. What is Known: • Steroids plus intravenous immunoglobulin, compared with intravenous immunoglobulin alone for multi-system inflammatory syndrome (MIS-C) might reduce the need for hemodynamic support and the duration of fever, but the certainty of the evidence is low. What is New: • Intravenous immunoglobulin, steroids, and their combination for MIS-C may have different outcomes. • In this study, intravenous immunoglobulin increased the probability of discharge over time, steroids reduced persistent fever, while combination therapy reduced the need for second-line treatments. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00431-022-04649-8.
Background Pneumonia is a frequent manifestation of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) in hospitalized children. Methods The study involved 80 hospitals in the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) Spanish Pediatric National Cohort. Participants were children <18 years, hospitalized with SARS‐CoV‐2 community‐acquired pneumonia (CAP). We compared the clinical and radiological characteristics of SARS‐CoV‐2‐associated CAP with CAP due to other viral etiologies from ValsDance (retrospective) cohort. Results In total, 151 children with SARS‐CoV‐2‐associated CAP and 138 with other viral CAP were included. Main clinical features of SARS‐CoV‐2‐associated CAP were cough, fever, or dyspnea. Lymphopenia was found in 43% patients and 15% required admission to the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU). Chest X‐ray revealed condensation (42%) and other infiltrates (58%). Compared with CAP from other viral pathogens, COVID‐19 patients were older, with lower C‐reactive protein (CRP) levels, less wheezing, and greater need of mechanical ventilation (MV). There were no differences in the use of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) or HVF, or PICU admission between groups. Conclusion SARS‐CoV‐2‐associated CAP in children presents differently to other virus‐associated CAP: children are older and rarely have wheezing or high CRP levels; they need less oxygen but more CPAP or MV. However, several features overlap and differentiating the etiology may be difficult. The overall prognosis is good.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.