User login
Bringing you the latest news, research and reviews, exclusive interviews, podcasts, quizzes, and more.
div[contains(@class, 'header__large-screen')]
div[contains(@class, 'read-next-article')]
div[contains(@class, 'nav-primary')]
nav[contains(@class, 'nav-primary')]
section[contains(@class, 'footer-nav-section-wrapper')]
footer[@id='footer']
div[contains(@class, 'main-prefix')]
section[contains(@class, 'nav-hidden')]
div[contains(@class, 'ce-card-content')]
nav[contains(@class, 'nav-ce-stack')]
AMA, 55 other groups urge health care vax mandate
As COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths mount again across the country, the American Medical Association (AMA), the American Nursing Association, and 54 other
This injunction, issued July 26, covers everyone in healthcare, Emanuel Ezekiel, MD, PhD, chair of the department of medical ethics and health policy at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, and the organizer of the joint statement, said in an interview.
That includes not only hospitals, but also physician offices, ambulatory surgery centers, home care agencies, skilled nursing facilities, pharmacies, laboratories, and imaging centers, he said.
The exhortation to get vaccinated also extends to federal and state healthcare facilities, including those of the military health system — TRICARE and the Department of Veterans Affairs — which instituted a mandate the same day.
The American Hospital Association (AHA) and other hospital groups recently said they supported hospitals and health systems that required their personnel to get vaccinated. Several dozen healthcare organizations have already done so, including some of the nation’s largest health systems.
A substantial fraction of U.S. healthcare workers have not yet gotten vaccinated, although how many are unvaccinated is unclear. An analysis by WebMD and Medscape Medical News estimated that 25% of hospital workers who had contact with patients were unvaccinated at the end of May.
More than 38% of nursing workers were not fully vaccinated by July 11, according to an analysis of Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services data by LeadingAge, which was cited by the Washington Post. And more than 40% of nursing home employees have not been fully vaccinated, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The joint statement did not give any indication of how many employees of physician practices have failed to get COVID shots. However, a recent AMA survey shows that 96% of physicians have been fully vaccinated.
Ethical commitment
The main reason for vaccine mandates, according to the healthcare associations’ statement, is “the ethical commitment to put patients as well as residents of long-term care facilities first and take all steps necessary to ensure their health and well-being.”
In addition, the statement noted, vaccination can protect healthcare workers and their families from getting COVID-19.
The statement also pointed out that many healthcare and long-term care organizations already require vaccinations for influenza, hepatitis B, and pertussis.
Workers who have certain medical conditions should be exempt from the vaccination mandates, the statement added.
While recognizing the “historical mistrust of health care institutions” among some healthcare workers, the statement said, “We must continue to address workers’ concerns, engage with marginalized populations, and work with trusted messengers to improve vaccine acceptance.”
There has been some skepticism about the legality of requiring healthcare workers to get vaccinated as a condition of employment, partly because the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has not yet fully authorized any of the COVID-19 vaccines.
But in June, a federal judge turned down a legal challenge to Houston Methodist’s vaccination mandate.
“It is critical that all people in the health care workforce get vaccinated against COVID-19 for the safety of our patients and our colleagues. With more than 300 million doses administered in the United States and nearly 4 billion doses administered worldwide, we know the vaccines are safe and highly effective at preventing severe illness and death from COVID-19.
“Increased vaccinations among health care personnel will not only reduce the spread of COVID-19 but also reduce the harmful toll this virus is taking within the health care workforce and those we are striving to serve,” Susan Bailey, MD, immediate past president of the AMA, said in a news release.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
As COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths mount again across the country, the American Medical Association (AMA), the American Nursing Association, and 54 other
This injunction, issued July 26, covers everyone in healthcare, Emanuel Ezekiel, MD, PhD, chair of the department of medical ethics and health policy at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, and the organizer of the joint statement, said in an interview.
That includes not only hospitals, but also physician offices, ambulatory surgery centers, home care agencies, skilled nursing facilities, pharmacies, laboratories, and imaging centers, he said.
The exhortation to get vaccinated also extends to federal and state healthcare facilities, including those of the military health system — TRICARE and the Department of Veterans Affairs — which instituted a mandate the same day.
The American Hospital Association (AHA) and other hospital groups recently said they supported hospitals and health systems that required their personnel to get vaccinated. Several dozen healthcare organizations have already done so, including some of the nation’s largest health systems.
A substantial fraction of U.S. healthcare workers have not yet gotten vaccinated, although how many are unvaccinated is unclear. An analysis by WebMD and Medscape Medical News estimated that 25% of hospital workers who had contact with patients were unvaccinated at the end of May.
More than 38% of nursing workers were not fully vaccinated by July 11, according to an analysis of Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services data by LeadingAge, which was cited by the Washington Post. And more than 40% of nursing home employees have not been fully vaccinated, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The joint statement did not give any indication of how many employees of physician practices have failed to get COVID shots. However, a recent AMA survey shows that 96% of physicians have been fully vaccinated.
Ethical commitment
The main reason for vaccine mandates, according to the healthcare associations’ statement, is “the ethical commitment to put patients as well as residents of long-term care facilities first and take all steps necessary to ensure their health and well-being.”
In addition, the statement noted, vaccination can protect healthcare workers and their families from getting COVID-19.
The statement also pointed out that many healthcare and long-term care organizations already require vaccinations for influenza, hepatitis B, and pertussis.
Workers who have certain medical conditions should be exempt from the vaccination mandates, the statement added.
While recognizing the “historical mistrust of health care institutions” among some healthcare workers, the statement said, “We must continue to address workers’ concerns, engage with marginalized populations, and work with trusted messengers to improve vaccine acceptance.”
There has been some skepticism about the legality of requiring healthcare workers to get vaccinated as a condition of employment, partly because the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has not yet fully authorized any of the COVID-19 vaccines.
But in June, a federal judge turned down a legal challenge to Houston Methodist’s vaccination mandate.
“It is critical that all people in the health care workforce get vaccinated against COVID-19 for the safety of our patients and our colleagues. With more than 300 million doses administered in the United States and nearly 4 billion doses administered worldwide, we know the vaccines are safe and highly effective at preventing severe illness and death from COVID-19.
“Increased vaccinations among health care personnel will not only reduce the spread of COVID-19 but also reduce the harmful toll this virus is taking within the health care workforce and those we are striving to serve,” Susan Bailey, MD, immediate past president of the AMA, said in a news release.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
As COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths mount again across the country, the American Medical Association (AMA), the American Nursing Association, and 54 other
This injunction, issued July 26, covers everyone in healthcare, Emanuel Ezekiel, MD, PhD, chair of the department of medical ethics and health policy at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, and the organizer of the joint statement, said in an interview.
That includes not only hospitals, but also physician offices, ambulatory surgery centers, home care agencies, skilled nursing facilities, pharmacies, laboratories, and imaging centers, he said.
The exhortation to get vaccinated also extends to federal and state healthcare facilities, including those of the military health system — TRICARE and the Department of Veterans Affairs — which instituted a mandate the same day.
The American Hospital Association (AHA) and other hospital groups recently said they supported hospitals and health systems that required their personnel to get vaccinated. Several dozen healthcare organizations have already done so, including some of the nation’s largest health systems.
A substantial fraction of U.S. healthcare workers have not yet gotten vaccinated, although how many are unvaccinated is unclear. An analysis by WebMD and Medscape Medical News estimated that 25% of hospital workers who had contact with patients were unvaccinated at the end of May.
More than 38% of nursing workers were not fully vaccinated by July 11, according to an analysis of Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services data by LeadingAge, which was cited by the Washington Post. And more than 40% of nursing home employees have not been fully vaccinated, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The joint statement did not give any indication of how many employees of physician practices have failed to get COVID shots. However, a recent AMA survey shows that 96% of physicians have been fully vaccinated.
Ethical commitment
The main reason for vaccine mandates, according to the healthcare associations’ statement, is “the ethical commitment to put patients as well as residents of long-term care facilities first and take all steps necessary to ensure their health and well-being.”
In addition, the statement noted, vaccination can protect healthcare workers and their families from getting COVID-19.
The statement also pointed out that many healthcare and long-term care organizations already require vaccinations for influenza, hepatitis B, and pertussis.
Workers who have certain medical conditions should be exempt from the vaccination mandates, the statement added.
While recognizing the “historical mistrust of health care institutions” among some healthcare workers, the statement said, “We must continue to address workers’ concerns, engage with marginalized populations, and work with trusted messengers to improve vaccine acceptance.”
There has been some skepticism about the legality of requiring healthcare workers to get vaccinated as a condition of employment, partly because the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has not yet fully authorized any of the COVID-19 vaccines.
But in June, a federal judge turned down a legal challenge to Houston Methodist’s vaccination mandate.
“It is critical that all people in the health care workforce get vaccinated against COVID-19 for the safety of our patients and our colleagues. With more than 300 million doses administered in the United States and nearly 4 billion doses administered worldwide, we know the vaccines are safe and highly effective at preventing severe illness and death from COVID-19.
“Increased vaccinations among health care personnel will not only reduce the spread of COVID-19 but also reduce the harmful toll this virus is taking within the health care workforce and those we are striving to serve,” Susan Bailey, MD, immediate past president of the AMA, said in a news release.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Vaccine breakthrough cases rising with Delta: Here’s what that means
At a recent town hall meeting in Cincinnati, President Joe Biden was asked about COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths rising in response to the Delta variant.
Touting the importance of vaccination, “We have a pandemic for those who haven’t gotten a vaccination. It’s that basic, that simple,” President Biden said at the event, which was broadcast live on CNN.
“If you’re vaccinated, you’re not going to be hospitalized, not going to the ICU unit, and not going to die,” he said, adding “you’re not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations.”
Unfortunately, it’s not so simple. Fully vaccinated people continue to be well protected against severe disease and death, even with Delta, Because of that, many experts continue to advise caution, even if fully vaccinated.
“I was disappointed,” Leana Wen, MD, MSc, an emergency physician and visiting professor of health policy and management at George Washington University’s Milken School of Public Health in Washington, told CNN in response to the president’s statement.
“I actually thought he was answering questions as if it were a month ago. He’s not really meeting the realities of what’s happening on the ground,” she said. “I think he may have led people astray.”
Vaccines still work
Recent cases support Dr. Wen’s claim. Fully vaccinated Olympic athletes, wedding guests, healthcare workers, and even White House staff have recently tested positive. So what gives?
The vast majority of these illnesses are mild, and public health officials say they are to be expected.
“The vaccines were designed to keep us out of the hospital and to keep us from dying. That was the whole purpose of the vaccine and they’re even more successful than we anticipated,” says William Schaffner, MD, an infectious disease expert at Vanderbilt University in Nashville.
As good as they are, these shots aren’t perfect. Their protection differs from person to person depending on age and underlying health. People with immune function that’s weakened because of age or a health condition can still become seriously ill, and, in very rare cases, die after vaccination.
When people are infected with Delta, they carry approximately 1,000 times more virus compared with previous versions of the virus, according to a recent study. All that virus can overwhelm even the strong protection from the vaccines.
“Three months ago, breakthroughs didn’t occur nearly at this rate because there was just so much less virus exposure in the community,” said Michael Osterholm, PhD, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis.
Breakthroughs by the numbers
In Los Angeles County, where 69% of residents over age 12 have been fully vaccinated, COVID-19 cases are rising, and so, too, are cases that break through the protection of the vaccine.
In June, fully vaccinated people accounted for 20%, or 1 in 5, COVID cases in the county, which is the most populous in the United States. The increase mirrors Delta’s rise. The proportion of breakthrough cases is up from 11% in May, 5% in April, and 2% in March, according to the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health.
In the United Kingdom, which is collecting the best information on infections caused by variants, the estimated effectiveness of the vaccines to prevent an illness that causes symptoms dropped by about 10 points against Delta compared with Alpha (or B.1.1.7).
After two doses, vaccines prevent symptomatic infection about 79% of the time against Delta, according to data compiled by Public Health England. They are still highly effective at preventing hospitalization, 96% after two doses.
Out of 229,218 COVID infections in the United Kingdom between February and July 19, 28,773 — or 12.5% — were in fully vaccinated people. Of those breakthrough infections, 1,101, or 3.8%, required a visit to an emergency room, according to Public Health England. Just 474, or 2.9%, of fully vaccinated people required hospital admission, and 229, or less than 1%, died.
Unanswered questions
One of the biggest questions about breakthrough cases is how often people who have it may pass the virus to others.
“We know the vaccine reduces the likelihood of carrying the virus and the amount of virus you would carry,” Dr. Wen told CNN. But we don’t yet know whether a vaccinated person with a breakthrough infection may still be contagious to others.
For that reason, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says that fully vaccinated people still need to be tested if they have symptoms and shouldn’t be out in public for at least 10 days after a positive test.
How should fully vaccinated people behave? That depends a lot on their underlying health and whether or not they have vulnerable people around them.
If you’re older or immunocompromised, Dr. Schaffner recommends what he calls the “belt-and-suspenders approach,” in other words, do everything you can to stay safe.
“Get vaccinated for sure, but since we can’t be absolutely certain that the vaccines are going to be optimally protective and you are particularly susceptible to serious disease, you would be well advised to adopt at least one and perhaps more of the other mitigation measures,” he said.
These include wearing a mask, social distancing, making sure your spaces are well ventilated, and not spending prolonged periods of time indoors in crowded places.
Taking young children to visit vaccinated, elderly grandparents demands extra caution, again, with Delta circulating, particularly as they go back to school and start mixing with other kids.
Dr. Schaffner recommends explaining the ground rules before the visit: Hugs around the waist. No kissing. Wearing a mask while indoors with them.
Other important unanswered questions are whether breakthrough infections can lead to prolonged symptoms, or “long covid.” Most experts think that’s less likely in vaccinated people.
And Dr. Osterholm said it will be important to see whether there’s anything unusual about the breakthrough cases happening in the community.
“I think some of us have been challenged by the number of clusters that we’ve seen,” he said. “I think that really needs to be examined more.”
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
At a recent town hall meeting in Cincinnati, President Joe Biden was asked about COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths rising in response to the Delta variant.
Touting the importance of vaccination, “We have a pandemic for those who haven’t gotten a vaccination. It’s that basic, that simple,” President Biden said at the event, which was broadcast live on CNN.
“If you’re vaccinated, you’re not going to be hospitalized, not going to the ICU unit, and not going to die,” he said, adding “you’re not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations.”
Unfortunately, it’s not so simple. Fully vaccinated people continue to be well protected against severe disease and death, even with Delta, Because of that, many experts continue to advise caution, even if fully vaccinated.
“I was disappointed,” Leana Wen, MD, MSc, an emergency physician and visiting professor of health policy and management at George Washington University’s Milken School of Public Health in Washington, told CNN in response to the president’s statement.
“I actually thought he was answering questions as if it were a month ago. He’s not really meeting the realities of what’s happening on the ground,” she said. “I think he may have led people astray.”
Vaccines still work
Recent cases support Dr. Wen’s claim. Fully vaccinated Olympic athletes, wedding guests, healthcare workers, and even White House staff have recently tested positive. So what gives?
The vast majority of these illnesses are mild, and public health officials say they are to be expected.
“The vaccines were designed to keep us out of the hospital and to keep us from dying. That was the whole purpose of the vaccine and they’re even more successful than we anticipated,” says William Schaffner, MD, an infectious disease expert at Vanderbilt University in Nashville.
As good as they are, these shots aren’t perfect. Their protection differs from person to person depending on age and underlying health. People with immune function that’s weakened because of age or a health condition can still become seriously ill, and, in very rare cases, die after vaccination.
When people are infected with Delta, they carry approximately 1,000 times more virus compared with previous versions of the virus, according to a recent study. All that virus can overwhelm even the strong protection from the vaccines.
“Three months ago, breakthroughs didn’t occur nearly at this rate because there was just so much less virus exposure in the community,” said Michael Osterholm, PhD, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis.
Breakthroughs by the numbers
In Los Angeles County, where 69% of residents over age 12 have been fully vaccinated, COVID-19 cases are rising, and so, too, are cases that break through the protection of the vaccine.
In June, fully vaccinated people accounted for 20%, or 1 in 5, COVID cases in the county, which is the most populous in the United States. The increase mirrors Delta’s rise. The proportion of breakthrough cases is up from 11% in May, 5% in April, and 2% in March, according to the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health.
In the United Kingdom, which is collecting the best information on infections caused by variants, the estimated effectiveness of the vaccines to prevent an illness that causes symptoms dropped by about 10 points against Delta compared with Alpha (or B.1.1.7).
After two doses, vaccines prevent symptomatic infection about 79% of the time against Delta, according to data compiled by Public Health England. They are still highly effective at preventing hospitalization, 96% after two doses.
Out of 229,218 COVID infections in the United Kingdom between February and July 19, 28,773 — or 12.5% — were in fully vaccinated people. Of those breakthrough infections, 1,101, or 3.8%, required a visit to an emergency room, according to Public Health England. Just 474, or 2.9%, of fully vaccinated people required hospital admission, and 229, or less than 1%, died.
Unanswered questions
One of the biggest questions about breakthrough cases is how often people who have it may pass the virus to others.
“We know the vaccine reduces the likelihood of carrying the virus and the amount of virus you would carry,” Dr. Wen told CNN. But we don’t yet know whether a vaccinated person with a breakthrough infection may still be contagious to others.
For that reason, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says that fully vaccinated people still need to be tested if they have symptoms and shouldn’t be out in public for at least 10 days after a positive test.
How should fully vaccinated people behave? That depends a lot on their underlying health and whether or not they have vulnerable people around them.
If you’re older or immunocompromised, Dr. Schaffner recommends what he calls the “belt-and-suspenders approach,” in other words, do everything you can to stay safe.
“Get vaccinated for sure, but since we can’t be absolutely certain that the vaccines are going to be optimally protective and you are particularly susceptible to serious disease, you would be well advised to adopt at least one and perhaps more of the other mitigation measures,” he said.
These include wearing a mask, social distancing, making sure your spaces are well ventilated, and not spending prolonged periods of time indoors in crowded places.
Taking young children to visit vaccinated, elderly grandparents demands extra caution, again, with Delta circulating, particularly as they go back to school and start mixing with other kids.
Dr. Schaffner recommends explaining the ground rules before the visit: Hugs around the waist. No kissing. Wearing a mask while indoors with them.
Other important unanswered questions are whether breakthrough infections can lead to prolonged symptoms, or “long covid.” Most experts think that’s less likely in vaccinated people.
And Dr. Osterholm said it will be important to see whether there’s anything unusual about the breakthrough cases happening in the community.
“I think some of us have been challenged by the number of clusters that we’ve seen,” he said. “I think that really needs to be examined more.”
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
At a recent town hall meeting in Cincinnati, President Joe Biden was asked about COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths rising in response to the Delta variant.
Touting the importance of vaccination, “We have a pandemic for those who haven’t gotten a vaccination. It’s that basic, that simple,” President Biden said at the event, which was broadcast live on CNN.
“If you’re vaccinated, you’re not going to be hospitalized, not going to the ICU unit, and not going to die,” he said, adding “you’re not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations.”
Unfortunately, it’s not so simple. Fully vaccinated people continue to be well protected against severe disease and death, even with Delta, Because of that, many experts continue to advise caution, even if fully vaccinated.
“I was disappointed,” Leana Wen, MD, MSc, an emergency physician and visiting professor of health policy and management at George Washington University’s Milken School of Public Health in Washington, told CNN in response to the president’s statement.
“I actually thought he was answering questions as if it were a month ago. He’s not really meeting the realities of what’s happening on the ground,” she said. “I think he may have led people astray.”
Vaccines still work
Recent cases support Dr. Wen’s claim. Fully vaccinated Olympic athletes, wedding guests, healthcare workers, and even White House staff have recently tested positive. So what gives?
The vast majority of these illnesses are mild, and public health officials say they are to be expected.
“The vaccines were designed to keep us out of the hospital and to keep us from dying. That was the whole purpose of the vaccine and they’re even more successful than we anticipated,” says William Schaffner, MD, an infectious disease expert at Vanderbilt University in Nashville.
As good as they are, these shots aren’t perfect. Their protection differs from person to person depending on age and underlying health. People with immune function that’s weakened because of age or a health condition can still become seriously ill, and, in very rare cases, die after vaccination.
When people are infected with Delta, they carry approximately 1,000 times more virus compared with previous versions of the virus, according to a recent study. All that virus can overwhelm even the strong protection from the vaccines.
“Three months ago, breakthroughs didn’t occur nearly at this rate because there was just so much less virus exposure in the community,” said Michael Osterholm, PhD, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis.
Breakthroughs by the numbers
In Los Angeles County, where 69% of residents over age 12 have been fully vaccinated, COVID-19 cases are rising, and so, too, are cases that break through the protection of the vaccine.
In June, fully vaccinated people accounted for 20%, or 1 in 5, COVID cases in the county, which is the most populous in the United States. The increase mirrors Delta’s rise. The proportion of breakthrough cases is up from 11% in May, 5% in April, and 2% in March, according to the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health.
In the United Kingdom, which is collecting the best information on infections caused by variants, the estimated effectiveness of the vaccines to prevent an illness that causes symptoms dropped by about 10 points against Delta compared with Alpha (or B.1.1.7).
After two doses, vaccines prevent symptomatic infection about 79% of the time against Delta, according to data compiled by Public Health England. They are still highly effective at preventing hospitalization, 96% after two doses.
Out of 229,218 COVID infections in the United Kingdom between February and July 19, 28,773 — or 12.5% — were in fully vaccinated people. Of those breakthrough infections, 1,101, or 3.8%, required a visit to an emergency room, according to Public Health England. Just 474, or 2.9%, of fully vaccinated people required hospital admission, and 229, or less than 1%, died.
Unanswered questions
One of the biggest questions about breakthrough cases is how often people who have it may pass the virus to others.
“We know the vaccine reduces the likelihood of carrying the virus and the amount of virus you would carry,” Dr. Wen told CNN. But we don’t yet know whether a vaccinated person with a breakthrough infection may still be contagious to others.
For that reason, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says that fully vaccinated people still need to be tested if they have symptoms and shouldn’t be out in public for at least 10 days after a positive test.
How should fully vaccinated people behave? That depends a lot on their underlying health and whether or not they have vulnerable people around them.
If you’re older or immunocompromised, Dr. Schaffner recommends what he calls the “belt-and-suspenders approach,” in other words, do everything you can to stay safe.
“Get vaccinated for sure, but since we can’t be absolutely certain that the vaccines are going to be optimally protective and you are particularly susceptible to serious disease, you would be well advised to adopt at least one and perhaps more of the other mitigation measures,” he said.
These include wearing a mask, social distancing, making sure your spaces are well ventilated, and not spending prolonged periods of time indoors in crowded places.
Taking young children to visit vaccinated, elderly grandparents demands extra caution, again, with Delta circulating, particularly as they go back to school and start mixing with other kids.
Dr. Schaffner recommends explaining the ground rules before the visit: Hugs around the waist. No kissing. Wearing a mask while indoors with them.
Other important unanswered questions are whether breakthrough infections can lead to prolonged symptoms, or “long covid.” Most experts think that’s less likely in vaccinated people.
And Dr. Osterholm said it will be important to see whether there’s anything unusual about the breakthrough cases happening in the community.
“I think some of us have been challenged by the number of clusters that we’ve seen,” he said. “I think that really needs to be examined more.”
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Diabetes duration linked to increasing heart failure risk
In a multivariable analysis the rate of incident heart failure increased steadily and significantly as diabetes duration increased. Among the 168 study subjects (2% of the total study group) who had diabetes for at least 15 years, the subsequent incidence of heart failure was nearly threefold higher than among the 4,802 subjects (49%) who never had diabetes or prediabetes, reported Justin B. Echouffo-Tcheugui, MD, PhD, and coauthors in an article published in JACC Heart Failure.
People with prediabetes (32% of the study population) had a significant but modest increased rate of incident heart failure that was 16% higher than in control subjects who never developed diabetes. People with diabetes for durations of 0-4.9 years, 5.0-9.9 years, or 10-14.9 years, had steadily increasing relative incident heart failure rates of 29%, 97%, and 210%, respectively, compared with controls, reported Dr. Echouffo-Tcheugui, an endocrinologist at Johns Hopkins Medicine in Baltimore.
Similar rates of HFrEF and HFpEF
Among all 1,841 people in the dataset with diabetes for any length of time each additional 5 years of the disorder linked with a significant, relative 17% increase in the rate of incident heart failure. Incidence of heart failure rose even more sharply with added duration among those with a hemoglobin A1c of 7% or greater, compared with those with better glycemic control. And the rate of incident heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) roughly matched the rate of incident heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).
The study dataset included 9,734 adults enrolled into the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study, and during a median follow-up of 22.5 years they had nearly 2,000 episodes of either hospitalization or death secondary to incident heart failure. This included 617 (31%) events involving HFpEF, 495 events (25%) involving HFrEF, and 876 unclassified heart failure events.
The cohort averaged 63 years of age; 58% were women, 23% were Black, and 77% were White (the study design excluded people with other racial and ethnic backgrounds). The study design also excluded people with a history of heart failure or coronary artery disease, as well as those diagnosed with diabetes prior to age 18 resulting in a study group that presumably mostly had type 2 diabetes when diabetes was present. The report provided no data on the specific numbers of patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes.
“It’s not surprising that a longer duration of diabetes is associated with heart failure, but the etiology remains problematic,” commented Robert H. Eckel, MD, an endocrinologist at the University of Colorado at Denver, Aurora. “The impact of diabetes on incident heart failure is not well know, particularly duration of diabetes,” although disorders often found in patients with diabetes, such as hypertension and diabetic cardiomyopathy, likely have roles in causing heart failure, he said.
Diabetes duration may signal need for an SGLT2 inhibitor
“With emerging novel treatments like the SGLT2 [sodium-glucose cotransporter 2] inhibitors for preventing heart failure hospitalizations and deaths in patients with type 2 diabetes, this is a timely analysis,” Dr. Eckel said in an interview.
“There is no question that with increased duration of type 2 diabetes” the need for an agent from the SGLT2-inhibitor class increases. Although, because of the proven protection these drugs give against heart failure events and progression of chronic kidney disease, treatment with this drug class should start early in patients with type 2 diabetes, he added.
Dr. Echouffo-Tcheugui and his coauthors agreed, citing two important clinical take-aways from their findings:
First, interventions that delay the onset of diabetes may potentially reduce incident heart failure; second, patients with diabetes might benefit from cardioprotective treatments such as SGLT2 inhibitors, the report said.
“Our observations suggest the potential prognostic relevance of diabetes duration in assessing heart failure,” the authors wrote. Integrating diabetes duration into heart failure risk estimation in people with diabetes “could help refine the selection of high-risk individuals who may derive the greatest absolute benefit from aggressive cardioprotective therapies such as SGLT2 inhibitors.”
The analysis also identified several other demographic and clinical factors that influenced the relative effect of diabetes duration. Longer duration was linked with higher rates of incident heart failure in women compared with men, in Blacks compared with Whites, in people younger than 65 compared with older people, in people with an A1c of 7% or higher, and in those with a body mass index of 30 kg/m2 or greater.
The ARIC study and the analyses run by Dr. Echouffo-Tcheugui and his coauthors received no commercial funding. Dr. Echouffo-Tcheugui and Dr. Eckel had no relevant disclosures.
In a multivariable analysis the rate of incident heart failure increased steadily and significantly as diabetes duration increased. Among the 168 study subjects (2% of the total study group) who had diabetes for at least 15 years, the subsequent incidence of heart failure was nearly threefold higher than among the 4,802 subjects (49%) who never had diabetes or prediabetes, reported Justin B. Echouffo-Tcheugui, MD, PhD, and coauthors in an article published in JACC Heart Failure.
People with prediabetes (32% of the study population) had a significant but modest increased rate of incident heart failure that was 16% higher than in control subjects who never developed diabetes. People with diabetes for durations of 0-4.9 years, 5.0-9.9 years, or 10-14.9 years, had steadily increasing relative incident heart failure rates of 29%, 97%, and 210%, respectively, compared with controls, reported Dr. Echouffo-Tcheugui, an endocrinologist at Johns Hopkins Medicine in Baltimore.
Similar rates of HFrEF and HFpEF
Among all 1,841 people in the dataset with diabetes for any length of time each additional 5 years of the disorder linked with a significant, relative 17% increase in the rate of incident heart failure. Incidence of heart failure rose even more sharply with added duration among those with a hemoglobin A1c of 7% or greater, compared with those with better glycemic control. And the rate of incident heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) roughly matched the rate of incident heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).
The study dataset included 9,734 adults enrolled into the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study, and during a median follow-up of 22.5 years they had nearly 2,000 episodes of either hospitalization or death secondary to incident heart failure. This included 617 (31%) events involving HFpEF, 495 events (25%) involving HFrEF, and 876 unclassified heart failure events.
The cohort averaged 63 years of age; 58% were women, 23% were Black, and 77% were White (the study design excluded people with other racial and ethnic backgrounds). The study design also excluded people with a history of heart failure or coronary artery disease, as well as those diagnosed with diabetes prior to age 18 resulting in a study group that presumably mostly had type 2 diabetes when diabetes was present. The report provided no data on the specific numbers of patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes.
“It’s not surprising that a longer duration of diabetes is associated with heart failure, but the etiology remains problematic,” commented Robert H. Eckel, MD, an endocrinologist at the University of Colorado at Denver, Aurora. “The impact of diabetes on incident heart failure is not well know, particularly duration of diabetes,” although disorders often found in patients with diabetes, such as hypertension and diabetic cardiomyopathy, likely have roles in causing heart failure, he said.
Diabetes duration may signal need for an SGLT2 inhibitor
“With emerging novel treatments like the SGLT2 [sodium-glucose cotransporter 2] inhibitors for preventing heart failure hospitalizations and deaths in patients with type 2 diabetes, this is a timely analysis,” Dr. Eckel said in an interview.
“There is no question that with increased duration of type 2 diabetes” the need for an agent from the SGLT2-inhibitor class increases. Although, because of the proven protection these drugs give against heart failure events and progression of chronic kidney disease, treatment with this drug class should start early in patients with type 2 diabetes, he added.
Dr. Echouffo-Tcheugui and his coauthors agreed, citing two important clinical take-aways from their findings:
First, interventions that delay the onset of diabetes may potentially reduce incident heart failure; second, patients with diabetes might benefit from cardioprotective treatments such as SGLT2 inhibitors, the report said.
“Our observations suggest the potential prognostic relevance of diabetes duration in assessing heart failure,” the authors wrote. Integrating diabetes duration into heart failure risk estimation in people with diabetes “could help refine the selection of high-risk individuals who may derive the greatest absolute benefit from aggressive cardioprotective therapies such as SGLT2 inhibitors.”
The analysis also identified several other demographic and clinical factors that influenced the relative effect of diabetes duration. Longer duration was linked with higher rates of incident heart failure in women compared with men, in Blacks compared with Whites, in people younger than 65 compared with older people, in people with an A1c of 7% or higher, and in those with a body mass index of 30 kg/m2 or greater.
The ARIC study and the analyses run by Dr. Echouffo-Tcheugui and his coauthors received no commercial funding. Dr. Echouffo-Tcheugui and Dr. Eckel had no relevant disclosures.
In a multivariable analysis the rate of incident heart failure increased steadily and significantly as diabetes duration increased. Among the 168 study subjects (2% of the total study group) who had diabetes for at least 15 years, the subsequent incidence of heart failure was nearly threefold higher than among the 4,802 subjects (49%) who never had diabetes or prediabetes, reported Justin B. Echouffo-Tcheugui, MD, PhD, and coauthors in an article published in JACC Heart Failure.
People with prediabetes (32% of the study population) had a significant but modest increased rate of incident heart failure that was 16% higher than in control subjects who never developed diabetes. People with diabetes for durations of 0-4.9 years, 5.0-9.9 years, or 10-14.9 years, had steadily increasing relative incident heart failure rates of 29%, 97%, and 210%, respectively, compared with controls, reported Dr. Echouffo-Tcheugui, an endocrinologist at Johns Hopkins Medicine in Baltimore.
Similar rates of HFrEF and HFpEF
Among all 1,841 people in the dataset with diabetes for any length of time each additional 5 years of the disorder linked with a significant, relative 17% increase in the rate of incident heart failure. Incidence of heart failure rose even more sharply with added duration among those with a hemoglobin A1c of 7% or greater, compared with those with better glycemic control. And the rate of incident heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) roughly matched the rate of incident heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).
The study dataset included 9,734 adults enrolled into the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study, and during a median follow-up of 22.5 years they had nearly 2,000 episodes of either hospitalization or death secondary to incident heart failure. This included 617 (31%) events involving HFpEF, 495 events (25%) involving HFrEF, and 876 unclassified heart failure events.
The cohort averaged 63 years of age; 58% were women, 23% were Black, and 77% were White (the study design excluded people with other racial and ethnic backgrounds). The study design also excluded people with a history of heart failure or coronary artery disease, as well as those diagnosed with diabetes prior to age 18 resulting in a study group that presumably mostly had type 2 diabetes when diabetes was present. The report provided no data on the specific numbers of patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes.
“It’s not surprising that a longer duration of diabetes is associated with heart failure, but the etiology remains problematic,” commented Robert H. Eckel, MD, an endocrinologist at the University of Colorado at Denver, Aurora. “The impact of diabetes on incident heart failure is not well know, particularly duration of diabetes,” although disorders often found in patients with diabetes, such as hypertension and diabetic cardiomyopathy, likely have roles in causing heart failure, he said.
Diabetes duration may signal need for an SGLT2 inhibitor
“With emerging novel treatments like the SGLT2 [sodium-glucose cotransporter 2] inhibitors for preventing heart failure hospitalizations and deaths in patients with type 2 diabetes, this is a timely analysis,” Dr. Eckel said in an interview.
“There is no question that with increased duration of type 2 diabetes” the need for an agent from the SGLT2-inhibitor class increases. Although, because of the proven protection these drugs give against heart failure events and progression of chronic kidney disease, treatment with this drug class should start early in patients with type 2 diabetes, he added.
Dr. Echouffo-Tcheugui and his coauthors agreed, citing two important clinical take-aways from their findings:
First, interventions that delay the onset of diabetes may potentially reduce incident heart failure; second, patients with diabetes might benefit from cardioprotective treatments such as SGLT2 inhibitors, the report said.
“Our observations suggest the potential prognostic relevance of diabetes duration in assessing heart failure,” the authors wrote. Integrating diabetes duration into heart failure risk estimation in people with diabetes “could help refine the selection of high-risk individuals who may derive the greatest absolute benefit from aggressive cardioprotective therapies such as SGLT2 inhibitors.”
The analysis also identified several other demographic and clinical factors that influenced the relative effect of diabetes duration. Longer duration was linked with higher rates of incident heart failure in women compared with men, in Blacks compared with Whites, in people younger than 65 compared with older people, in people with an A1c of 7% or higher, and in those with a body mass index of 30 kg/m2 or greater.
The ARIC study and the analyses run by Dr. Echouffo-Tcheugui and his coauthors received no commercial funding. Dr. Echouffo-Tcheugui and Dr. Eckel had no relevant disclosures.
FROM JACC HEART FAILURE
Dissolving pacemaker impressive in early research
A fully implantable, bioresorbable pacemaker has been developed that’s capable of sustaining heart rhythms in animal and human donor hearts before disappearing over 5-7 weeks.
Temporary pacing devices are frequently used after cardiac surgery but rely on bulky external generators and transcutaneous pacing leads that run the risk of becoming infected or dislodged and can damage the heart when removed if they’re enveloped in fibrotic tissue.
The experimental device is thin, powered without leads or batteries, and made of water-soluble, biocompatible materials, thereby bypassing many of the disadvantages of conventional temporary pacing devices, according to John A. Rogers, PhD, who led the device’s development and directs the Querrey Simpson Institute for Bioelectronics at Northwestern University in Chicago.
“The total material load on the body is very minimal,” he said in an interview. “The amount of silicon and magnesium in a multivitamin tablet is about 3,000 times more than the amount of those materials in our electronics. So you can think of them as a very tiny vitamin pill, in a sense, but configured with electronic functionality.”
Dr. Rogers and his team have a reputation for innovation in bioelectronic medicine, having recently constructed transient wireless devices to accelerate neuroregeneration associated with damaged peripheral nerves, to monitor critically ill neonates, and to detect early signs and symptoms associated with COVID-19.
Shortly after Dr. Rogers joined Northwestern, Rishi Arora, MD, a cardiac electrophysiologist and professor of medicine at Northwestern, reached out to discuss how they could leverage wireless electronics for patients needing temporary pacing.
“It was a natural marriage,” Dr. Arora said in an interview. “Part of the reason to go into the heart was because the cardiology group here at Northwestern, especially on the electrophysiology side, has been very involved in translational research, and John also had a very strong collaboration before he came here with Igor Efimov, [PhD, of George Washington University, Washington], a giant in the field in terms of heart rhythm research.”
Dr. Arora noted that the incidence of temporary pacing after cardiac surgery is at least 10% but can reach 20%. Current devices work well in most patients, but temporary pacing with epicardial wires can cause complications and, typically, work well only for a few days after cardiac surgery. Clinically, though, several patients need postoperative pacing support for 1-2 weeks.
“So if something like this were available where you could tack it onto the surface and forget it for a week or 10 days or 2 weeks, you’d be doing those 20% of patients a huge service,” he said.
Bioresorbable scaffold déjà vu?
The philosophy of “leave nothing behind” is nothing new in cardiology, with bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) gaining initial support as a potential solution to neoatherosclerosis and late-stent thrombosis in permanent metal stents. Failure to show advantages, and safety concerns such as in-scaffold thrombosis, however, led Abbott to stop global sales of the first approved BVS and Boston Scientific to halt its BVS program in 2017.
The wireless pacemaker, however, is an electrical device, not a mechanical one, observed Dr. Rogers. “The fact that it’s not in the bloodstream greatly lowers risks and, as I mentioned before, everything is super thin, low-mass quantities of materials. So, I guess there’s a relationship there, but it’s different in a couple of very important ways.”
As Dr. Rogers, Dr. Arora, Dr. Efimov, and colleagues recently reported in Nature Biotechnology, the electronic part of the pacemaker contains three layers: A loop antenna with a bilayer tungsten-coated magnesium inductive coil, a radiofrequency PIN diode based on a monocrystalline silicon nanomembrane, and a poly (lactide-co-glycolide) (PLGA) dielectric interlayer.
The electronic components rest between two encapsulation layers of PLGA to isolate the active materials from the surrounding biofluids during implantation, and connect to a pair of flexible extension electrodes that deliver the electrical stimuli to a contact pad sutured onto the heart. The entire system is about 16 mm in width and 15 mm in length, and weighs in at about 0.3 g.
The pacemaker receives power and control commands through a wireless inductive power transfer – the same technology used in implanted medical devices, smartphones, and radio-frequency identification tags – between the receiver coil in the device and a wand-shaped, external transmission coil placed on top of or within a few inches of the heart.
“Right now we’re almost at 15 inches, which I think is a very respectable distance for this particular piece of hardware, and clinically very doable,” observed Dr. Arora.
Competing considerations
Testing thus far shows effective ventricular capture across a range of frequencies in mouse and rabbit hearts and successful pacing and activation of human cardiac tissue.
In vivo tests in dogs also suggest that the system can “achieve the power necessary for operation of bioresorbable pacemakers in adult human patients,” the authors say.
Electrodes placed on the dogs’ legs showed a change in ECG signals from a narrow QRS complex (consistent with a normal rate sinus rhythm of 350-400 bpm) to a widened QRS complex with a shortened R-R interval (consistent with a paced rhythm of 400-450 bpm) – indicating successful ventricular capture.
The device successfully paced the dogs through postoperative day 4 but couldn’t provide enough energy to capture the ventricular myocardium on day 5 and failed to pace the heart on day 6, even when transmitting voltages were increased from 1 Vpp to more than 10 Vpp.
Dr. Rogers pointed out that a transient device of theirs that uses very thin films of silica provides stable intracranial pressure monitoring for traumatic brain injury recovery for 3 weeks before dissolving. The problem with the polymers used as encapsulating layers in the pacemaker is that even if they haven’t completely dissolved, there’s a finite rate of water permeation through the film.
“It turns out that’s what’s become the limiting factor, rather than the chemistry of bioresorption,” he said. “So, what we’re seeing with these devices beginning to degrade electrically in terms of performance around 5-6 days is due to that water permeation.”
Although it is not part of the current study, there’s no reason thin silica layers couldn’t be incorporated into the pacemaker to make it less water permeable, Dr. Rogers said. Still, this will have to be weighed against the competing consideration of stable operating life.
The researchers specifically chose materials that would naturally bioresorb via hydrolysis and metabolic action in the body. PLGA degrades into glycolic and lactic acid, the tungsten-coated magnesium inductive coil into Wox and Mg(OH)2, and the silicon nanomembrane radiofrequency PIN diode into Si(OH)4.
CT imaging in rat models shows the device is enveloped in fibrotic tissue and completely decouples from the heart at 4 weeks, while images of explanted devices suggest the pacemaker largely dissolves within 3 weeks and the remaining residues disappear after 12 weeks.
The researchers have started an investigational device exemption process to allow the device to be used in clinical trials, and they plan to dig deeper into the potential for fragments to form at various stages of resorption, which some imaging suggests may occur.
“Because these devices are made out of pure materials and they’re in a heterogeneous environment, both mechanically and biomechanically, the devices don’t resorb in a perfectly uniform way and, as a result, at the tail end of the process you can end up with small fragments that eventually bioresorb, but before they’re gone, they are potentially mobile within the body cavity,” Dr. Rogers said.
“We feel that because the devices aren’t in the bloodstream, the risk associated with those fragments is probably manageable but at the same time, these are the sorts of details that must be thoroughly addressed before trials in humans,” he said, adding that one solution, if needed, would be to encapsulate the entire device in a thin bioresorbable hydrogel as a containment vehicle.
Dr. Arora said they hope the pacemaker “will make patients’ lives a lot easier in the postoperative setting but, even there, I think one must remember current pacing technology in this setting is actually very good. So there’s a word of caution not to get ahead of ourselves.”
Looking forward, the excitement of this approach is not only in the immediate postop setting but in the transvenous setting, he said. “If we can get to the point where we can actually do this transvenously, that opens up a huge window of opportunity because there we’re talking about post-TAVR [transcatheter aortic valve replacement], post–myocardial infarction, etc.”
Currently, temporary transvenous pacing can be quite unreliable because of a high risk of dislodgement and infection – much higher than for surgical pacing wires, he noted.
“In terms of translatability to larger numbers of patients, the value would be huge. But again, a lot needs to be done before we can get there. But if it can get to that point, then I think you have a real therapy that could potentially be transformative,” Dr. Arora said.
Dr. Rogers reported support from the Leducq Foundation projects RHYTHM and ROI-HL121270. Dr. Arora has disclosed no relevant financial relationships. Coauthor disclosures are listed in the original article.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
A fully implantable, bioresorbable pacemaker has been developed that’s capable of sustaining heart rhythms in animal and human donor hearts before disappearing over 5-7 weeks.
Temporary pacing devices are frequently used after cardiac surgery but rely on bulky external generators and transcutaneous pacing leads that run the risk of becoming infected or dislodged and can damage the heart when removed if they’re enveloped in fibrotic tissue.
The experimental device is thin, powered without leads or batteries, and made of water-soluble, biocompatible materials, thereby bypassing many of the disadvantages of conventional temporary pacing devices, according to John A. Rogers, PhD, who led the device’s development and directs the Querrey Simpson Institute for Bioelectronics at Northwestern University in Chicago.
“The total material load on the body is very minimal,” he said in an interview. “The amount of silicon and magnesium in a multivitamin tablet is about 3,000 times more than the amount of those materials in our electronics. So you can think of them as a very tiny vitamin pill, in a sense, but configured with electronic functionality.”
Dr. Rogers and his team have a reputation for innovation in bioelectronic medicine, having recently constructed transient wireless devices to accelerate neuroregeneration associated with damaged peripheral nerves, to monitor critically ill neonates, and to detect early signs and symptoms associated with COVID-19.
Shortly after Dr. Rogers joined Northwestern, Rishi Arora, MD, a cardiac electrophysiologist and professor of medicine at Northwestern, reached out to discuss how they could leverage wireless electronics for patients needing temporary pacing.
“It was a natural marriage,” Dr. Arora said in an interview. “Part of the reason to go into the heart was because the cardiology group here at Northwestern, especially on the electrophysiology side, has been very involved in translational research, and John also had a very strong collaboration before he came here with Igor Efimov, [PhD, of George Washington University, Washington], a giant in the field in terms of heart rhythm research.”
Dr. Arora noted that the incidence of temporary pacing after cardiac surgery is at least 10% but can reach 20%. Current devices work well in most patients, but temporary pacing with epicardial wires can cause complications and, typically, work well only for a few days after cardiac surgery. Clinically, though, several patients need postoperative pacing support for 1-2 weeks.
“So if something like this were available where you could tack it onto the surface and forget it for a week or 10 days or 2 weeks, you’d be doing those 20% of patients a huge service,” he said.
Bioresorbable scaffold déjà vu?
The philosophy of “leave nothing behind” is nothing new in cardiology, with bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) gaining initial support as a potential solution to neoatherosclerosis and late-stent thrombosis in permanent metal stents. Failure to show advantages, and safety concerns such as in-scaffold thrombosis, however, led Abbott to stop global sales of the first approved BVS and Boston Scientific to halt its BVS program in 2017.
The wireless pacemaker, however, is an electrical device, not a mechanical one, observed Dr. Rogers. “The fact that it’s not in the bloodstream greatly lowers risks and, as I mentioned before, everything is super thin, low-mass quantities of materials. So, I guess there’s a relationship there, but it’s different in a couple of very important ways.”
As Dr. Rogers, Dr. Arora, Dr. Efimov, and colleagues recently reported in Nature Biotechnology, the electronic part of the pacemaker contains three layers: A loop antenna with a bilayer tungsten-coated magnesium inductive coil, a radiofrequency PIN diode based on a monocrystalline silicon nanomembrane, and a poly (lactide-co-glycolide) (PLGA) dielectric interlayer.
The electronic components rest between two encapsulation layers of PLGA to isolate the active materials from the surrounding biofluids during implantation, and connect to a pair of flexible extension electrodes that deliver the electrical stimuli to a contact pad sutured onto the heart. The entire system is about 16 mm in width and 15 mm in length, and weighs in at about 0.3 g.
The pacemaker receives power and control commands through a wireless inductive power transfer – the same technology used in implanted medical devices, smartphones, and radio-frequency identification tags – between the receiver coil in the device and a wand-shaped, external transmission coil placed on top of or within a few inches of the heart.
“Right now we’re almost at 15 inches, which I think is a very respectable distance for this particular piece of hardware, and clinically very doable,” observed Dr. Arora.
Competing considerations
Testing thus far shows effective ventricular capture across a range of frequencies in mouse and rabbit hearts and successful pacing and activation of human cardiac tissue.
In vivo tests in dogs also suggest that the system can “achieve the power necessary for operation of bioresorbable pacemakers in adult human patients,” the authors say.
Electrodes placed on the dogs’ legs showed a change in ECG signals from a narrow QRS complex (consistent with a normal rate sinus rhythm of 350-400 bpm) to a widened QRS complex with a shortened R-R interval (consistent with a paced rhythm of 400-450 bpm) – indicating successful ventricular capture.
The device successfully paced the dogs through postoperative day 4 but couldn’t provide enough energy to capture the ventricular myocardium on day 5 and failed to pace the heart on day 6, even when transmitting voltages were increased from 1 Vpp to more than 10 Vpp.
Dr. Rogers pointed out that a transient device of theirs that uses very thin films of silica provides stable intracranial pressure monitoring for traumatic brain injury recovery for 3 weeks before dissolving. The problem with the polymers used as encapsulating layers in the pacemaker is that even if they haven’t completely dissolved, there’s a finite rate of water permeation through the film.
“It turns out that’s what’s become the limiting factor, rather than the chemistry of bioresorption,” he said. “So, what we’re seeing with these devices beginning to degrade electrically in terms of performance around 5-6 days is due to that water permeation.”
Although it is not part of the current study, there’s no reason thin silica layers couldn’t be incorporated into the pacemaker to make it less water permeable, Dr. Rogers said. Still, this will have to be weighed against the competing consideration of stable operating life.
The researchers specifically chose materials that would naturally bioresorb via hydrolysis and metabolic action in the body. PLGA degrades into glycolic and lactic acid, the tungsten-coated magnesium inductive coil into Wox and Mg(OH)2, and the silicon nanomembrane radiofrequency PIN diode into Si(OH)4.
CT imaging in rat models shows the device is enveloped in fibrotic tissue and completely decouples from the heart at 4 weeks, while images of explanted devices suggest the pacemaker largely dissolves within 3 weeks and the remaining residues disappear after 12 weeks.
The researchers have started an investigational device exemption process to allow the device to be used in clinical trials, and they plan to dig deeper into the potential for fragments to form at various stages of resorption, which some imaging suggests may occur.
“Because these devices are made out of pure materials and they’re in a heterogeneous environment, both mechanically and biomechanically, the devices don’t resorb in a perfectly uniform way and, as a result, at the tail end of the process you can end up with small fragments that eventually bioresorb, but before they’re gone, they are potentially mobile within the body cavity,” Dr. Rogers said.
“We feel that because the devices aren’t in the bloodstream, the risk associated with those fragments is probably manageable but at the same time, these are the sorts of details that must be thoroughly addressed before trials in humans,” he said, adding that one solution, if needed, would be to encapsulate the entire device in a thin bioresorbable hydrogel as a containment vehicle.
Dr. Arora said they hope the pacemaker “will make patients’ lives a lot easier in the postoperative setting but, even there, I think one must remember current pacing technology in this setting is actually very good. So there’s a word of caution not to get ahead of ourselves.”
Looking forward, the excitement of this approach is not only in the immediate postop setting but in the transvenous setting, he said. “If we can get to the point where we can actually do this transvenously, that opens up a huge window of opportunity because there we’re talking about post-TAVR [transcatheter aortic valve replacement], post–myocardial infarction, etc.”
Currently, temporary transvenous pacing can be quite unreliable because of a high risk of dislodgement and infection – much higher than for surgical pacing wires, he noted.
“In terms of translatability to larger numbers of patients, the value would be huge. But again, a lot needs to be done before we can get there. But if it can get to that point, then I think you have a real therapy that could potentially be transformative,” Dr. Arora said.
Dr. Rogers reported support from the Leducq Foundation projects RHYTHM and ROI-HL121270. Dr. Arora has disclosed no relevant financial relationships. Coauthor disclosures are listed in the original article.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
A fully implantable, bioresorbable pacemaker has been developed that’s capable of sustaining heart rhythms in animal and human donor hearts before disappearing over 5-7 weeks.
Temporary pacing devices are frequently used after cardiac surgery but rely on bulky external generators and transcutaneous pacing leads that run the risk of becoming infected or dislodged and can damage the heart when removed if they’re enveloped in fibrotic tissue.
The experimental device is thin, powered without leads or batteries, and made of water-soluble, biocompatible materials, thereby bypassing many of the disadvantages of conventional temporary pacing devices, according to John A. Rogers, PhD, who led the device’s development and directs the Querrey Simpson Institute for Bioelectronics at Northwestern University in Chicago.
“The total material load on the body is very minimal,” he said in an interview. “The amount of silicon and magnesium in a multivitamin tablet is about 3,000 times more than the amount of those materials in our electronics. So you can think of them as a very tiny vitamin pill, in a sense, but configured with electronic functionality.”
Dr. Rogers and his team have a reputation for innovation in bioelectronic medicine, having recently constructed transient wireless devices to accelerate neuroregeneration associated with damaged peripheral nerves, to monitor critically ill neonates, and to detect early signs and symptoms associated with COVID-19.
Shortly after Dr. Rogers joined Northwestern, Rishi Arora, MD, a cardiac electrophysiologist and professor of medicine at Northwestern, reached out to discuss how they could leverage wireless electronics for patients needing temporary pacing.
“It was a natural marriage,” Dr. Arora said in an interview. “Part of the reason to go into the heart was because the cardiology group here at Northwestern, especially on the electrophysiology side, has been very involved in translational research, and John also had a very strong collaboration before he came here with Igor Efimov, [PhD, of George Washington University, Washington], a giant in the field in terms of heart rhythm research.”
Dr. Arora noted that the incidence of temporary pacing after cardiac surgery is at least 10% but can reach 20%. Current devices work well in most patients, but temporary pacing with epicardial wires can cause complications and, typically, work well only for a few days after cardiac surgery. Clinically, though, several patients need postoperative pacing support for 1-2 weeks.
“So if something like this were available where you could tack it onto the surface and forget it for a week or 10 days or 2 weeks, you’d be doing those 20% of patients a huge service,” he said.
Bioresorbable scaffold déjà vu?
The philosophy of “leave nothing behind” is nothing new in cardiology, with bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) gaining initial support as a potential solution to neoatherosclerosis and late-stent thrombosis in permanent metal stents. Failure to show advantages, and safety concerns such as in-scaffold thrombosis, however, led Abbott to stop global sales of the first approved BVS and Boston Scientific to halt its BVS program in 2017.
The wireless pacemaker, however, is an electrical device, not a mechanical one, observed Dr. Rogers. “The fact that it’s not in the bloodstream greatly lowers risks and, as I mentioned before, everything is super thin, low-mass quantities of materials. So, I guess there’s a relationship there, but it’s different in a couple of very important ways.”
As Dr. Rogers, Dr. Arora, Dr. Efimov, and colleagues recently reported in Nature Biotechnology, the electronic part of the pacemaker contains three layers: A loop antenna with a bilayer tungsten-coated magnesium inductive coil, a radiofrequency PIN diode based on a monocrystalline silicon nanomembrane, and a poly (lactide-co-glycolide) (PLGA) dielectric interlayer.
The electronic components rest between two encapsulation layers of PLGA to isolate the active materials from the surrounding biofluids during implantation, and connect to a pair of flexible extension electrodes that deliver the electrical stimuli to a contact pad sutured onto the heart. The entire system is about 16 mm in width and 15 mm in length, and weighs in at about 0.3 g.
The pacemaker receives power and control commands through a wireless inductive power transfer – the same technology used in implanted medical devices, smartphones, and radio-frequency identification tags – between the receiver coil in the device and a wand-shaped, external transmission coil placed on top of or within a few inches of the heart.
“Right now we’re almost at 15 inches, which I think is a very respectable distance for this particular piece of hardware, and clinically very doable,” observed Dr. Arora.
Competing considerations
Testing thus far shows effective ventricular capture across a range of frequencies in mouse and rabbit hearts and successful pacing and activation of human cardiac tissue.
In vivo tests in dogs also suggest that the system can “achieve the power necessary for operation of bioresorbable pacemakers in adult human patients,” the authors say.
Electrodes placed on the dogs’ legs showed a change in ECG signals from a narrow QRS complex (consistent with a normal rate sinus rhythm of 350-400 bpm) to a widened QRS complex with a shortened R-R interval (consistent with a paced rhythm of 400-450 bpm) – indicating successful ventricular capture.
The device successfully paced the dogs through postoperative day 4 but couldn’t provide enough energy to capture the ventricular myocardium on day 5 and failed to pace the heart on day 6, even when transmitting voltages were increased from 1 Vpp to more than 10 Vpp.
Dr. Rogers pointed out that a transient device of theirs that uses very thin films of silica provides stable intracranial pressure monitoring for traumatic brain injury recovery for 3 weeks before dissolving. The problem with the polymers used as encapsulating layers in the pacemaker is that even if they haven’t completely dissolved, there’s a finite rate of water permeation through the film.
“It turns out that’s what’s become the limiting factor, rather than the chemistry of bioresorption,” he said. “So, what we’re seeing with these devices beginning to degrade electrically in terms of performance around 5-6 days is due to that water permeation.”
Although it is not part of the current study, there’s no reason thin silica layers couldn’t be incorporated into the pacemaker to make it less water permeable, Dr. Rogers said. Still, this will have to be weighed against the competing consideration of stable operating life.
The researchers specifically chose materials that would naturally bioresorb via hydrolysis and metabolic action in the body. PLGA degrades into glycolic and lactic acid, the tungsten-coated magnesium inductive coil into Wox and Mg(OH)2, and the silicon nanomembrane radiofrequency PIN diode into Si(OH)4.
CT imaging in rat models shows the device is enveloped in fibrotic tissue and completely decouples from the heart at 4 weeks, while images of explanted devices suggest the pacemaker largely dissolves within 3 weeks and the remaining residues disappear after 12 weeks.
The researchers have started an investigational device exemption process to allow the device to be used in clinical trials, and they plan to dig deeper into the potential for fragments to form at various stages of resorption, which some imaging suggests may occur.
“Because these devices are made out of pure materials and they’re in a heterogeneous environment, both mechanically and biomechanically, the devices don’t resorb in a perfectly uniform way and, as a result, at the tail end of the process you can end up with small fragments that eventually bioresorb, but before they’re gone, they are potentially mobile within the body cavity,” Dr. Rogers said.
“We feel that because the devices aren’t in the bloodstream, the risk associated with those fragments is probably manageable but at the same time, these are the sorts of details that must be thoroughly addressed before trials in humans,” he said, adding that one solution, if needed, would be to encapsulate the entire device in a thin bioresorbable hydrogel as a containment vehicle.
Dr. Arora said they hope the pacemaker “will make patients’ lives a lot easier in the postoperative setting but, even there, I think one must remember current pacing technology in this setting is actually very good. So there’s a word of caution not to get ahead of ourselves.”
Looking forward, the excitement of this approach is not only in the immediate postop setting but in the transvenous setting, he said. “If we can get to the point where we can actually do this transvenously, that opens up a huge window of opportunity because there we’re talking about post-TAVR [transcatheter aortic valve replacement], post–myocardial infarction, etc.”
Currently, temporary transvenous pacing can be quite unreliable because of a high risk of dislodgement and infection – much higher than for surgical pacing wires, he noted.
“In terms of translatability to larger numbers of patients, the value would be huge. But again, a lot needs to be done before we can get there. But if it can get to that point, then I think you have a real therapy that could potentially be transformative,” Dr. Arora said.
Dr. Rogers reported support from the Leducq Foundation projects RHYTHM and ROI-HL121270. Dr. Arora has disclosed no relevant financial relationships. Coauthor disclosures are listed in the original article.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
CDC panel updates info on rare side effect after J&J vaccine
Despite recent reports of Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) after the Johnson & Johnson vaccine,
The company also presented new data suggesting that the shots generate strong immune responses against circulating variants and that antibodies generated by the vaccine stay elevated for at least 8 months.
Members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) did not vote, but discussed and affirmed their support for recent decisions by the Food and Drug Administration and CDC to update patient information about the very low risk of GBS that appears to be associated with the vaccine, but to continue offering the vaccine to people in the United States.
The Johnson & Johnson shot has been a minor player in the U.S. vaccination campaign, accounting for less than 4% of all vaccine doses given in this country. Still, the single-dose inoculation, which doesn’t require ultra-cold storage, has been important for reaching people in rural areas, through mobile clinics, at colleges and primary care offices, and in vulnerable populations – those who are incarcerated or homeless.
The FDA says it has received reports of 100 cases of GBS after the Johnson & Johnson vaccine in its Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System database through the end of June. The cases are still under investigation.
To date, more than 12 million doses of the vaccine have been administered, making the rate of GBS 8.1 cases for every million doses administered.
Although it is still extremely rare, that’s above the expected background rate of GBS of 1.6 cases for every million people, said Grace Lee, MD, a Stanford, Calif., pediatrician who chairs the ACIP’s Vaccine Safety Technical Work Group.
So far, most GBS cases (61%) have been among men. The midpoint age of the cases was 57 years. The average time to onset was 14 days, and 98% of cases occurred within 42 days of the shot. Facial paralysis has been associated with an estimated 30%-50% of cases. One person, who had heart failure, high blood pressure, and diabetes, has died.
Still, the benefits of the vaccine far outweigh its risks. For every million doses given to people over age 50, the vaccine prevents nearly 7,500 COVID-19 hospitalizations and nearly 100 deaths in women, and more than 13,000 COVID-19 hospitalizations and more than 2,400 deaths in men.
Rates of GBS after the mRNA vaccines made by Pfizer and Moderna were around 1 case for every 1 million doses given, which is not above the rate that would be expected without vaccination.
The link to the Johnson & Johnson vaccine prompted the FDA to add a warning to the vaccine’s patient safety information on July 12.
Also in July, the European Medicines Agency recommended a similar warning for the product information of the AstraZeneca vaccine Vaxzevria, which relies on similar technology.
Good against variants
Johnson & Johnson also presented new information showing its vaccine maintained high levels of neutralizing antibodies against four of the so-called “variants of concern” – Alpha, Gamma, Beta, and Delta. The protection generated by the vaccine lasted for at least 8 months after the shot, the company said.
“We’re still learning about the duration of protection and the breadth of coverage against this evolving variant landscape for each of the authorized vaccines,” said Mathai Mammen, MD, PhD, global head of research and development at Janssen, the company that makes the vaccine for J&J.
The company also said that its vaccine generated very strong T-cell responses. T cells destroy infected cells and, along with antibodies, are an important part of the body’s immune response.
Antibody levels and T-cell responses are markers for immunity. Measuring these levels isn’t the same as proving that shots can fend off an infection.
It’s still unclear exactly which component of the immune response is most important for fighting off COVID-19.
Dr. Mammen said the companies are still gathering that clinical data, and would present it soon.
“We will have a better view of the clinical efficacy in the coming weeks,” he said.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Despite recent reports of Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) after the Johnson & Johnson vaccine,
The company also presented new data suggesting that the shots generate strong immune responses against circulating variants and that antibodies generated by the vaccine stay elevated for at least 8 months.
Members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) did not vote, but discussed and affirmed their support for recent decisions by the Food and Drug Administration and CDC to update patient information about the very low risk of GBS that appears to be associated with the vaccine, but to continue offering the vaccine to people in the United States.
The Johnson & Johnson shot has been a minor player in the U.S. vaccination campaign, accounting for less than 4% of all vaccine doses given in this country. Still, the single-dose inoculation, which doesn’t require ultra-cold storage, has been important for reaching people in rural areas, through mobile clinics, at colleges and primary care offices, and in vulnerable populations – those who are incarcerated or homeless.
The FDA says it has received reports of 100 cases of GBS after the Johnson & Johnson vaccine in its Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System database through the end of June. The cases are still under investigation.
To date, more than 12 million doses of the vaccine have been administered, making the rate of GBS 8.1 cases for every million doses administered.
Although it is still extremely rare, that’s above the expected background rate of GBS of 1.6 cases for every million people, said Grace Lee, MD, a Stanford, Calif., pediatrician who chairs the ACIP’s Vaccine Safety Technical Work Group.
So far, most GBS cases (61%) have been among men. The midpoint age of the cases was 57 years. The average time to onset was 14 days, and 98% of cases occurred within 42 days of the shot. Facial paralysis has been associated with an estimated 30%-50% of cases. One person, who had heart failure, high blood pressure, and diabetes, has died.
Still, the benefits of the vaccine far outweigh its risks. For every million doses given to people over age 50, the vaccine prevents nearly 7,500 COVID-19 hospitalizations and nearly 100 deaths in women, and more than 13,000 COVID-19 hospitalizations and more than 2,400 deaths in men.
Rates of GBS after the mRNA vaccines made by Pfizer and Moderna were around 1 case for every 1 million doses given, which is not above the rate that would be expected without vaccination.
The link to the Johnson & Johnson vaccine prompted the FDA to add a warning to the vaccine’s patient safety information on July 12.
Also in July, the European Medicines Agency recommended a similar warning for the product information of the AstraZeneca vaccine Vaxzevria, which relies on similar technology.
Good against variants
Johnson & Johnson also presented new information showing its vaccine maintained high levels of neutralizing antibodies against four of the so-called “variants of concern” – Alpha, Gamma, Beta, and Delta. The protection generated by the vaccine lasted for at least 8 months after the shot, the company said.
“We’re still learning about the duration of protection and the breadth of coverage against this evolving variant landscape for each of the authorized vaccines,” said Mathai Mammen, MD, PhD, global head of research and development at Janssen, the company that makes the vaccine for J&J.
The company also said that its vaccine generated very strong T-cell responses. T cells destroy infected cells and, along with antibodies, are an important part of the body’s immune response.
Antibody levels and T-cell responses are markers for immunity. Measuring these levels isn’t the same as proving that shots can fend off an infection.
It’s still unclear exactly which component of the immune response is most important for fighting off COVID-19.
Dr. Mammen said the companies are still gathering that clinical data, and would present it soon.
“We will have a better view of the clinical efficacy in the coming weeks,” he said.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Despite recent reports of Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) after the Johnson & Johnson vaccine,
The company also presented new data suggesting that the shots generate strong immune responses against circulating variants and that antibodies generated by the vaccine stay elevated for at least 8 months.
Members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) did not vote, but discussed and affirmed their support for recent decisions by the Food and Drug Administration and CDC to update patient information about the very low risk of GBS that appears to be associated with the vaccine, but to continue offering the vaccine to people in the United States.
The Johnson & Johnson shot has been a minor player in the U.S. vaccination campaign, accounting for less than 4% of all vaccine doses given in this country. Still, the single-dose inoculation, which doesn’t require ultra-cold storage, has been important for reaching people in rural areas, through mobile clinics, at colleges and primary care offices, and in vulnerable populations – those who are incarcerated or homeless.
The FDA says it has received reports of 100 cases of GBS after the Johnson & Johnson vaccine in its Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System database through the end of June. The cases are still under investigation.
To date, more than 12 million doses of the vaccine have been administered, making the rate of GBS 8.1 cases for every million doses administered.
Although it is still extremely rare, that’s above the expected background rate of GBS of 1.6 cases for every million people, said Grace Lee, MD, a Stanford, Calif., pediatrician who chairs the ACIP’s Vaccine Safety Technical Work Group.
So far, most GBS cases (61%) have been among men. The midpoint age of the cases was 57 years. The average time to onset was 14 days, and 98% of cases occurred within 42 days of the shot. Facial paralysis has been associated with an estimated 30%-50% of cases. One person, who had heart failure, high blood pressure, and diabetes, has died.
Still, the benefits of the vaccine far outweigh its risks. For every million doses given to people over age 50, the vaccine prevents nearly 7,500 COVID-19 hospitalizations and nearly 100 deaths in women, and more than 13,000 COVID-19 hospitalizations and more than 2,400 deaths in men.
Rates of GBS after the mRNA vaccines made by Pfizer and Moderna were around 1 case for every 1 million doses given, which is not above the rate that would be expected without vaccination.
The link to the Johnson & Johnson vaccine prompted the FDA to add a warning to the vaccine’s patient safety information on July 12.
Also in July, the European Medicines Agency recommended a similar warning for the product information of the AstraZeneca vaccine Vaxzevria, which relies on similar technology.
Good against variants
Johnson & Johnson also presented new information showing its vaccine maintained high levels of neutralizing antibodies against four of the so-called “variants of concern” – Alpha, Gamma, Beta, and Delta. The protection generated by the vaccine lasted for at least 8 months after the shot, the company said.
“We’re still learning about the duration of protection and the breadth of coverage against this evolving variant landscape for each of the authorized vaccines,” said Mathai Mammen, MD, PhD, global head of research and development at Janssen, the company that makes the vaccine for J&J.
The company also said that its vaccine generated very strong T-cell responses. T cells destroy infected cells and, along with antibodies, are an important part of the body’s immune response.
Antibody levels and T-cell responses are markers for immunity. Measuring these levels isn’t the same as proving that shots can fend off an infection.
It’s still unclear exactly which component of the immune response is most important for fighting off COVID-19.
Dr. Mammen said the companies are still gathering that clinical data, and would present it soon.
“We will have a better view of the clinical efficacy in the coming weeks,” he said.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Face mask–related injuries rose dramatically in 2020
How dramatic? The number of mask-related injuries treated in U.S. emergency departments averaged about 200 per year from 2016 to 2019. In 2020, that figure soared to 4,976 – an increase of almost 2,400%, Gerald McGwin Jr., PhD, and associates said in a research letter published in the Journal to the American Academy of Dermatology.
“Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic the use of respiratory protection equipment was largely limited to healthcare and industrial settings. As [face mask] use by the general population increased, so too have reports of dermatologic reactions,” said Dr. McGwin and associates of the department of epidemiology at the University of Alabama at Birmingham.
Dermatitis was the most common mask-related injury treated last year, affecting 28.3% of those presenting to EDs, followed by lacerations at 10.1%. Injuries were more common in women than men, but while and black patients “were equally represented,” they noted, based on data from the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System, which includes about 100 hospitals and EDs.
Most injuries were caused by rashes/allergic reactions (38%) from prolonged use, poorly fitting masks (19%), and obscured vision (14%). “There was a small (5%) but meaningful number of injuries, all among children, attributable to consuming pieces of a mask or inserting dismantled pieces of a mask into body orifices,” the investigators said.
Guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is available “to aid in the choice and proper fit of face masks,” they wrote, and “increased awareness of these resources [could] minimize the future occurrence of mask-related injuries.”
There was no funding source for the study, and the investigators did not declare any conflicts of interest.
How dramatic? The number of mask-related injuries treated in U.S. emergency departments averaged about 200 per year from 2016 to 2019. In 2020, that figure soared to 4,976 – an increase of almost 2,400%, Gerald McGwin Jr., PhD, and associates said in a research letter published in the Journal to the American Academy of Dermatology.
“Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic the use of respiratory protection equipment was largely limited to healthcare and industrial settings. As [face mask] use by the general population increased, so too have reports of dermatologic reactions,” said Dr. McGwin and associates of the department of epidemiology at the University of Alabama at Birmingham.
Dermatitis was the most common mask-related injury treated last year, affecting 28.3% of those presenting to EDs, followed by lacerations at 10.1%. Injuries were more common in women than men, but while and black patients “were equally represented,” they noted, based on data from the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System, which includes about 100 hospitals and EDs.
Most injuries were caused by rashes/allergic reactions (38%) from prolonged use, poorly fitting masks (19%), and obscured vision (14%). “There was a small (5%) but meaningful number of injuries, all among children, attributable to consuming pieces of a mask or inserting dismantled pieces of a mask into body orifices,” the investigators said.
Guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is available “to aid in the choice and proper fit of face masks,” they wrote, and “increased awareness of these resources [could] minimize the future occurrence of mask-related injuries.”
There was no funding source for the study, and the investigators did not declare any conflicts of interest.
How dramatic? The number of mask-related injuries treated in U.S. emergency departments averaged about 200 per year from 2016 to 2019. In 2020, that figure soared to 4,976 – an increase of almost 2,400%, Gerald McGwin Jr., PhD, and associates said in a research letter published in the Journal to the American Academy of Dermatology.
“Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic the use of respiratory protection equipment was largely limited to healthcare and industrial settings. As [face mask] use by the general population increased, so too have reports of dermatologic reactions,” said Dr. McGwin and associates of the department of epidemiology at the University of Alabama at Birmingham.
Dermatitis was the most common mask-related injury treated last year, affecting 28.3% of those presenting to EDs, followed by lacerations at 10.1%. Injuries were more common in women than men, but while and black patients “were equally represented,” they noted, based on data from the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System, which includes about 100 hospitals and EDs.
Most injuries were caused by rashes/allergic reactions (38%) from prolonged use, poorly fitting masks (19%), and obscured vision (14%). “There was a small (5%) but meaningful number of injuries, all among children, attributable to consuming pieces of a mask or inserting dismantled pieces of a mask into body orifices,” the investigators said.
Guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is available “to aid in the choice and proper fit of face masks,” they wrote, and “increased awareness of these resources [could] minimize the future occurrence of mask-related injuries.”
There was no funding source for the study, and the investigators did not declare any conflicts of interest.
FROM THE JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF DERMATOLOGY
Dapagliflozin safe, protective in advanced kidney disease
Patients with stage 4 chronic kidney disease (CKD) who were in the DAPA-CKD trial had cardiorenal benefits from dapagliflozin that were similar to those of patients in the overall trial, with no added safety signal.
DAPA-CKD (Dapagliflozin and Prevention of Adverse Outcomes in Chronic Kidney Disease) was a landmark study of more than 4,000 patients with CKD, with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of 25-75 mL/min per 1.73 m2 and albuminuria with/without type 2 diabetes.
The primary results showed that patients who received the sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor dapagliflozin for a median of 2.4 years were significantly less likely to have worsening kidney disease or die from all causes than were patients who received placebo.
“This prespecified subanalysis of people with an eGFR < 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 [stage 4 CKD] in the DAPA-CKD study shows first, that in this very vulnerable population, use of the SGLT2 inhibitor is safe,” said Chantal Mathieu, MD, PhD.
Furthermore, there was no signal whatsoever of more adverse events and even a trend to fewer events, she said in an email to this news organization.
The analysis also showed that “although now in small numbers (around 300 each in the treated group vs. placebo group), there is no suggestion that the protective effect of dapagliflozin on the renal and cardiovascular front would not happen in this group” with advanced CKD. The efficacy findings just missed statistical significance, noted Dr. Mathieu, of Catholic University, Leuven, Belgium, who was not involved in the study.
Although dapagliflozin is now approved for treating patients with CKD who are at risk of kidney disease progression (on the basis of the DAPA-CKD results), guidelines have not yet been updated to reflect this, lead investigator Glenn M. Chertow, MD, MPH, of Stanford (Calif.) University, told this news organization in an email.
“For clinicians,” Dr. Mathieu said, “this is now the absolute reassurance that we do not have to stop an SGLT2 inhibitor in people with eGFR < 30 mL/min for safety reasons and that we should maintain them at these values for renal and cardiovascular protection!
“I absolutely hope labels will change soon to reflect these observations (and indeed movement on that front is happening),” she continued.
“The American Diabetes Association/European Association for the Study of Diabetes consensus on glucose-lowering therapies in type 2 diabetes already advocated keeping these agents until eGFR 30 mL/min (on the basis of evidence in 2019),” Dr. Mathieu added, “but this study will probably push the statements even further.”
“Of note,” she pointed out, “at these low eGFRs, the glucose-lowering potential of the SGLT2 inhibitor is negligible.”
Dapagliflozin risks and benefits in advanced CKD
Based on the DAPA-CKD study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine Oct. 8, 2020, the Food and Drug Administration expanded the indication for dapagliflozin (Farxiga, AstraZeneca) in April of 2021.
However, relatively little is known about the safety and efficacy of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with advanced CKD, who are particularly vulnerable to cardiovascular events and progressive kidney failure, Dr. Chertow and colleagues wrote.
The DAPA-CKD trial randomized 4,304 patients with CKD 1:1 to dapagliflozin 10 mg/day or placebo, including 624 patients (14%) who had eGFR < 30 mL/min per 1.73 m2 and albuminuria at baseline.
Patients in the subgroup with advanced CKD had a mean age of 62 years, and 37% were female. About two-thirds had type 2 diabetes and about one-third had cardiovascular disease.
A total of 293 patients received dapagliflozin and 331 patients received placebo.
During a median follow-up of 2.4 years, patients who received dapagliflozin as opposed to placebo had a lower risk of the primary efficacy outcome – a composite of a 50% or greater sustained decline in eGFR, end-stage kidney disease, or death from cardiovascular or renal causes (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.53-1.02).
In secondary efficacy outcomes, patients who received dapagliflozin as opposed to placebo also had a lower risk of the following:
- A renal composite outcome – a ≥ 50% sustained decline in eGFR, end-stage kidney disease, or death from renal causes (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.49-1.02).
- A cardiovascular composite outcome comprising cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.45-1.53).
- All-cause mortality (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.39 to 1.21).
The eGFR slope declined by 2.15 mL/min per 1.73 m2 per year and by 3.38 mL/min per 1.73 m2 per year in the dapagliflozin and placebo groups, respectively (P = .005).
“The trial was not powered to detect a statistically significant difference in the primary and key secondary endpoints in modest-sized subgroups,” the researchers noted.
The researchers limited their safety analysis to serious adverse events or symptoms of volume depletion, kidney-related events, major hypoglycemia, bone fractures, amputations, and potential diabetic ketoacidosis.
There was no evidence of increased risk of these adverse events in patients who received dapagliflozin.
The subanalysis of the DAPA-CKD trial was published July 16 in the Journal of the American Society of Nephrology.
The study was funded by AstraZeneca. Dr. Chertow has received fees from AstraZeneca for the DAPA-CKD trial steering committee. The disclosures of the other authors are listed in the article. Dr. Mathieu has served on the advisory panel/speakers bureau for AstraZeneca. Dr. Chertow and Dr. Mathieu also have financial relationships with many other pharmaceutical companies.
Patients with stage 4 chronic kidney disease (CKD) who were in the DAPA-CKD trial had cardiorenal benefits from dapagliflozin that were similar to those of patients in the overall trial, with no added safety signal.
DAPA-CKD (Dapagliflozin and Prevention of Adverse Outcomes in Chronic Kidney Disease) was a landmark study of more than 4,000 patients with CKD, with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of 25-75 mL/min per 1.73 m2 and albuminuria with/without type 2 diabetes.
The primary results showed that patients who received the sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor dapagliflozin for a median of 2.4 years were significantly less likely to have worsening kidney disease or die from all causes than were patients who received placebo.
“This prespecified subanalysis of people with an eGFR < 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 [stage 4 CKD] in the DAPA-CKD study shows first, that in this very vulnerable population, use of the SGLT2 inhibitor is safe,” said Chantal Mathieu, MD, PhD.
Furthermore, there was no signal whatsoever of more adverse events and even a trend to fewer events, she said in an email to this news organization.
The analysis also showed that “although now in small numbers (around 300 each in the treated group vs. placebo group), there is no suggestion that the protective effect of dapagliflozin on the renal and cardiovascular front would not happen in this group” with advanced CKD. The efficacy findings just missed statistical significance, noted Dr. Mathieu, of Catholic University, Leuven, Belgium, who was not involved in the study.
Although dapagliflozin is now approved for treating patients with CKD who are at risk of kidney disease progression (on the basis of the DAPA-CKD results), guidelines have not yet been updated to reflect this, lead investigator Glenn M. Chertow, MD, MPH, of Stanford (Calif.) University, told this news organization in an email.
“For clinicians,” Dr. Mathieu said, “this is now the absolute reassurance that we do not have to stop an SGLT2 inhibitor in people with eGFR < 30 mL/min for safety reasons and that we should maintain them at these values for renal and cardiovascular protection!
“I absolutely hope labels will change soon to reflect these observations (and indeed movement on that front is happening),” she continued.
“The American Diabetes Association/European Association for the Study of Diabetes consensus on glucose-lowering therapies in type 2 diabetes already advocated keeping these agents until eGFR 30 mL/min (on the basis of evidence in 2019),” Dr. Mathieu added, “but this study will probably push the statements even further.”
“Of note,” she pointed out, “at these low eGFRs, the glucose-lowering potential of the SGLT2 inhibitor is negligible.”
Dapagliflozin risks and benefits in advanced CKD
Based on the DAPA-CKD study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine Oct. 8, 2020, the Food and Drug Administration expanded the indication for dapagliflozin (Farxiga, AstraZeneca) in April of 2021.
However, relatively little is known about the safety and efficacy of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with advanced CKD, who are particularly vulnerable to cardiovascular events and progressive kidney failure, Dr. Chertow and colleagues wrote.
The DAPA-CKD trial randomized 4,304 patients with CKD 1:1 to dapagliflozin 10 mg/day or placebo, including 624 patients (14%) who had eGFR < 30 mL/min per 1.73 m2 and albuminuria at baseline.
Patients in the subgroup with advanced CKD had a mean age of 62 years, and 37% were female. About two-thirds had type 2 diabetes and about one-third had cardiovascular disease.
A total of 293 patients received dapagliflozin and 331 patients received placebo.
During a median follow-up of 2.4 years, patients who received dapagliflozin as opposed to placebo had a lower risk of the primary efficacy outcome – a composite of a 50% or greater sustained decline in eGFR, end-stage kidney disease, or death from cardiovascular or renal causes (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.53-1.02).
In secondary efficacy outcomes, patients who received dapagliflozin as opposed to placebo also had a lower risk of the following:
- A renal composite outcome – a ≥ 50% sustained decline in eGFR, end-stage kidney disease, or death from renal causes (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.49-1.02).
- A cardiovascular composite outcome comprising cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.45-1.53).
- All-cause mortality (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.39 to 1.21).
The eGFR slope declined by 2.15 mL/min per 1.73 m2 per year and by 3.38 mL/min per 1.73 m2 per year in the dapagliflozin and placebo groups, respectively (P = .005).
“The trial was not powered to detect a statistically significant difference in the primary and key secondary endpoints in modest-sized subgroups,” the researchers noted.
The researchers limited their safety analysis to serious adverse events or symptoms of volume depletion, kidney-related events, major hypoglycemia, bone fractures, amputations, and potential diabetic ketoacidosis.
There was no evidence of increased risk of these adverse events in patients who received dapagliflozin.
The subanalysis of the DAPA-CKD trial was published July 16 in the Journal of the American Society of Nephrology.
The study was funded by AstraZeneca. Dr. Chertow has received fees from AstraZeneca for the DAPA-CKD trial steering committee. The disclosures of the other authors are listed in the article. Dr. Mathieu has served on the advisory panel/speakers bureau for AstraZeneca. Dr. Chertow and Dr. Mathieu also have financial relationships with many other pharmaceutical companies.
Patients with stage 4 chronic kidney disease (CKD) who were in the DAPA-CKD trial had cardiorenal benefits from dapagliflozin that were similar to those of patients in the overall trial, with no added safety signal.
DAPA-CKD (Dapagliflozin and Prevention of Adverse Outcomes in Chronic Kidney Disease) was a landmark study of more than 4,000 patients with CKD, with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of 25-75 mL/min per 1.73 m2 and albuminuria with/without type 2 diabetes.
The primary results showed that patients who received the sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor dapagliflozin for a median of 2.4 years were significantly less likely to have worsening kidney disease or die from all causes than were patients who received placebo.
“This prespecified subanalysis of people with an eGFR < 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 [stage 4 CKD] in the DAPA-CKD study shows first, that in this very vulnerable population, use of the SGLT2 inhibitor is safe,” said Chantal Mathieu, MD, PhD.
Furthermore, there was no signal whatsoever of more adverse events and even a trend to fewer events, she said in an email to this news organization.
The analysis also showed that “although now in small numbers (around 300 each in the treated group vs. placebo group), there is no suggestion that the protective effect of dapagliflozin on the renal and cardiovascular front would not happen in this group” with advanced CKD. The efficacy findings just missed statistical significance, noted Dr. Mathieu, of Catholic University, Leuven, Belgium, who was not involved in the study.
Although dapagliflozin is now approved for treating patients with CKD who are at risk of kidney disease progression (on the basis of the DAPA-CKD results), guidelines have not yet been updated to reflect this, lead investigator Glenn M. Chertow, MD, MPH, of Stanford (Calif.) University, told this news organization in an email.
“For clinicians,” Dr. Mathieu said, “this is now the absolute reassurance that we do not have to stop an SGLT2 inhibitor in people with eGFR < 30 mL/min for safety reasons and that we should maintain them at these values for renal and cardiovascular protection!
“I absolutely hope labels will change soon to reflect these observations (and indeed movement on that front is happening),” she continued.
“The American Diabetes Association/European Association for the Study of Diabetes consensus on glucose-lowering therapies in type 2 diabetes already advocated keeping these agents until eGFR 30 mL/min (on the basis of evidence in 2019),” Dr. Mathieu added, “but this study will probably push the statements even further.”
“Of note,” she pointed out, “at these low eGFRs, the glucose-lowering potential of the SGLT2 inhibitor is negligible.”
Dapagliflozin risks and benefits in advanced CKD
Based on the DAPA-CKD study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine Oct. 8, 2020, the Food and Drug Administration expanded the indication for dapagliflozin (Farxiga, AstraZeneca) in April of 2021.
However, relatively little is known about the safety and efficacy of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with advanced CKD, who are particularly vulnerable to cardiovascular events and progressive kidney failure, Dr. Chertow and colleagues wrote.
The DAPA-CKD trial randomized 4,304 patients with CKD 1:1 to dapagliflozin 10 mg/day or placebo, including 624 patients (14%) who had eGFR < 30 mL/min per 1.73 m2 and albuminuria at baseline.
Patients in the subgroup with advanced CKD had a mean age of 62 years, and 37% were female. About two-thirds had type 2 diabetes and about one-third had cardiovascular disease.
A total of 293 patients received dapagliflozin and 331 patients received placebo.
During a median follow-up of 2.4 years, patients who received dapagliflozin as opposed to placebo had a lower risk of the primary efficacy outcome – a composite of a 50% or greater sustained decline in eGFR, end-stage kidney disease, or death from cardiovascular or renal causes (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.53-1.02).
In secondary efficacy outcomes, patients who received dapagliflozin as opposed to placebo also had a lower risk of the following:
- A renal composite outcome – a ≥ 50% sustained decline in eGFR, end-stage kidney disease, or death from renal causes (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.49-1.02).
- A cardiovascular composite outcome comprising cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.45-1.53).
- All-cause mortality (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.39 to 1.21).
The eGFR slope declined by 2.15 mL/min per 1.73 m2 per year and by 3.38 mL/min per 1.73 m2 per year in the dapagliflozin and placebo groups, respectively (P = .005).
“The trial was not powered to detect a statistically significant difference in the primary and key secondary endpoints in modest-sized subgroups,” the researchers noted.
The researchers limited their safety analysis to serious adverse events or symptoms of volume depletion, kidney-related events, major hypoglycemia, bone fractures, amputations, and potential diabetic ketoacidosis.
There was no evidence of increased risk of these adverse events in patients who received dapagliflozin.
The subanalysis of the DAPA-CKD trial was published July 16 in the Journal of the American Society of Nephrology.
The study was funded by AstraZeneca. Dr. Chertow has received fees from AstraZeneca for the DAPA-CKD trial steering committee. The disclosures of the other authors are listed in the article. Dr. Mathieu has served on the advisory panel/speakers bureau for AstraZeneca. Dr. Chertow and Dr. Mathieu also have financial relationships with many other pharmaceutical companies.
FROM THE JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF NEPHROLOGY
Delta variant among the most infectious respiratory viruses, CDC says
.
“Today, I want to speak about our need to come together against a common enemy. SARS-CoV-2 and the Delta variant is spreading with incredible efficiency, and now represents more than 83% of the virus circulating in the U.S.,” Dr. Walensky said at a news briefing July 22. “It is one of the most infectious respiratory viruses we know of and that I have seen in my 20-year career.”
Dr. Walensky said there were 46,318 cases of COVID-19 reported July 21, with a 7-day average of 37,700 cases per day -- up 53% from the previous week. Hospital admissions average about 3,500 per day, an increase of 32%. The 7-day average of deaths is 237 -- a 19% increase from the previous week.
Meanwhile, there are now 162 million Americans who are fully vaccinated against COVID-19.
Areas with low vaccination coverage continue to have the highest case numbers, she reported, with unvaccinated people accounting for 97% of hospitalizations and deaths.
But there may be early signs of progress. The four states with the highest case rates -- Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, and Nevada -- had a higher rate of new vaccinations, compared with the national average over the past week, White House COVID-19 Response Coordinator Jeff Zients said.
He also announced that the administration will send $100 million to nearly 2,000 rural health clinics to support vaccine education and outreach efforts.
Dr. Walensky said despite the rising numbers, the CDC mask guidance remains the same, but she encouraged vaccinated people to wear masks if they choose.
“Whether you are vaccinated or not, please know we together are not out of the woods yet,” she said. “We are yet at another pivotal moment in this pandemic, with cases rising again and hospitals reaching their capacity in some areas.”
A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.
.
“Today, I want to speak about our need to come together against a common enemy. SARS-CoV-2 and the Delta variant is spreading with incredible efficiency, and now represents more than 83% of the virus circulating in the U.S.,” Dr. Walensky said at a news briefing July 22. “It is one of the most infectious respiratory viruses we know of and that I have seen in my 20-year career.”
Dr. Walensky said there were 46,318 cases of COVID-19 reported July 21, with a 7-day average of 37,700 cases per day -- up 53% from the previous week. Hospital admissions average about 3,500 per day, an increase of 32%. The 7-day average of deaths is 237 -- a 19% increase from the previous week.
Meanwhile, there are now 162 million Americans who are fully vaccinated against COVID-19.
Areas with low vaccination coverage continue to have the highest case numbers, she reported, with unvaccinated people accounting for 97% of hospitalizations and deaths.
But there may be early signs of progress. The four states with the highest case rates -- Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, and Nevada -- had a higher rate of new vaccinations, compared with the national average over the past week, White House COVID-19 Response Coordinator Jeff Zients said.
He also announced that the administration will send $100 million to nearly 2,000 rural health clinics to support vaccine education and outreach efforts.
Dr. Walensky said despite the rising numbers, the CDC mask guidance remains the same, but she encouraged vaccinated people to wear masks if they choose.
“Whether you are vaccinated or not, please know we together are not out of the woods yet,” she said. “We are yet at another pivotal moment in this pandemic, with cases rising again and hospitals reaching their capacity in some areas.”
A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.
.
“Today, I want to speak about our need to come together against a common enemy. SARS-CoV-2 and the Delta variant is spreading with incredible efficiency, and now represents more than 83% of the virus circulating in the U.S.,” Dr. Walensky said at a news briefing July 22. “It is one of the most infectious respiratory viruses we know of and that I have seen in my 20-year career.”
Dr. Walensky said there were 46,318 cases of COVID-19 reported July 21, with a 7-day average of 37,700 cases per day -- up 53% from the previous week. Hospital admissions average about 3,500 per day, an increase of 32%. The 7-day average of deaths is 237 -- a 19% increase from the previous week.
Meanwhile, there are now 162 million Americans who are fully vaccinated against COVID-19.
Areas with low vaccination coverage continue to have the highest case numbers, she reported, with unvaccinated people accounting for 97% of hospitalizations and deaths.
But there may be early signs of progress. The four states with the highest case rates -- Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, and Nevada -- had a higher rate of new vaccinations, compared with the national average over the past week, White House COVID-19 Response Coordinator Jeff Zients said.
He also announced that the administration will send $100 million to nearly 2,000 rural health clinics to support vaccine education and outreach efforts.
Dr. Walensky said despite the rising numbers, the CDC mask guidance remains the same, but she encouraged vaccinated people to wear masks if they choose.
“Whether you are vaccinated or not, please know we together are not out of the woods yet,” she said. “We are yet at another pivotal moment in this pandemic, with cases rising again and hospitals reaching their capacity in some areas.”
A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.
Expert proposes rethinking the classification of SJS/TEN
In the opinion of Neil H. Shear, MD, a stepwise approach is the best way to diagnose possible drug-induced skin disease and determine the root cause.
“Often, we need to think of more than one cause,” he said during the annual meeting of the Society for Pediatric Dermatology. “It could be drug X. It could be drug Y. It could be contrast media. We must think broadly and pay special attention to skin of color, overlapping syndromes, and the changing diagnostic assessment over time.”
His suggested diagnostic triangle includes appearance of the rash or lesion(s), systemic impact, and histology. “The first is the appearance,” said Dr. Shear, professor emeritus of dermatology, clinical pharmacology and toxicology, and medicine at the University of Toronto. “Is it exanthem? Is it blistering? Don’t just say drug ‘rash.’ That doesn’t work. You need to know if there are systemic features, and sometimes histologic information can change your approach or diagnosis, but not as often as one might think,” he said, noting that, in his view, the two main factors are appearance and systemic impact.
The presence of fever is a hallmark of systemic problems, he continued, “so if you see fever, you know you’re probably going to be dealing with a complex reaction, so we need to know the morphology.” Consider whether it is simple exanthem (a mild, uncomplicated rash) or complex exanthem (drug rash with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms or fever, malaise, and adenopathy).
As for other morphologies, urticarial lesions could be urticaria or a serum sickness-like reaction, pustular lesions could be acneiform or acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis, while
Dr. Shear considers SJS/TEN as a spectrum of blistering disease, “because there’s not a single diagnosis,” he said. “There’s a spectrum, if you will, depending on how advanced people are in their disease.” He coauthored a 1991 report describing eight cases of mycoplasma and Stevens-Johnson syndrome. “I was surprised at how long that stood up as about the only paper in that area,” he said. “But there’s much more happening now with a proliferation of terms,” he added, referring to MIRM (Mycoplasma pneumonia–induced rash and mucositis), RIME (reactive infectious mucocutaneous eruption); and Fuchs syndrome, or SJS without skin lesions.
What was not appreciated in the early classification of SJS, he continued, was a “side basket” of bullous erythema multiforme. “We didn’t know what to call it,” he said. “At one point we called it bullous erythema multiforme. At another point we called it erythema multiforme major. We just didn’t know what it was.”
The appearance and systemic effects of SJS comprise what he termed SJS type 2 – or the early stages of TEN. Taken together, he refers to these two conditions as TEN Spectrum, or TENS. “One of the traps is that TENS can look like varicella, and vice versa, especially in very dark brown or black skin,” Dr. Shear said. “You have to be careful. A biopsy might be worthwhile. Acute lupus has the pathology of TENS but the patients are not as systemically ill as true TENS.”
In 2011, Japanese researchers reported on 38 cases of SJS associated with M. pneumoniae, and 78 cases of drug-induced SJS. They found that 66% of adult patients with M. pneumoniae–associated SJS developed mucocutaneous lesions and fever/respiratory symptoms on the same day, mostly shortness of breath and cough. In contrast, most of the patients aged under 20 years developed fever/respiratory symptoms before mucocutaneous involvement.
“The big clinical differentiator between drug-induced SJS and mycoplasma-induced SJS was respiratory disorder,” said Dr. Shear, who was not affiliated with the study. “That means you’re probably looking at something that’s mycoplasma related [when respiratory problems are present]. Even if you can’t prove it’s mycoplasma related, that probably needs to be the target of your therapy. The idea ... is to make sure it’s clear at the end. One, so they get better, and two, so that we’re not giving drugs needlessly when it was really mycoplasma.”
Noting that HLA-B*15:02 is a marker for carbamazepine-induced SJS and TEN, he said, “a positive HLA test can support the diagnosis, confirm the suspected offending drug, and is valuable for familial genetic counseling.”
As for treatment of SJS, TEN, and other cytotoxic T-lymphocyte–mediated severe cutaneous adverse reactions, a randomized Japanese clinical trial evaluating prednisolone 1-1.5 mg/kg/day IV versus etanercept 25-50 mg subcutaneously twice per week in 96 patients with SJS-TEN found that etanercept decreased the mortality rate by 8.3%. In addition, etanercept reduced skin healing time, when compared with prednisolone (a median of 14 vs. 19 days, respectively; P = .010), and was associated with a lower incidence of GI hemorrhage (2.6% vs. 18.2%, respectively; P = .03).
Dr. Shear said that he would like to see better therapeutics for severe, complex patients. “After leaving the hospital, people with SJS or people with TEN need to have ongoing care, consultation, and explanation so they and their families know what drugs are safe in the future.”
Dr. Shear disclosed that he has been a consultant to AbbVie, Amgen, Bausch Medicine, Novartis, Sanofi-Genzyme, UCB, LEO Pharma, Otsuka, Janssen, Alpha Laboratories, Lilly, ChemoCentryx, Vivoryon, Galderma, Innovaderm, Chromocell, and Kyowa Kirin.
In the opinion of Neil H. Shear, MD, a stepwise approach is the best way to diagnose possible drug-induced skin disease and determine the root cause.
“Often, we need to think of more than one cause,” he said during the annual meeting of the Society for Pediatric Dermatology. “It could be drug X. It could be drug Y. It could be contrast media. We must think broadly and pay special attention to skin of color, overlapping syndromes, and the changing diagnostic assessment over time.”
His suggested diagnostic triangle includes appearance of the rash or lesion(s), systemic impact, and histology. “The first is the appearance,” said Dr. Shear, professor emeritus of dermatology, clinical pharmacology and toxicology, and medicine at the University of Toronto. “Is it exanthem? Is it blistering? Don’t just say drug ‘rash.’ That doesn’t work. You need to know if there are systemic features, and sometimes histologic information can change your approach or diagnosis, but not as often as one might think,” he said, noting that, in his view, the two main factors are appearance and systemic impact.
The presence of fever is a hallmark of systemic problems, he continued, “so if you see fever, you know you’re probably going to be dealing with a complex reaction, so we need to know the morphology.” Consider whether it is simple exanthem (a mild, uncomplicated rash) or complex exanthem (drug rash with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms or fever, malaise, and adenopathy).
As for other morphologies, urticarial lesions could be urticaria or a serum sickness-like reaction, pustular lesions could be acneiform or acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis, while
Dr. Shear considers SJS/TEN as a spectrum of blistering disease, “because there’s not a single diagnosis,” he said. “There’s a spectrum, if you will, depending on how advanced people are in their disease.” He coauthored a 1991 report describing eight cases of mycoplasma and Stevens-Johnson syndrome. “I was surprised at how long that stood up as about the only paper in that area,” he said. “But there’s much more happening now with a proliferation of terms,” he added, referring to MIRM (Mycoplasma pneumonia–induced rash and mucositis), RIME (reactive infectious mucocutaneous eruption); and Fuchs syndrome, or SJS without skin lesions.
What was not appreciated in the early classification of SJS, he continued, was a “side basket” of bullous erythema multiforme. “We didn’t know what to call it,” he said. “At one point we called it bullous erythema multiforme. At another point we called it erythema multiforme major. We just didn’t know what it was.”
The appearance and systemic effects of SJS comprise what he termed SJS type 2 – or the early stages of TEN. Taken together, he refers to these two conditions as TEN Spectrum, or TENS. “One of the traps is that TENS can look like varicella, and vice versa, especially in very dark brown or black skin,” Dr. Shear said. “You have to be careful. A biopsy might be worthwhile. Acute lupus has the pathology of TENS but the patients are not as systemically ill as true TENS.”
In 2011, Japanese researchers reported on 38 cases of SJS associated with M. pneumoniae, and 78 cases of drug-induced SJS. They found that 66% of adult patients with M. pneumoniae–associated SJS developed mucocutaneous lesions and fever/respiratory symptoms on the same day, mostly shortness of breath and cough. In contrast, most of the patients aged under 20 years developed fever/respiratory symptoms before mucocutaneous involvement.
“The big clinical differentiator between drug-induced SJS and mycoplasma-induced SJS was respiratory disorder,” said Dr. Shear, who was not affiliated with the study. “That means you’re probably looking at something that’s mycoplasma related [when respiratory problems are present]. Even if you can’t prove it’s mycoplasma related, that probably needs to be the target of your therapy. The idea ... is to make sure it’s clear at the end. One, so they get better, and two, so that we’re not giving drugs needlessly when it was really mycoplasma.”
Noting that HLA-B*15:02 is a marker for carbamazepine-induced SJS and TEN, he said, “a positive HLA test can support the diagnosis, confirm the suspected offending drug, and is valuable for familial genetic counseling.”
As for treatment of SJS, TEN, and other cytotoxic T-lymphocyte–mediated severe cutaneous adverse reactions, a randomized Japanese clinical trial evaluating prednisolone 1-1.5 mg/kg/day IV versus etanercept 25-50 mg subcutaneously twice per week in 96 patients with SJS-TEN found that etanercept decreased the mortality rate by 8.3%. In addition, etanercept reduced skin healing time, when compared with prednisolone (a median of 14 vs. 19 days, respectively; P = .010), and was associated with a lower incidence of GI hemorrhage (2.6% vs. 18.2%, respectively; P = .03).
Dr. Shear said that he would like to see better therapeutics for severe, complex patients. “After leaving the hospital, people with SJS or people with TEN need to have ongoing care, consultation, and explanation so they and their families know what drugs are safe in the future.”
Dr. Shear disclosed that he has been a consultant to AbbVie, Amgen, Bausch Medicine, Novartis, Sanofi-Genzyme, UCB, LEO Pharma, Otsuka, Janssen, Alpha Laboratories, Lilly, ChemoCentryx, Vivoryon, Galderma, Innovaderm, Chromocell, and Kyowa Kirin.
In the opinion of Neil H. Shear, MD, a stepwise approach is the best way to diagnose possible drug-induced skin disease and determine the root cause.
“Often, we need to think of more than one cause,” he said during the annual meeting of the Society for Pediatric Dermatology. “It could be drug X. It could be drug Y. It could be contrast media. We must think broadly and pay special attention to skin of color, overlapping syndromes, and the changing diagnostic assessment over time.”
His suggested diagnostic triangle includes appearance of the rash or lesion(s), systemic impact, and histology. “The first is the appearance,” said Dr. Shear, professor emeritus of dermatology, clinical pharmacology and toxicology, and medicine at the University of Toronto. “Is it exanthem? Is it blistering? Don’t just say drug ‘rash.’ That doesn’t work. You need to know if there are systemic features, and sometimes histologic information can change your approach or diagnosis, but not as often as one might think,” he said, noting that, in his view, the two main factors are appearance and systemic impact.
The presence of fever is a hallmark of systemic problems, he continued, “so if you see fever, you know you’re probably going to be dealing with a complex reaction, so we need to know the morphology.” Consider whether it is simple exanthem (a mild, uncomplicated rash) or complex exanthem (drug rash with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms or fever, malaise, and adenopathy).
As for other morphologies, urticarial lesions could be urticaria or a serum sickness-like reaction, pustular lesions could be acneiform or acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis, while
Dr. Shear considers SJS/TEN as a spectrum of blistering disease, “because there’s not a single diagnosis,” he said. “There’s a spectrum, if you will, depending on how advanced people are in their disease.” He coauthored a 1991 report describing eight cases of mycoplasma and Stevens-Johnson syndrome. “I was surprised at how long that stood up as about the only paper in that area,” he said. “But there’s much more happening now with a proliferation of terms,” he added, referring to MIRM (Mycoplasma pneumonia–induced rash and mucositis), RIME (reactive infectious mucocutaneous eruption); and Fuchs syndrome, or SJS without skin lesions.
What was not appreciated in the early classification of SJS, he continued, was a “side basket” of bullous erythema multiforme. “We didn’t know what to call it,” he said. “At one point we called it bullous erythema multiforme. At another point we called it erythema multiforme major. We just didn’t know what it was.”
The appearance and systemic effects of SJS comprise what he termed SJS type 2 – or the early stages of TEN. Taken together, he refers to these two conditions as TEN Spectrum, or TENS. “One of the traps is that TENS can look like varicella, and vice versa, especially in very dark brown or black skin,” Dr. Shear said. “You have to be careful. A biopsy might be worthwhile. Acute lupus has the pathology of TENS but the patients are not as systemically ill as true TENS.”
In 2011, Japanese researchers reported on 38 cases of SJS associated with M. pneumoniae, and 78 cases of drug-induced SJS. They found that 66% of adult patients with M. pneumoniae–associated SJS developed mucocutaneous lesions and fever/respiratory symptoms on the same day, mostly shortness of breath and cough. In contrast, most of the patients aged under 20 years developed fever/respiratory symptoms before mucocutaneous involvement.
“The big clinical differentiator between drug-induced SJS and mycoplasma-induced SJS was respiratory disorder,” said Dr. Shear, who was not affiliated with the study. “That means you’re probably looking at something that’s mycoplasma related [when respiratory problems are present]. Even if you can’t prove it’s mycoplasma related, that probably needs to be the target of your therapy. The idea ... is to make sure it’s clear at the end. One, so they get better, and two, so that we’re not giving drugs needlessly when it was really mycoplasma.”
Noting that HLA-B*15:02 is a marker for carbamazepine-induced SJS and TEN, he said, “a positive HLA test can support the diagnosis, confirm the suspected offending drug, and is valuable for familial genetic counseling.”
As for treatment of SJS, TEN, and other cytotoxic T-lymphocyte–mediated severe cutaneous adverse reactions, a randomized Japanese clinical trial evaluating prednisolone 1-1.5 mg/kg/day IV versus etanercept 25-50 mg subcutaneously twice per week in 96 patients with SJS-TEN found that etanercept decreased the mortality rate by 8.3%. In addition, etanercept reduced skin healing time, when compared with prednisolone (a median of 14 vs. 19 days, respectively; P = .010), and was associated with a lower incidence of GI hemorrhage (2.6% vs. 18.2%, respectively; P = .03).
Dr. Shear said that he would like to see better therapeutics for severe, complex patients. “After leaving the hospital, people with SJS or people with TEN need to have ongoing care, consultation, and explanation so they and their families know what drugs are safe in the future.”
Dr. Shear disclosed that he has been a consultant to AbbVie, Amgen, Bausch Medicine, Novartis, Sanofi-Genzyme, UCB, LEO Pharma, Otsuka, Janssen, Alpha Laboratories, Lilly, ChemoCentryx, Vivoryon, Galderma, Innovaderm, Chromocell, and Kyowa Kirin.
FROM SPD 2021
Lucid abductions and Candy Crush addiction
I dream of alien abductions
There he goes! It’s lunchtime and your colleague Tom is going on and on again about that time he was abducted by aliens. It sounds ridiculous, but he does make some convincing arguments. Tom thinks it was real, but could it have all just been in his head?
Lucid dreaming may help explain alleged alien abductions. During a lucid dream, people know that they’re dreaming, and can also have some control over how the dreams play out. During some dream states, a person can feel intense sensations, such as terror and paralysis, so it’s no wonder these dreams feel so real.
In a recent study, scientists encouraged 152 participants who had self-identified as lucid dreamers to dream about aliens. Many (75%) of the participants were able to dream about alien encounters, and 15% “achieved relatively realistic experiences,” the investigators reported.
So cut Tom some slack. He’s not crazy, he might just have lucid dreaming privileges. Tell him he should dream about something more fun, like a vacation in the Bahamas.
Follow your heart: Drink more coffee
It seems like the world is divided into coffee drinkers and non–coffee drinkers. Then there’s decaf and regular drinkers. Whichever camp you fall into, know this: The widespread belief that caffeine consumption has an effect on your heart is all beans.
In what is the largest investigation of its kind, researchers from the University of California, San Francisco, looked into whether drinking caffeinated coffee was linked to a risk for heart arrhythmia. They also researched whether patients with genetic variants that affect their metabolism could change that association. Almost 400,000 people with a mean age of 56 years participated in the study. More than half of the participants were women.
The investigators analyzed the participants’ self-reported coffee consumption using a technique called Mendelian randomization to leverage genetic data with the participants’ relationship with caffeine, making it an even field and not relying on the participant consumption self-reporting for outcomes as in previous studies.
What they found, after the 4-year follow up, was nothing short of myth busting.
“We found no evidence that caffeine consumption leads to a greater risk of arrhythmias,” said senior and corresponding author Gregory Marcus, MD. “Our population-based study provides reassurance that common prohibitions against caffeine to reduce arrhythmia risk are likely unwarranted.”
There was no evidence of a heightened risk of arrhythmias in participants who were genetically predisposed to metabolize caffeine differently from those who were not. And, there was a 3% reduction of arrhythmias in patients who consumed higher amounts of coffee.
We are not lobbying for Big Caffeine, but this study adds to the reported health benefits linked to coffee, which already include reduced risk for cancer, diabetes, and Parkinson’s disease, with an added bonus of anti-inflammatory benefits. So, the next time you’re hesitant to pour that second cup of Joe, just go for it. Your heart can take it.
Bored? Feeling down? Don’t play Candy Crush
Now hang on, aren’t those the perfect times to play video games? If there’s nothing else to do, why not open Candy Crush and mindlessly power through the levels?
Because, according to a study by a group of Canadian researchers, it’s actually the worst thing you can do. Well, maybe not literally, but it’s not helpful. Researchers recruited 60 Candy Crush players who were at various levels in the game. They had the participants play early levels that were far too easy or levels balanced with their gameplay abilities.
Players in the easy-level group got bored and quit far earlier than did those in the advanced-level group. The group playing to their abilities were able to access a “flow” state and focus all their attention on the game. While this is all well and good for their gaming performance, according to the researchers, it confirms the theory that playing to escape boredom or negative emotions is more likely to lead to addiction. As with all addictions, the temporary high can give way to a self-repeating loop, causing patients to ignore real life and deepen depression.
The researchers hope their findings will encourage game developers to “consider implementing responsible video gaming tools directly within their games.” Comedy gold. Perhaps Canadians’ idea of capitalism is a little different from that of those south of the border.
Hiccups and vaccine refusal
Tonight, LOTME News dives into the fetid cesspool that is international politics and comes out with … hiccups?
But first, a word from our sponsor, Fearless Boxing Club of South Etobicoke, Ontario.
Are you looking to flout public health restrictions? Do you want to spend time in an enclosed space with other people who haven’t gotten the COVID-19 vaccine? Do you “feel safer waiting until more research is done on the side effects being discovered right now”? (We are not making this up.)
Then join the Fearless Boxing Club, because we “will not be accepting any vaccinated members.” Our founders, Mohammed Abedeen and Krystal Glazier-Roscoe, are working hard to exclude “those who received the experimental COVID vaccine.” (Still not making it up.)
And now, back to the news.
Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro was hospitalized recently for a severe case of hiccups that may have been related to a stab wound he received in 2018. [Nope, didn’t make that up, either.]
Mr. Bolsonaro had been hiccuping for 10 days, and was experiencing abdominal pain and difficulty speaking, when he entered the hospital on July 14. Since being stabbed while on the campaign trail, he has undergone several operations, which may have led to the partial intestinal obstruction that caused his latest symptoms.
His medical team advised Mr. Bolsonaro to go on a diet to aid his recovery, but when he was released on July 18 he said, “I hope in 10 days I’ll be eating barbecued ribs.” (Maybe this is all just a lucid dream. Probably shouldn’t have had ribs right before bed.)
I dream of alien abductions
There he goes! It’s lunchtime and your colleague Tom is going on and on again about that time he was abducted by aliens. It sounds ridiculous, but he does make some convincing arguments. Tom thinks it was real, but could it have all just been in his head?
Lucid dreaming may help explain alleged alien abductions. During a lucid dream, people know that they’re dreaming, and can also have some control over how the dreams play out. During some dream states, a person can feel intense sensations, such as terror and paralysis, so it’s no wonder these dreams feel so real.
In a recent study, scientists encouraged 152 participants who had self-identified as lucid dreamers to dream about aliens. Many (75%) of the participants were able to dream about alien encounters, and 15% “achieved relatively realistic experiences,” the investigators reported.
So cut Tom some slack. He’s not crazy, he might just have lucid dreaming privileges. Tell him he should dream about something more fun, like a vacation in the Bahamas.
Follow your heart: Drink more coffee
It seems like the world is divided into coffee drinkers and non–coffee drinkers. Then there’s decaf and regular drinkers. Whichever camp you fall into, know this: The widespread belief that caffeine consumption has an effect on your heart is all beans.
In what is the largest investigation of its kind, researchers from the University of California, San Francisco, looked into whether drinking caffeinated coffee was linked to a risk for heart arrhythmia. They also researched whether patients with genetic variants that affect their metabolism could change that association. Almost 400,000 people with a mean age of 56 years participated in the study. More than half of the participants were women.
The investigators analyzed the participants’ self-reported coffee consumption using a technique called Mendelian randomization to leverage genetic data with the participants’ relationship with caffeine, making it an even field and not relying on the participant consumption self-reporting for outcomes as in previous studies.
What they found, after the 4-year follow up, was nothing short of myth busting.
“We found no evidence that caffeine consumption leads to a greater risk of arrhythmias,” said senior and corresponding author Gregory Marcus, MD. “Our population-based study provides reassurance that common prohibitions against caffeine to reduce arrhythmia risk are likely unwarranted.”
There was no evidence of a heightened risk of arrhythmias in participants who were genetically predisposed to metabolize caffeine differently from those who were not. And, there was a 3% reduction of arrhythmias in patients who consumed higher amounts of coffee.
We are not lobbying for Big Caffeine, but this study adds to the reported health benefits linked to coffee, which already include reduced risk for cancer, diabetes, and Parkinson’s disease, with an added bonus of anti-inflammatory benefits. So, the next time you’re hesitant to pour that second cup of Joe, just go for it. Your heart can take it.
Bored? Feeling down? Don’t play Candy Crush
Now hang on, aren’t those the perfect times to play video games? If there’s nothing else to do, why not open Candy Crush and mindlessly power through the levels?
Because, according to a study by a group of Canadian researchers, it’s actually the worst thing you can do. Well, maybe not literally, but it’s not helpful. Researchers recruited 60 Candy Crush players who were at various levels in the game. They had the participants play early levels that were far too easy or levels balanced with their gameplay abilities.
Players in the easy-level group got bored and quit far earlier than did those in the advanced-level group. The group playing to their abilities were able to access a “flow” state and focus all their attention on the game. While this is all well and good for their gaming performance, according to the researchers, it confirms the theory that playing to escape boredom or negative emotions is more likely to lead to addiction. As with all addictions, the temporary high can give way to a self-repeating loop, causing patients to ignore real life and deepen depression.
The researchers hope their findings will encourage game developers to “consider implementing responsible video gaming tools directly within their games.” Comedy gold. Perhaps Canadians’ idea of capitalism is a little different from that of those south of the border.
Hiccups and vaccine refusal
Tonight, LOTME News dives into the fetid cesspool that is international politics and comes out with … hiccups?
But first, a word from our sponsor, Fearless Boxing Club of South Etobicoke, Ontario.
Are you looking to flout public health restrictions? Do you want to spend time in an enclosed space with other people who haven’t gotten the COVID-19 vaccine? Do you “feel safer waiting until more research is done on the side effects being discovered right now”? (We are not making this up.)
Then join the Fearless Boxing Club, because we “will not be accepting any vaccinated members.” Our founders, Mohammed Abedeen and Krystal Glazier-Roscoe, are working hard to exclude “those who received the experimental COVID vaccine.” (Still not making it up.)
And now, back to the news.
Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro was hospitalized recently for a severe case of hiccups that may have been related to a stab wound he received in 2018. [Nope, didn’t make that up, either.]
Mr. Bolsonaro had been hiccuping for 10 days, and was experiencing abdominal pain and difficulty speaking, when he entered the hospital on July 14. Since being stabbed while on the campaign trail, he has undergone several operations, which may have led to the partial intestinal obstruction that caused his latest symptoms.
His medical team advised Mr. Bolsonaro to go on a diet to aid his recovery, but when he was released on July 18 he said, “I hope in 10 days I’ll be eating barbecued ribs.” (Maybe this is all just a lucid dream. Probably shouldn’t have had ribs right before bed.)
I dream of alien abductions
There he goes! It’s lunchtime and your colleague Tom is going on and on again about that time he was abducted by aliens. It sounds ridiculous, but he does make some convincing arguments. Tom thinks it was real, but could it have all just been in his head?
Lucid dreaming may help explain alleged alien abductions. During a lucid dream, people know that they’re dreaming, and can also have some control over how the dreams play out. During some dream states, a person can feel intense sensations, such as terror and paralysis, so it’s no wonder these dreams feel so real.
In a recent study, scientists encouraged 152 participants who had self-identified as lucid dreamers to dream about aliens. Many (75%) of the participants were able to dream about alien encounters, and 15% “achieved relatively realistic experiences,” the investigators reported.
So cut Tom some slack. He’s not crazy, he might just have lucid dreaming privileges. Tell him he should dream about something more fun, like a vacation in the Bahamas.
Follow your heart: Drink more coffee
It seems like the world is divided into coffee drinkers and non–coffee drinkers. Then there’s decaf and regular drinkers. Whichever camp you fall into, know this: The widespread belief that caffeine consumption has an effect on your heart is all beans.
In what is the largest investigation of its kind, researchers from the University of California, San Francisco, looked into whether drinking caffeinated coffee was linked to a risk for heart arrhythmia. They also researched whether patients with genetic variants that affect their metabolism could change that association. Almost 400,000 people with a mean age of 56 years participated in the study. More than half of the participants were women.
The investigators analyzed the participants’ self-reported coffee consumption using a technique called Mendelian randomization to leverage genetic data with the participants’ relationship with caffeine, making it an even field and not relying on the participant consumption self-reporting for outcomes as in previous studies.
What they found, after the 4-year follow up, was nothing short of myth busting.
“We found no evidence that caffeine consumption leads to a greater risk of arrhythmias,” said senior and corresponding author Gregory Marcus, MD. “Our population-based study provides reassurance that common prohibitions against caffeine to reduce arrhythmia risk are likely unwarranted.”
There was no evidence of a heightened risk of arrhythmias in participants who were genetically predisposed to metabolize caffeine differently from those who were not. And, there was a 3% reduction of arrhythmias in patients who consumed higher amounts of coffee.
We are not lobbying for Big Caffeine, but this study adds to the reported health benefits linked to coffee, which already include reduced risk for cancer, diabetes, and Parkinson’s disease, with an added bonus of anti-inflammatory benefits. So, the next time you’re hesitant to pour that second cup of Joe, just go for it. Your heart can take it.
Bored? Feeling down? Don’t play Candy Crush
Now hang on, aren’t those the perfect times to play video games? If there’s nothing else to do, why not open Candy Crush and mindlessly power through the levels?
Because, according to a study by a group of Canadian researchers, it’s actually the worst thing you can do. Well, maybe not literally, but it’s not helpful. Researchers recruited 60 Candy Crush players who were at various levels in the game. They had the participants play early levels that were far too easy or levels balanced with their gameplay abilities.
Players in the easy-level group got bored and quit far earlier than did those in the advanced-level group. The group playing to their abilities were able to access a “flow” state and focus all their attention on the game. While this is all well and good for their gaming performance, according to the researchers, it confirms the theory that playing to escape boredom or negative emotions is more likely to lead to addiction. As with all addictions, the temporary high can give way to a self-repeating loop, causing patients to ignore real life and deepen depression.
The researchers hope their findings will encourage game developers to “consider implementing responsible video gaming tools directly within their games.” Comedy gold. Perhaps Canadians’ idea of capitalism is a little different from that of those south of the border.
Hiccups and vaccine refusal
Tonight, LOTME News dives into the fetid cesspool that is international politics and comes out with … hiccups?
But first, a word from our sponsor, Fearless Boxing Club of South Etobicoke, Ontario.
Are you looking to flout public health restrictions? Do you want to spend time in an enclosed space with other people who haven’t gotten the COVID-19 vaccine? Do you “feel safer waiting until more research is done on the side effects being discovered right now”? (We are not making this up.)
Then join the Fearless Boxing Club, because we “will not be accepting any vaccinated members.” Our founders, Mohammed Abedeen and Krystal Glazier-Roscoe, are working hard to exclude “those who received the experimental COVID vaccine.” (Still not making it up.)
And now, back to the news.
Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro was hospitalized recently for a severe case of hiccups that may have been related to a stab wound he received in 2018. [Nope, didn’t make that up, either.]
Mr. Bolsonaro had been hiccuping for 10 days, and was experiencing abdominal pain and difficulty speaking, when he entered the hospital on July 14. Since being stabbed while on the campaign trail, he has undergone several operations, which may have led to the partial intestinal obstruction that caused his latest symptoms.
His medical team advised Mr. Bolsonaro to go on a diet to aid his recovery, but when he was released on July 18 he said, “I hope in 10 days I’ll be eating barbecued ribs.” (Maybe this is all just a lucid dream. Probably shouldn’t have had ribs right before bed.)