Search

Background: Limited language proficiency is an established barrier to research participation among racialized populations. While prior studies have highlighted the underrepresentation of racialized populations in venous thromboembolism (VTE) research, the impact of limited language proficiency as a reason for nonconsent among eligible patients is unknown., Objectives: To determine the impact of language barrier as the primary reason for VTE research non-participation., Methods: We reviewed all prospective VTE studies conducted at a research-intensive academic thrombosis research program in Canada between 2014 and 2024. Studies with screening logs that systematically and consecutively captured eligibility assessment and reasons for nonconsent were included. Primary outcome was nonconsent of a screen-eligible patient due to limited language proficiency as the reported reason. We derived pooled estimates of nonconsent due to limited language proficiency as a proportion of consented participants and determined subgroup rates by phase of VTE management, associated medical conditions, and recruitment settings., Results: Screening logs of 28 studies with 22 057 screening events, 8317 screen-eligible patients, and 3320 consented participants were included. For every 100 consented participants, 3.2 (95% CI, 2.0-5.3) screen-eligible individuals were unable to provide consent due to limited language proficiency. Rates of nonconsent were highest in studies involving cancer (5.6 per 100 participants; 95% CI, 2.9-10.4) and in studies recruiting patients from ambulatory settings outside of the thrombosis clinic (10.8 per 100 participants; 95% CI, 4.8-22.6)., Conclusion: Language proficiency is a key barrier to VTE research participation. Urgent implementation of targeted interventions aimed at mitigating linguistic barriers is essential to ensure equitable opportunities for VTE research participation for racialized patients disproportionately affected by language proficiency., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interests M.C. reports research grants from Pfizer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and LEO Pharma and consultancy honoraria from Pfizer, Bayer, Sanofi, Servier, and LEO Pharma. P.W. reports consulting in a legal case for Bayer Healthcare. D.S. has received honoraria paid indirectly to her research institute from AstraZeneca, BMS-Pfizer, Roche, and Servier. T.-F.W. reports advisory board honoraria from Valeo and research funding to the institution from LEO Pharma. L.C.’s research institution has received honoraria from Bayer, BMS-Pfizer, The Academy for Continued Advancement in Healthcare Education, Amag Pharmaceutical, LEO Pharma, Sanofi, Valeo Pharma, and Servier. All other authors have no financial or personal relationships or affiliations that could influence the decisions and work on this article., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The currently approved direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are increasingly used in clinical practice. Although serious bleeding risks are lower with DOACs than with vitamin K antagonists, bleeding remains the most frequent side effect. Andexanet alfa and idarucizumab are the currently approved specific reversal agents for oral factor (F)Xa inhibitors and dabigatran, respectively. Our prior guidance document was published in 2016, but with more information available on the utility and increased use of these reversal agents and other bleeding management strategies, we have updated this International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis guidance document on DOAC reversal. In this narrative review, we compare the mechanism of action of specific and nonspecific reversal agents, review the clinical data supporting their use, and provide guidance on when reversal is indicated. In addition, we briefly discuss the reversal of oral FXIa inhibitors, a new class of DOACs currently under clinical development., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interests J.H.L.: Participation on Advisory or Steering Committees for Grifols, Octapharma, Takeda, and Werfen. J.R.S.: In-kind laboratory support from Diagnostica Stago. L.A.C.: L.A.C.’s research institution has received honoraria from Bayer, BMS-Pfizer Alliance, The Academy for Continued Advancement in Healthcare Education, Amag Pharmaceutical, LEO Pharma, Sanofi, Valeo Pharma, and Servier. L.A.C. holds a Tier 2 Research Chair from the University of Ottawa. J.M.C.: Participation on Scientific Advisory Boards and consulting for Abbott, Anthos, BMS, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, and Werfen; research funding from CSL Behring to the institution. J.D.: Serves on advisory committees for Pfizer, Sanofi, Leo Pharma, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Janssen. E.L-L.: Lecture honoraria and advisory fees from Bayer AG, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer, Daiichi Sankyo, Portola, CSL Behring, Norgine, Roche, Leo, AstraZeneca, and Aspen; institutional research support from Bayer AG, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Pfizer, Daiichi Sankyo, Werfen, and CSL Behring. B.R.: Consultant for AbocaSRL on medical devices; Advisory Committee for Bayer AG. C.M.S.: Advisory for Norgine Pharma. D.S.: Honoraria for educational presentations and advisory fees paid indirectly to research institute from AstraZeneca, BMS-Pfizer, Roche, Servier. D.S. is supported by a Tier 2 Canada Research Chair in Anticoagulant Management of Cardiovascular Disease. J.I.W.: Consultant or member of Advisory Boards or Steering Committees for Anthos, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Johnson and Johnson, Merck, and Regeneron., (Copyright © 2024 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Patients with cancer are at an increased risk of developing atrial fibrillation (AF) and often need to undergo procedures or surgery that requires periprocedural interruption of anticoagulation. Anticoagulated patients with cancer might be at increased risk of postprocedural thromboembolic and bleeding complications. Data on postprocedural outcomes among patients with concurrent active cancer and AF are sparse., Objective: To assess the 30-day risk of postoperative thromboembolic and major bleeding complications after the periprocedural interruption of anticoagulation among patients with AF and active cancer., Methods: We conducted a single-center retrospective cohort study in patients with active cancer and AF who required periprocedural interruption of anticoagulation for invasive procedures between August 2015 and May 2019. The primary endpoints were the 30-day postoperative risks of arterial thromboembolism (ATE) and major bleeding. The secondary endpoints included the 30-day risks of venous thromboembolism, clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding, and overall mortality., Results: Two hundred sixty-four patients undergoing 302 periprocedural interruptions were included in our study. The 30-day risk of ATE was 0.7% (95% CI, 0.1%-2.4%), and the 30-day risk of major bleeding was 1.7% (95% CI, 0.6%-3.9%). The 30-day risks of venous thromboembolism and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding were 0.7% (95% CI, 0.1%-2.4%) and 4.3% (95% CI, 2.5%-7.3%), respectively. The overall risk of mortality at 30 days was 1.3% (95% CI, 0.4%-3.4%). There was one fatal postoperative stroke., Conclusions: Patients with AF and active cancer in this study were at relatively low risk for ATE and postoperative bleeding complications when patients were managed according to commonly applied perioperative management recommendations., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest T-F. Wang reports research funding from Leo Pharma; advisory board/honoraria: Servier and Valeo. D. Siegal has received honoraria indirectly to her research institute from Astra Zeneca, BMS-Pfizer, Leo Pharma, Roche, Servier. J. Douketis has received research support from Boehringer-Ingelheim, royalties from UptoDate and the Merck Manual, as well as consultant/advisory board fees from Actelion, AGEN, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Biotie, BMS, Daiichi-Sankyo, Portola, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Cytori, Janssen, Leo Pharma, Pfizer, Medicine CO., Sanofi, Servier, Bristol Meyers Squibb and PhaseBio, in addition to speaker’s fees from Bayer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Pfizer, Leo Pharma, Sanofi, with all funds deposited into a university-based research account of through the St. Joseph’s Healthcare Foundation. Dr. Le Gal reports grants from Pfizer and Bristol-Myers Squibb and honoraria (not taken as salary) from Pfizer, Leo Pharma and Sanofi and Aspen Pharma. M Carrier reports research funding from Leo Pharma, BMS and Pfizer; advisory board/honoraria: Bayer, Sanofi, Leo Pharma, Pfizer, Servier and Valeo. J.R. Shaw has received fellowship funding through the Thrombosis Canada BMS-Pfizer Fellowship Award and has received research support from Diagnostica Stago., (Copyright © 2022 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) account for most oral anticoagulant use. DOAC-associated bleeding events are commonly encountered in clinical practice and are associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. Both specific reversal agents and nonspecific hemostatic therapies, such as prothrombin complex concentrates, are used in the management of DOAC-associated bleeding. Measuring hemostatic efficacy and demonstrating a clinical impact from these therapies among studies of bleeding patients is challenging. Thrombin generation assays provide information on the total hemostatic potential of plasma, and have emerged as a promising modality to both measure the impact of DOACs on coagulation and to evaluate the effects of hemostatic therapies among patients with DOAC-associated bleeding. The mechanisms by which nonspecific hemostatic agents impact coagulation and thrombin generation in the context of DOAC therapy are unclear. As a result, we undertook a review of the literature using a systematic search strategy with the goal of summarizing the effects of DOACs on thrombin generation and the effects of both specific reversal agents and nonspecific hemostatic therapies on DOAC-altered thrombin generation parameters. We sought to identify clinical studies focusing on whether altered thrombin generation is associated with clinical bleeding and whether correction of altered thrombin generation parameters predicts improvements in clinical hemostasis. Lastly, we sought to outline future directions for the application of thrombin generation assays toward anticoagulation therapies and the question of anticoagulation reversal., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest J.R.S. has received research support in the form of in-kind contributions from Diagnostica Stago. L.A.C.’s research institute has received honoraria from Amag Pharmaceuticals, Bayer, BMS-Pfizer Alliance, the Academy, LEO Pharma, Sanofi, Servier, and Valeo. M.C. has received research funding from BMS, Leo Pharma, and Pfizer, as well as honoraria from Bayer, Sanofi, Servier, BMS, Leo Pharma, and Pfizer, with all payments made to his institution., (Copyright © 2022 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

By January 2022 over ten billion doses of COVID-19 vaccines had been administered worldwide. Concerns about COVID-19 vaccine-associated thrombosis arose after the characterization of a rare prothrombotic condition associated with adenoviral vector-based COVID-19 vaccines known as vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT). Although mRNA COVID-19 vaccines have not been linked to VITT, concerns about thrombosis after vaccination persist despite safety data from hundreds of millions of recipients of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. With widespread vaccination some VTE will occur shortly after vaccination by chance alone because VTE is a common condition that affects 1 to 2 in 1000 persons each year. Detailed analysis is required to determine whether these VTE events are coincidental or associated when they occur in close proximity to mRNA vaccine administration. This paper will review what is currently known about rates of VTE after mRNA vaccination in adults, discuss the reasons why uncertainty on this topic persists, and briefly review the implications of these findings for clinical practice and health policy., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest MN, HG, and NC, have no conflicts of interest relevant to this manuscript. DS has received honoraria from BMS-Pfizer, Leo Pharma, Novartis, Portola, and Servier., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To retrospectively analyze the nature and extent of oncology-related errors accounting for malpractice allegations in diagnostic radiology., Methods: The Comparative Benchmarking System of the Controlled Risk Insurance Company, a database containing roughly 30% of medical malpractice claims in the United States, was searched retrospectively for the period 2008 to 2017. Claims naming radiology as a primary service were identified and were stratified and compared by oncologic versus nononcologic status, allegation type (diagnostic versus nondiagnostic), and imaging modality., Results: Over the 10-year period, radiology was the primary responsible service for 3.9% of all malpractice claims (2,582 of 66,061) and 12.8% of claims with diagnostic allegations (1,756 of 13,695). Oncology (neoplasms) accounted for 44.0% of radiology cases with diagnostic allegations, a larger share than any other category of medical condition. Among radiology cases with diagnostic allegations, high-severity harm occurred in 79% of oncologic but just 42% of nononcologic cases. Of all oncologic radiology cases, 97.4% had diagnostic allegations, and just 55.0% of nononcologic radiology cases had diagnostic allegations. Imaging misinterpretation was a contributing factor for a large majority (80.7% [623 of 772]) of oncologic radiology cases with diagnostic allegations. The modalities most commonly used in oncologic radiology cases with diagnostic allegations involving misinterpretation were mammography and CT., Conclusion: Oncology represents the largest source of radiology malpractice cases with diagnostic allegations. Oncologic radiology malpractice cases are more likely than nononcologic radiology cases to be due to diagnostic errors. Furthermore, compared with those that are nononcologic, oncologic radiology cases with diagnostic allegations are more likely to be associated with high-severity harm. Efforts are warranted to reduce misinterpretations of oncologic imaging., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Central venous catheter (CVC) insertion is an important risk factor for venous thromboembolism (VTE) among patients with cancer. Routine use of primary thromboprophylaxis in this patient population is not currently recommended. We sought to assess the feasibility of conducting a randomized controlled trial (RCT) assessing the safety and efficacy of rivaroxaban (10 mg daily) to prevent VTE complications in this patient population., Methods: This is a two-center prospective, randomized, open blinded end point pilot trial including patients with active cancer and a newly inserted CVC. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to rivaroxaban or observation for 90 days. The primary feasibility outcome of this pilot study was the number of participants recruited per month. Secondary clinical outcomes included thrombotic complications, major VTE, and major bleeding episodes., Results: Overall, 105 patients were enrolled over 11 months. The average enrollment rates were 7.5 and 2 patients per month at the two participating centers, respectively. Overall, thrombotic complications occurred in 3 patients in the rivaroxaban group (5.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-16.0) compared with 5 patients in the control group (9.4%; 95% CI, 3.1-20.7) (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.14-2.5). Major VTE occurred in 2 (3.9%; 95% CI, 0.5-13.2) and 3 (5.7%; 95% CI, 1.2-15.7) patients in the rivaroxaban and control group, respectively (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.11-3.9). One patient (1.9%) receiving rivaroxaban had a major bleeding event., Conclusions: Thrombotic complications are common in patients with cancer and a newly inserted CVC. The pilot trial achieved its enrollment targets and supports that a large multicenter RCT is feasible in this area. ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03506815)., (© 2021 The Authors. Research and Practice in Thrombosis and Haemostasis published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH).)

Background: We aimed to establish diagnostic criteria for bleeding independently associated with mortality after noncardiac surgery (BIMS) defined as bleeding during or within 30 days after noncardiac surgery that is independently associated with mortality within 30 days of surgery, and to estimate the proportion of 30-day postoperative mortality potentially attributable to BIMS., Methods: This was a prospective cohort study of participants ≥45 yr old having inpatient noncardiac surgery at 12 academic hospitals in eight countries between 2007 and 2011. Cox proportional hazards models evaluated the adjusted relationship between candidate diagnostic criteria for BIMS and all-cause mortality within 30 days of surgery., Results: Of 16 079 participants, 2.0% (315) died and 36.1% (5810) met predefined screening criteria for bleeding. Based on independent association with 30-day mortality, BIMS was identified as bleeding leading to a postoperative haemoglobin <70 g L -1 , transfusion of ≥1 unit of red blood cells, or that was judged to be the cause of death. Bleeding independently associated with mortality after noncardiac surgery occurred in 17.3% of patients (2782). Death occurred in 5.8% of patients with BIMS (161/2782), 1.3% (39/3028) who met bleeding screening criteria but not BIMS criteria, and 1.1% (115/10 269) without bleeding. BIMS was associated with mortality (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.87; 95% confidence interval: 1.42-2.47). We estimated the proportion of 30-day postoperative deaths potentially attributable to BIMS to be 20.1-31.9%., Conclusions: Bleeding independently associated with mortality after noncardiac surgery (BIMS), defined as bleeding that leads to a postoperative haemoglobin <70 g L -1 , blood transfusion, or that is judged to be the cause of death, is common and may account for a quarter of deaths after noncardiac surgery., Clinical Trial Registration: NCT00512109., (Copyright © 2020 British Journal of Anaesthesia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Diagnostic criteria for Bleeding Independently associated with Mortality after noncardiac Surgery (BIMS) have been defined as bleeding that leads to a postoperative haemoglobin <70 g L -1 , leads to blood transfusion, or is judged to be the direct cause of death. Preoperative prediction guides for BIMS can facilitate informed consent and planning of perioperative care., Methods: In a prospective cohort study of 16 079 participants aged ≥45 yr having inpatient noncardiac surgery at 12 academic hospitals in eight countries between 2007 and 2011, 17.3% (2782) experienced BIMS. An electronic risk calculator for BIMS was developed and internally validated by logistic regression with bootstrapping, and further simplified to a risk index. Decision curve analysis assessed the potential utility of each prediction guide compared with a strategy of identifying risk of BIMS based on preoperative haemoglobin <120 g L -1 ., Results: With information about the type of surgery, preoperative haemoglobin, age, sex, functional status, kidney function, history of high-risk coronary artery disease, and active cancer, the risk calculator accurately predicted BIMS (bias-corrected C-statistic, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.837-0.852). A simplified index based on preoperative haemoglobin <120 g L -1 , open surgery, and high-risk surgery also predicted BIMS, but less accurately (C-statistic, 0.787; 95% confidence interval, 0.779-0.796). Both prediction guides could improve decision making compared with knowledge of haemoglobin <120 g L -1 alone., Conclusions: BIMS, defined as bleeding that leads to a postoperative haemoglobin <70 g L -1 , leads to blood transfusion, or that is judged to be the direct cause of death, can be predicted by a simple risk index before surgery., Clinical Trial Registration: NCT00512109., (Copyright © 2020 British Journal of Anaesthesia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Essentials The optimal dose and duration of thromboprophylaxis after bariatric surgery are unclear. We evaluated the safety of weight-adjusted tinzaparin prophylaxis in 1212 patients. In-hospital rates of venous thromboembolism and major bleeding were 0.2% and 1.8% respectively. In a sub-set of patients, trough anti-Xa levels did not show excessive anticoagulant activity., Summary: Background Patients undergoing bariatric surgery are at moderate to high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). The optimal dose and duration of anticoagulant prophylaxis is uncertain. Objective To evaluate the safety of extended-duration weight-adjusted tinzaparin after bariatric surgery. Patients/methods We conducted a single-center retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients undergoing bariatric surgery who received weight-adjusted tinzaparin 4500-14 000 IU daily (75 IU kg -1 rounded to the nearest prefilled syringe) for 10 days after surgery (7-9 days post-hospital discharge). Primary safety outcomes were the frequency of VTE and major bleeding within 30 days of surgery in patients receiving at least one dose of tinzaparin. Results A total of 1279 patients undergoing bariatric surgery between July 2009 and December 2012 were reviewed, of whom 1212 received weight-adjusted tinzaparin. Safety outcomes were collected for 819 patients at 30 days, and for 1212 patients in-hospital only. The median age was 45.0 years, median weight was 130.0 kg and 98.8% of patients underwent gastric bypass or sleeve gastrectomy. In patients completing 30 days of follow-up, VTE occurred in 4/819 (0.5%) and major bleeding occurred in 13/819 patients (1.6%). In-hospital rates of VTE and major bleeding during surgical admission were 3/1212 (0.2%) and 22/1212 (1.8%), respectively. Conclusions Extended thromboprophylaxis with weight-adjusted tinzaparin appears to be a safe strategy after bariatric surgery, with low rates of postoperative VTE and major bleeding., (© 2018 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis.)

Purpose: Order entry protocol selection of advanced imaging studies is labor-intensive, can disrupt workflow, and may displace staff from more valuable tasks. The aim of this study was to explore and compare the behaviors of radiologic technologists and radiologists when determining protocol to identify opportunities for workflow automation., Methods: A data set of over 273,000 cross-sectional examination orders from four hospitals within our health system was created. From this data set, we isolated the 12 most frequently requested examinations, which represent almost 50% of the entirety of advanced imaging volume. Intergroup comparisons were made between behavior of radiologic technologists and radiologists or residents when determining protocol. Frequencies of changes were calculated. Common parameters of changed examinations were identified., Results: The overall change rate for both radiologists and residents (4%) is very low and comparable to the overall change rate of radiologic technologists (1%). The change rates for the 12 most ordered examinations were calculated and compared individually. Most examinations that underwent change involved a patient with a low estimated glomerular filtration rate, a patient with a contrast allergy, or a provider ordering a general examination but in fact wanting an organ-specific protocol or an angiographic study., Conclusion: Order entry protocol selection of the most frequently ordered advanced imaging examinations was rarely a value-added activity because these examinations are rarely changed. Changes follow predictable patterns that make order entry protocol selection of most radiology orders for advanced imaging amenable to workflow automation., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Cancer patients are at high risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE), which results in substantial morbidity and mortality. In this narrative review, we present evidence for the use of anticoagulants in the treatment and prevention of VTE in cancer patients. The benefit of perioperative anticoagulant prophylaxis following cancer surgery is well established. However, the risk-benefit trade-offs in non-surgical hospitalized cancer patients and among outpatients receiving chemotherapy are more complex. Emerging evidence suggests that the use of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) may confer a small survival benefit in cancer patients without VTE. However, specific patient populations that may derive the most benefit have yet to be defined. Guidelines endorse LMWH as the preferred treatment for acute VTE, on the basis of high-quality clinical trial data, but the optimal duration of treatment remains unclear, and practical issues may limit its use outside the clinical trial setting. Novel oral anticoagulants may provide additional treatment and prophylaxis options, but their efficacy and safety in this population have not been established. Despite the significant impact of VTE on the lives of cancer patients and the large body of existing literature regarding treatment and prevention, important unanswered clinical questions remain, emphasizing the need for additional high-quality clinical trial data., (© 2012 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis.)

Organophosphates and carbamate compounds are acetylcholinesterase inhibitors used as agricultural insecticides and represent a common cause of cholinergic toxicity. Cardiac manifestations of organophosphate and carbamate toxicity are described primarily from reports of organophosphate exposure and include sinus bradycardia, prolonged PR interval, sinus tachycardia, prolonged corrected QT interval and ventricular arrhythmias. Complete atrioventricular block has rarely been reported with insecticide poisonings. A case of complete heart block following carbamate ingestion is described and the importance of extended cardiac monitoring in these patients is emphasized.

Purpose: To determine the prevalence of repetitive stress symptoms among radiologists working in a archiving and communication systems (PACS) environment and to assess their responses to ergonomic interventions., Methods: A survey instrument was designed in conjunction with occupational health specialists and administered to 107 faculty members, fellows, and residents working in a PACS-based radiology department. Data gathered included the number of hours per day working at a personal computer or PACS monitor, the presence of repetitive stress symptoms, and prior diagnosis of repetitive stress syndrome. Additionally, respondents who had received ergonomic chairs, ergonomic workstations, or ergonomic training were asked to rank the impact of these interventions on the severity of repetitive stress symptoms using a 7-point, Likert-type scale ranging from -3 ("markedly worse") to 3 ("markedly better")., Results: A total of 73 responses were received (a 68% response rate) from 33 faculty members and 40 trainees (residents and fellows). A majority of respondents (68%) reported working more than 8 hours per day at a personal computer or PACS monitor (55% of faculty members, 80% of trainees). Repetitive stress symptoms were reported by 58% of respondents (52% of faculty members, 63% of trainees), and prior diagnoses of repetitive stress syndrome were reported by 38% (39% of faculty members, 38% of trainees). Improvements in repetitive stress symptoms (scale ratings of 1 to 3) were reported by 70% of respondents who received ergonomic chairs (n = 54), 80% who received ergonomic workstations (n = 55), and 80% who underwent ergonomic training (n = 20)., Conclusion: Repetitive stress symptoms are highly prevalent among radiologists working in a PACS-based environment but are responsive to ergonomic interventions. Radiology departments should implement ergonomic initiatives to reduce the risk for repetitive stress injuries.

Prospective population-based surveillance to assess the incidence and impact of invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) in organ transplant patients is lacking. By using a population-based Invasive Bacterial Diseases Network surveillance program, we studied the incidence, clinical significance, serotypes and antimicrobial resistance pattern of IPD in a large cohort of adult transplant patients and the general population. Streptococcus pneumoniae isolates and patient data were collected prospectively from 1995 to 2004. We identified 21 cases of IPD (based on sterile-site isolates) in our organ transplant population over a 10-year period. This translated to an incidence rate of 146 infections per 100,000 persons per year. This compared to an incidence of 11.5 per 100,000 persons per year in the general population (R(R)=12.8; 95% CI 8.1-19.9, p<0.00001). If nonsterile-site isolates (respiratory tract) were included, the incidence rate in transplant patients was 419 of 100 000 persons per year. Serotypes 23F and 22F were most common, and 85.0% had a serotype included in the 23-valent pneumococcal vaccine. The antimicrobial resistance rates were high, especially for penicillin and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP/SMX), but were not significantly different from the general population. Solid organ transplant recipients are at significantly greater risk for IPD than the general population. Preventative strategies are necessary.

Routine pneumococcal vaccination is recommended at regular intervals posttransplant. However, there is limited data on durability of vaccine response and the impact of vaccine type on antibody persistence. We determined the durability of response for patients enrolled in a randomized trial of conjugate (PCV7) versus polysaccharide (PPV23) pneumococcal vaccination. Response was defined as a twofold increase from baseline and a titer > or =0.35 microg/mL using a pneumococcal ELISA for seven serotypes (measured at 8 weeks and 3 years). Forty-seven patients were evaluated and had received either PPV23 (n = 24) or PCV7 (n = 23). Response rates and geometric mean titers varied by serotype but declined significantly at 3-years for 6 of 7 serotypes (p < 0.001). No significant difference in durability was found in patients that had received PPV23 versus PCV7. Compared to the 8-week response, 20.6% fewer patients had a response to at least one serotype by 3 years. The largest relative declines were seen for serotype 4 (response dropped from 40.4% at 8 weeks to 17.0% at 3 years) and serotype 9V (44.7% dropping to 21.3%). The only factor predictive of response durability was a strong multiserotype initial response (p < 0.001). In conclusion, vaccine responses decline significantly by 3 years and conjugate vaccine does not improve the durability of response.

Community-acquired viral respiratory tract infections (RTI) in lung transplant recipients may have a high rate of progression to pneumonia and can be a trigger for immunologically mediated detrimental effects on lung function. A cohort of 100 patients was enrolled from 2001 to 2003 in which 50 patients had clinically diagnosed viral RTI and 50 were asymptomatic. All patients had nasopharyngeal and throat swabs taken for respiratory virus antigen detection, culture and RT-PCR. All patients had pulmonary function tests at regular intervals for 12 months. Rates of rejection, decline in forced expiratory volume (L) in 1 s (FEV-1) and bacterial and fungal superinfection were compared at the 3-month primary endpoint. In the 50 patients with RTI, a microbial etiology was identified in 33 of 50 (66%) and included rhinovirus (9), coronavirus (8), RSV (6), influenza A (5), parainfluenza (4) and human metapneumovirus (1). During the 3-month primary endpoint, 8 of 50 (16%) RTI patients had acute rejection versus 0 of 50 non-RTI patients (p=0.006). The number of patients experiencing a 20% or more decline in FEV-1 by 3 months was 9 of 50 (18%) RTI versus 0 of 50 non-RTI (0%) (p=0.003). In six of these nine patients, the decline in FEV-1 was sustained over a 1-year period consistent with bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome (BOS). Community-acquired respiratory viruses may be associated with the development of acute rejection and BOS.

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is common after lung transplantation. We performed a prospective trial of valganciclovir prophylaxis in lung recipients with outcomes compared to matched historical controls. The valganciclovir group (n = 40) (including D+/R- and R+ patients) was prospectively enrolled, and received oral valganciclovir 900 mg once daily for 12 weeks. Historical controls (n = 40) received 12 weeks of daily intravenous ganciclovir if D+/R- or 12 weeks of oral ganciclovir if R+. CMV viral load testing was done at two-week intervals until 6 months posttransplant. Baseline demographics and immunosuppression were comparable in the two groups. The incidence of CMV viremia was 16/40 (40.0%) in the valganciclovir arm versus 18/40 (45%) in the ganciclovir arm (p = NS). The incidence of symptomatic CMV disease was 8/40 (20%) versus 7/40 (17.5%), respectively (p = NS). In both groups viremia, while on prophylaxis, was uncommon (valganciclovir: 0/40 and ganciclovir: 2/40). Peak viral load and time to viremia were similar in the two arms. High rates of viremia and symptomatic disease occurred in the D+/R- patients after discontinuation of prophylaxis. Genotypic CMV sequence analysis demonstrated low rates of ganciclovir resistance in both groups. Valganciclovir prophylaxis had similar efficacy to either intravenous ganciclovir (D+/R- patients), or oral ganciclovir (R+ patients) in lung recipients.