| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Glasbey, JC, et al.
(författare)
-
- 2021
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 3. |
- Tabiri, S, et al.
(författare)
-
- 2021
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 4. |
- Bravo, L, et al.
(författare)
-
- 2021
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Ederle, Joerg, et al.
(författare)
-
Carotid artery stenting compared with endarterectomy in patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis (International Carotid Stenting Study): an interim analysis of a randomised controlled trial
- 2010
-
Ingår i: The Lancet. - 1474-547X. ; 375:9719, s. 985-997
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Stents are an alternative treatment to carotid endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis, but previous trials have not established equivalent safety and efficacy. We compared the safety of carotid artery stenting with that of carotid endarterectomy. Methods The International Carotid Stenting Study (ICSS) is a multicentre, international, randomised controlled trial with blinded adjudication of outcomes. Patients with recently symptomatic carotid artery stenosis were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive carotid artery stenting or carotid endarterectomy. Randomisation was by telephone call or fax to a central computerised service and was stratified by centre with minimisation for sex, age, contralateral occlusion, and side of the randomised artery. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment assignment. Patients were followed up by independent clinicians not directly involved in delivering the randomised treatment. The primary outcome measure of the trial is the 3-year rate of fatal or disabling stroke in any territory, which has not been analysed yet. The main outcome measure for the interim safety analysis was the 120-day rate of stroke, death, or procedural myocardial infarction. Analysis was by intention to treat (ITT). This study is registered, number ISRCTN25337470. Findings The trial enrolled 1713 patients (stenting group, n=855; endarterectomy group, n=858). Two patients in the stenting group and one in the endarterectomy group withdrew immediately after randomisation, and were not included in the ITT analysis. Between randomisation and 120 days, there were 34 (Kaplan-Meier estimate 4.0%) events of disabling stroke or death in the stenting group compared with 27 (3.2%) events in the endarterectomy group (hazard ratio [HR] 1.28, 95% CI 0.77-2.11). The incidence of stroke, death, or procedural myocardial infarction was 8.5% in the stenting group compared with 5.2% in the endarterectomy group (72 vs 44 events; HR 1.69, 1.16-2.45, p=0.006), Risks of any stroke (65 vs 35 events; HR 1.92, 1.27-2.89) and all-cause death (19 vs seven events; HR 2.76, 1.16-6.56) were higher in the stenting group than in the endarterectomy group. Three procedural myocardial infarctions were recorded in the stenting group, all of which were fatal, compared with four, all non-fatal, in the endarterectomy group. There was one event of cranial nerve palsy in the stenting group compared with 45 in the endarterectomy group. There were also fewer haematomas of any severity in the stenting group than in the endarterectomy group (31 vs 50 events; p=0.0197). Interpretation Completion of long-term follow-up is needed to establish the efficacy of carotid artery stenting compared with endarterectomy. In the meantime, carotid endarterectomy should remain the treatment of choice for patients suitable for surgery.
|
|
| 9. |
- Demetris, A J, et al.
(författare)
-
2016 Comprehensive Update of the Banff Working Group on Liver Allograft Pathology: Introduction of Antibody-Mediated Rejection.
- 2016
-
Ingår i: American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons. - : Elsevier BV. - 1600-6143. ; 16:10, s. 2816-2835
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The Banff Working Group on Liver Allograft Pathology reviewed and discussed literature evidence regarding antibody-mediated liver allograft rejection at the 11th (Paris, France, June 5-10, 2011), 12th (Comandatuba, Brazil, August 19-23, 2013), and 13th (Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, October 5-10, 2015) meetings of the Banff Conference on Allograft Pathology. Discussion continued online. The primary goal was to introduce guidelines and consensus criteria for the diagnosis of liver allograft antibody-mediated rejection and provide a comprehensive update of all Banff Schema recommendations. Included are new recommendations for complement component 4d tissue staining and interpretation, staging liver allograft fibrosis, and findings related to immunosuppression minimization. In an effort to create a single reference document, previous unchanged criteria are also included.
|
|
| 10. |
- Razavi, Homie A., et al.
(författare)
-
Hepatitis D double reflex testing of all hepatitis B carriers in low-HBV- and high-HBV/HDV-prevalence countries
- 2023
-
Ingår i: JOURNAL OF HEPATOLOGY. - : Elsevier. - 0168-8278 .- 1600-0641. ; 79:2, s. 576-580
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Hepatitis D virus (HDV) infection occurs as a coinfection with hepatitis B and increases the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma, decompensated cirrhosis, and mortality compared to hepatitis B virus (HBV) monoinfection. Reliable estimates of the prevalence of HDV infection and disease burden are essential to formulate strategies to find coinfected individuals more effectively and efficiently. The global prevalence of HBV infections was estimated to be 262,240,000 in 2021. Only 1,994,000 of the HBV in-fections were newly diagnosed in 2021, with more than half of the new diagnoses made in China. Our initial estimates indicated a much lower prevalence of HDV antibody (anti-HDV) and HDV RNA positivity than previously reported in published studies. Ac-curate estimates of HDV prevalence are needed. The most effective method to generate estimates of the prevalence of anti-HDV and HDV RNA positivity and to find undiagnosed individuals at the national level is to implement double reflex testing. This re-quires anti-HDV testing of all hepatitis B surface antigen-positive individuals and HDV RNA testing of all anti-HDV-positive in-dividuals. This strategy is manageable for healthcare systems since the number of newly diagnosed HBV cases is low. At the global level, a comprehensive HDV screening strategy would require only 1,994,000 HDV antibody tests and less than 89,000 HDV PCR tests. Double reflex testing is the preferred strategy in countries with a low prevalence of HBV and those with a high prevalence of both HBV and HDV. For example, in the European Union and North America only 35,000 and 22,000 cases, respectively, will require anti-HDV testing annually.
|
|
