暂无摘要。

暂无摘要。

The aim of the present European Stroke Organisation (ESO) guideline is to provide evidence-based recommendations on the acute management of patients with basilar artery occlusion (BAO). These guidelines were prepared following the Standard Operational Procedure of the ESO and according to the GRADE methodology.Although BAO accounts for only 1-2% of all strokes, it has very poor natural outcome. We identified 10 relevant clinical situations and formulated the corresponding Population Intervention Comparator Outcomes (PICO) questions, based on which a systematic literature search and review was performed. The working group consisted of 10 voting members (five representing ESO and five representing the European Society of Minimally Invasive Neurological Therapy (ESMINT)) and three non-voting junior members. The certainty of evidence was generally very low. In many PICOs, available data were scarce or lacking, hence, we provided expert consensus statements.First, we compared intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) to no IVT, but specific BAO-related data do not exist. Yet, historically, IVT was standard of care for BAO patients who were also included (although in small numbers) in IVT trials. Non-randomized studies of IVT-only cohorts showed a high proportion of favorable outcomes. Expert Consensus suggests using IVT up to 24 hours unless otherwise contraindicated. We further suggest IVT plus endovascular treatment (EVT) over direct EVT. EVT on top of best medical treatment (BMT) was compared with BMT alone within 6 and 6-24 hours from last seen well. In both time windows, we observed a different effect of treatment depending on a) the region where the patients were treated (Europe vs Asia), b) on the proportion of IVT in the BMT arm, and c) on the initial stroke severity. In case of high proportion of IVT in the BMT group and in patients with a National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score below 10, EVT plus BMT was not found better than BMT alone. Based on very low certainty of evidence, we suggest EVT+BMT over BMT alone (this is based on results of patients with at least 10 NIHSS points and a low proportion of IVT in BMT). For patients with an NIHSS score below 10, we found no evidence to recommend EVT over BMT. In fact, BMT was non-significantly better and safer than EVT. Furthermore, we found a stronger treatment effect of EVT+BMT over BMT alone in proximal and middle locations of BAO compared with distal location. While recommendations for patients without extensive early ischemic changes in the posterior fossa can, in general, follow those of other PICOs, we formulated an Expert Consensus Statement suggesting against reperfusion therapy in those with extensive bilateral and/or brainstem ischemic changes. Another Expert Consensus suggests reperfusion therapy regardless of collateral scores. Based on limited evidence, we suggest direct aspiration over stent retriever as the first-line strategy of mechanical thrombectomy. As an Expert Consensus, we suggest rescue percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and/or stenting after a failed EVT procedure. Finally, based on very low certainty of evidence, we suggest add-on antithrombotic treatment during EVT or within 24 hours after EVT in patients with no concomitant IVT and in whom EVT was complicated (defined as failed or imminent re-occlusion, or need for additional stenting or angioplasty).

A nonthrombotic iliac vein lesion is defined as the extrinsic compression of the iliac vein. Symptoms of lower extremity chronic venous insufficiency or pelvic venous disease can develop secondary to nonthrombotic iliac vein lesion. Anatomic compression has been observed in both symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. Causative factors that lead to symptomatic manifestations remain unclear. To provide guidance for providers treating patients with nonthrombotic iliac vein lesion, the VIVA Foundation convened a multidisciplinary group of leaders in venous disease management with representatives from the American Venous Forum and the American Vein and Lymphatic Society. Consensus statements regarding nonthrombotic iliac vein lesions were drafted by the participants to address patient selection, imaging for diagnosis, technical considerations for stent placement, postprocedure management, and future research/educational needs.

BACKGROUND: Systemic sclerosis (SSc) is a rare chronic autoimmune disease with heterogeneous manifestations. In the last decade, several clinical trials have been conducted to evaluate new treatment options for SSc. The purpose of this work is to update the recommendations of the Brazilian Society of Rheumatology in light of the new evidence available for the pharmacological management of SSc.
METHODS: A systematic review including randomized clinical trials (RCTs) for predefined questions that were elaborated according to the Patient/Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes (PICO) strategy was conducted. The rating of the available evidence was performed according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. To become a recommendation, at least 75% agreement of the voting panel was needed.
RESULTS: Six recommendations were elaborated regarding the pharmacological treatment of Raynaud\'s phenomenon, the treatment (healing) and prevention of digital ulcers, skin involvement, interstitial lung disease (ILD) and gastrointestinal involvement in SSc patients based on results available from RCTs. New drugs, such as rituximab, were included as therapeutic options for skin involvement, and rituximab, tocilizumab and nintedanib were included as therapeutic options for ILD. Recommendations for the pharmacological treatment of scleroderma renal crisis and musculoskeletal involvement were elaborated based on the expert opinion of the voting panel, as no placebo-controlled RCTs were found.
CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines updated and incorporated new treatment options for the management of SSc based on evidence from the literature and expert opinion regarding SSc, providing support for decision-making in clinical practice.

暂无摘要。

Evans syndrome is a rare disease marked by a severe clinical course, high relapse rate, infectious and thrombotic complications, and sometimes fatal outcome. Management is highly heterogeneous. There are several case reports but few large retrospective studies and no prospective or randomised trials. Here, we report the results of the first consensus-based expert recommendations aimed at harmonising the diagnosis and management of Evans syndrome in adults. After reviewing the literature, we used a fuzzy Delphi consensus method, with two rounds of a 42-item questionnaire that were scored by a panel of 13 international experts from five countries using a 7-point Likert scale. Panellists were selected by the core panel on the basis of their personal experience and previous publications on Evans syndrome and immune cytopenias; they met virtually throughout 2023. The panellists recommended extensive clinical and laboratory diagnostic tests, including bone marrow evaluation and CT scan, and an aggressive front-line therapy with prednisone (with or without intravenous immunoglobulins), with different treatment durations and tapering for immune thrombocytopenia and autoimmune haemolytic anaemias (AIHAs). Rituximab was strongly recommended as first-line treatment in cold-type AIHA and as second-line treatment in warm-type AIHA and patients with immune thrombocytopenia and antiphospholipid antibodies, previous thrombotic events, or associated lymphoproliferative diseases. However, rituximab was discouraged for patients with immunodeficiency or severe infections, with the same applying to splenectomy. Thrombopoietin receptor agonists were recommended for chronic immune thrombocytopenia and in the case of previous grade 4 infection. Fostamatinib was recommended as third-line or further-line treatment and suggested as second-line therapy for patients with previous thrombotic events. Immunosuppressive agents have been moved to third-line or further-line treatment. The panellists recommended the use of recombinant erythropoietin in AIHA in the case of inadequate reticulocyte counts, use of the complement inhibitor sutimlimab for relapsed cold AIHA, and the combination of rituximab plus bendamustine in Evans syndrome secondary to lymphoproliferative disorders. Finally, recommendations were given for supportive therapy, platelet or red blood cell transfusions, and thrombotic and antibiotic prophylaxis. These consensus-based recommendations should facilitate best practice for diagnosis and management of Evans syndrome in clinical practice.

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a life-threatening condition with increasing hospital admissions. Prompt identification and treatment of PE patients with hemodynamic collapse are essential. Conflicting recommendations and weak evidence hinder effective management of PE, resulting in unchanged mortality rates despite advancements in therapies. Current risk stratification lacks granularity, necessitating a more detailed classification to guide treatment, predict outcomes, and improve patient selection for clinical trials. This article reviews clinical practice guidelines from major North American and European societies, emphasizing the need for more research and guidance to improve mortality and morbidity outcomes in PE.

In recent years, various aspects of prostate cancer (PC) management have undergone significant changes, including the implementation of therapeutic strategies such as the use of new hormonal agents like abiraterone, apalutamide, enzalutamide or darolutamide and the incorporation of next generation imaging techniques (NGI). However, the evidence regarding the role of NGI and the therapeutic decision-making based on their findings is not solid. Following the methodology of the Advanced Prostate Cancer Consensus Conference (APCCC), a multidisciplinary expert consensus was developed to address controversial questions concerning the use of NGI and clinical management in four priority scenarios: localized PC, PC after radical prostatectomy, PC after radiotherapy with curative intent, and metastatic hormone-sensitive PC. This consensus represents the opinions of medical oncology, radiation oncology and urology physicians and provides useful recommendations for clinical practice.

In this review, we compare different refractory anaphylaxis (RA) management guidelines focusing on cardiovascular involvement and best practice recommendations, discuss postulated pathogenic mechanisms underlining RA and highlight knowledge gaps and research priorities. There is a paucity of data supporting existing management guidelines. Therapeutic recommendations include the need for the timely administration of appropriate doses of aggressive fluid resuscitation and intravenous (IV) adrenaline in RA. The preferred second-line vasopressor (noradrenaline, vasopressin, metaraminol and dopamine) is unknown. Most guidelines recommend IV glucagon for patients on beta-blockers, despite a lack of evidence. The use of methylene blue or extracorporeal life support (ECLS) is also suggested as rescue therapy. Despite recent advances in understanding the pathogenesis of anaphylaxis, the factors that lead to a lack of response to the initial adrenaline and thus RA are unclear. Genetic factors, such as deficiency in platelet activating factor-acetyl hydrolase or hereditary alpha-tryptasaemia, mastocytosis may modulate reaction severity or response to treatment. Further research into the underlying pathophysiology of RA may help define potential new therapeutic approaches and reduce the morbidity and mortality of anaphylaxis.