BACKGROUND: Small for gestational age is defined as a birthweight below a birthweight percentile threshold, usually the 10th percentile, with the third or fifth percentile used to identify severe small for gestational age. Small for gestational age is used as a proxy for growth restriction in the newborn, but small-for-gestational-age newborns can be physiologically small and healthy. In addition, this definition excludes growth-restricted newborns who have weights more than the 10th percentile. To address these limits, a Delphi study developed a new consensus definition of growth restriction in newborns on the basis of neonatal anthropometric and clinical parameters, but it has not been evaluated.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the prevalence of growth restriction in the newborn according to the Delphi consensus definition and to investigate associated morbidity risks compared with definitions of Small for gestational age using birthweight percentile thresholds.
METHODS: Data come from the 2016 and 2021 French National Perinatal Surveys, which include all births ≥22 weeks and/or with birthweights ≥500 g in all maternity units in France over 1 week. Data are collected from medical records and interviews with mothers after the delivery. The study population included 23,897 liveborn singleton births. The Delphi consensus definition of growth restriction was birthweight less than third percentile or at least 3 of the following criteria: birthweight, head circumference or length <10th percentile, antenatal diagnosis of growth restriction, or maternal hypertension. A composite of neonatal morbidity at birth, defined as 5-minute Apgar score <7, cord arterial pH <7.10, resuscitation and/or neonatal admission, was compared using the Delphi definition and usual birthweight percentile thresholds for defining small for gestational age using the following birthweight percentile groups: less than a third, third to fourth, and fifth to ninth percentiles. Relative risks were adjusted for maternal characteristics (age, parity, body mass index, smoking, educational level, preexisting hypertension and diabetes, and study year) and then for the consensus definition and birthweight percentile groups. Multiple imputation by chained equations was used to impute missing data. Analyses were carried out in the overall sample and among term and preterm newborns separately.
RESULTS: We identified that 4.9% (95% confidence intervals, 4.6-5.2) of newborns had growth restriction. Of these infants, 29.7% experienced morbidity, yielding an adjusted relative risk of 2.5 (95% confidence intervals, 2.2-2.7) compared with newborns without growth restriction. Compared with birthweight ≥10th percentile, morbidity risks were higher for low birthweight percentiles (less than third percentile: adjusted relative risk, 3.3 [95% confidence intervals, 3.0-3.7]; third to fourth percentile: relative risk, 1.4 [95% confidence intervals, 1.1-1.7]; fifth to ninth percentile: relative risk, 1.4 [95% confidence intervals, 1.2-1.6]). In adjusted models including the definition of growth restriction and birthweight percentile groups and excluding birthweights less than third percentile, which are included in both definitions, morbidity risks remained higher for birthweights at the third to fourth percentile (adjusted relative risk, 1.4 [95% confidence intervals, 1.1-1.7]) and fifth to ninth percentile (adjusted relative risk, 1.4 [95% confidence intervals, 1.2-1.6]), but not for the Delphi definition of growth restriction (adjusted relative risk, 0.9 [95% confidence intervals, 0.7-1.2]). Similar patterns were found for term and preterm newborns.
CONCLUSIONS: The Delphi consensus definition of growth restriction did not identify more newborns with morbidity than definitions of small for gestational age on the basis of birthweight percentiles. These findings illustrate the importance of evaluating the results of Delphi consensus studies before their adoption in clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Pollution of the indoor environment represents a concern for human health, mainly in case of prolonged exposure such as in the case of women, children, the elderly, and the chronically ill, who spend most of their time in closed environments.
METHODS: The aim of the study is to organize a group of experts in order to evaluate the evidence and discuss the main risk factors concerning indoor air and the impact on human health as well as challenging factors regarding preventive strategies to reduce pollution. The experts highlighted the main risk factors concerning indoor air, including poor ventilation, climatic conditions, chemical substances, and socio-economic status. They discussed the impact on human health in terms of mortality and morbidity, as well as challenging factors regarding preventive strategies to reduce pollution.
CONCLUSIONS: The experts identified strategies that can be reinforced to reduce indoor pollution and prevent negative consequences on human health at national and local levels.

UNASSIGNED: Current measures of alopecia areata (AA) severity, such as the Severity of Alopecia Tool score, do not adequately capture overall disease impact.
UNASSIGNED: To explore factors associated with AA severity beyond scalp hair loss, and to support the development of the Alopecia Areata Severity and Morbidity Index (ASAMI).
UNASSIGNED: A total of 74 hair and scalp disorder specialists from multiple continents were invited to participate in an eDelphi project consisting of 3 survey rounds. The first 2 sessions took place via a text-based web application following the Delphi study design. The final round took place virtually among participants via video conferencing software on April 30, 2022.
UNASSIGNED: Of all invited experts, 64 completed the first survey round (global representation: Africa [4.7%], Asia [9.4%], Australia [14.1%], Europe [43.8%], North America [23.4%], and South America [4.7%]; health care setting: public [20.3%], private [28.1%], and both [51.6%]). A total of 58 specialists completed the second round, and 42 participated in the final video conference meeting. Overall, consensus was achieved in 96 of 107 questions. Several factors, independent of the Severity of Alopecia Tool score, were identified as potentially worsening AA severity outcomes. These factors included a disease duration of 12 months or more, 3 or more relapses, inadequate response to topical or systemic treatments, rapid disease progression, difficulty in cosmetically concealing hair loss, facial hair involvement (eyebrows, eyelashes, and/or beard), nail involvement, impaired quality of life, and a history of anxiety, depression, or suicidal ideation due to or exacerbated by AA. Consensus was reached that the Alopecia Areata Investigator Global Assessment scale adequately classified the severity of scalp hair loss.
UNASSIGNED: This eDelphi survey study, with consensus among global experts, identified various determinants of AA severity, encompassing not only scalp hair loss but also other outcomes. These findings are expected to facilitate the development of a multicomponent severity tool that endeavors to competently measure disease impact. The findings are also anticipated to aid in identifying candidates for current and emerging systemic treatments. Future research must incorporate the perspectives of patients and the public to assign weight to the domains recognized in this project as associated with AA severity.

Dealing with acute cholecystitis in high-risk, critically ill, and unfit-for-surgery patients is frequent during daily practice and requires complex management. Several procedures exist to postpone and/or prevent surgical intervention in those patients who temporarily or definitively cannot undergo surgery. After a systematic review of the literature, an expert panel from the Italian Society of Emergency Surgery and Trauma (SICUT) discussed the different issues and statements in subsequent rounds. The final version of the statements was discussed during the annual meeting in Rome (September 2022). The present paper presents the definitive conclusions of the discussion. Fifteen statements based on the literature evidence were provided. The statements gave precise indications regarding the decisional process and the management of patients who cannot temporarily or definitively undergo cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. Acute cholecystitis management in high-risk, critically ill, and unfit-for-surgery patients should be multidisciplinary. The different gallbladder drainage methods must be tailored according to each patient and based on the expertise of the hospital. Percutaneous gallbladder drainage is recommended as the first choice as a bridge to surgery or in severely physiologically deranged patients. Endoscopic gallbladder drainage (cholecystoduodenostomy and cholecystogastrostomy) is suggested as a second-line alternative especially as a definitive procedure for those patients not amenable to surgical management. Trans-papillary gallbladder drainage is the last option to be reserved only to those unfit for other techniques. Delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients with percutaneous gallbladder drainage is suggested in all those patients recovering from the conditions that previously discouraged surgical intervention after at least 6 weeks from the gallbladder drainage.

OBJECTIVE: Many heart failure (HF) patients do not receive optimal guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) despite clear benefit on morbidity and mortality outcomes. Digital consults (DCs) have the potential to improve efficiency on GDMT optimization to serve the growing HF population. The investigator-initiated ADMINISTER trial was designed as a pragmatic multicenter randomized controlled open-label trial to evaluate efficacy and safety of DC in patients on HF treatment.
RESULTS: Patients (n = 150) diagnosed with HF with a reduced ejection fraction will be randomized to DC or standard care (1:1). The intervention group receives multifaceted DCs including (i) digital data sharing (e.g. exchange of pharmacotherapy use and home-measured vital signs), (ii) patient education via an e-learning, and (iii) digital guideline recommendations to treating clinicians. The consults are performed remotely unless there is an indication to perform the consult physically. The primary outcome is the GDMT prescription rate score, and secondary outcomes include time till full GDMT optimization, patient and clinician satisfaction, time spent on healthcare, and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire. Results will be reported in accordance to the CONSORT statement.
CONCLUSIONS: The ADMINISTER trial will offer the first randomized controlled data on GDMT prescription rates, time till full GDMT optimization, time spent on healthcare, quality of life, and patient and clinician satisfaction of the multifaceted patient- and clinician-targeted DC for GDMT optimization.

Radical cystectomy (RC) in bladder cancer patients with cardiovascular comorbidity poses challenges due to the need for antithrombotic therapy and high perioperative risk. We aimed to assess 30-day complications after RC in patients receiving antithrombotic therapy.
Retrospective study of 416 bladder cancer patients (2009-2017) undergoing open RC with pelvic lymph node dissection, with or without antithrombotic therapy. Antithrombotic therapy and complication reporting followed European guidelines. Procedure-specific 30-day complications were cataloged, graded (Clavien-Dindo), and quantified using the 30-day Comprehensive Complication Index. Multivariable regressions evaluated antithrombotic therapy\'s independent effect on key morbidity outcomes.
Median age was 70 years, 78% were male. Patients on antithrombotic therapy were mostly male, had higher comorbidity burden, worse kidney function, more frequent incontinent diversion, and shorter operative time (all p ≤ 0.027). Bleeding complications occurred in 135 patients (32%; 95%CI = 28-37%), more prevalent with antithrombotic therapy (46% vs. 29%; p = 0.004). Thromboembolic complications occurred in 18 patients (4.3%; 95%CI = 2.6-6.8%), no difference between patients with and without antithrombotic therapy (8.4% vs. 3.3%; p = 0.063). Prevalence of myocardial infarction, new-onset hypertension, acute congestive heart failure, and angina pectoris showed no difference (all p ≥ 0.3). Multivariable analyses indicated no association between antithrombotic therapy and cardiac complications, 30-day major complications, or cumulative morbidity (all p ≥ 0.2). Antithrombotic therapy was associated with bleeding complications (OR = 1.92; 95%CI = 1.07-3.45; p = 0.028), predominantly transfusion-related (75% of 152 bleeding complications). Limitations include retrospective data assessment with biases.
RC in patients on antithrombotic therapy exhibits a higher incidence of adverse events due to underlying comorbidities. Adherence to thromboprophylaxis guidelines enables safe RC in patients with significant comorbidities, without substantial increase in major bleeding or severe thromboembolic events.

Although rare, craniopharyngiomas constitute up to 80% of tumours in the hypothalamic-pituitary region in childhood. Despite being benign, the close proximity of these tumours to the visual pathways, hypothalamus, and pituitary gland means that both treatment of the tumour and the tumour itself can cause pronounced long-term neuroendocrine morbidity against a background of high overall survival. To date, the optimal management strategy for these tumours remains undefined, with practice varying between centres. In light of these discrepancies, as part of a national endeavour to create evidence-based and consensus-based guidance for the management of rare paediatric endocrine tumours in the UK, we aimed to develop guidelines, which are presented in this Review. These guidelines were developed under the auspices of the UK Children\'s Cancer and Leukaemia Group and the British Society for Paediatric Endocrinology and Diabetes, with the oversight and endorsement of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health using Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II methodology to standardise care for children and young people with craniopharyngiomas.

ImportanceProphylactic cyclo-oxygenase inhibitors (COX-Is) such as indomethacin, ibuprofen and acetaminophen may prevent morbidity and mortality in extremely preterm infants (born ≤28 weeks\' gestation). However, there is controversy around which COX-I, if any, is the most effective and safest, which has resulted in considerable variability in clinical practice.  Our objective was to develop rigorous and transparent clinical practice guideline recommendations for the prophylactic use of COX-I drugs for the prevention of mortality and morbidity in extremely preterm infants.  The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation evidence-to-decision framework for multiple comparisons was used to develop the guideline recommendations. A 12-member panel, including 5 experienced neonatal care providers, 2 methods experts, 1 pharmacist, 2 parents of former extremely preterm infants and 2 adults born extremely preterm, was convened. A rating of the most important clinical outcomes was established a priori. Evidence from a Cochrane network meta-analysis and a cross-sectional mixed-methods study exploring family values and preferences were used as the primary sources of evidence.  The panel recommended that prophylaxis with intravenous indomethacin may be considered in extremely preterm infants (conditional recommendation, moderate certainty in estimate of effects). Shared decision making with parents was encouraged to evaluate their values and preferences prior to therapy. The panel recommended against routine use of ibuprofen prophylaxis in this gestational age group (conditional recommendation, low certainty in the estimate of effects). The panel strongly recommended against use of prophylactic acetaminophen (strong recommendation, very low certainty in estimate of effects) until further research evidence is available.

Heart failure (HF), a type of cardiovascular disease (CVD), is a major cause of death globally and significantly burdens patients and the healthcare systems. Therefore, an improved treatment strategy is a necessity to reduce the mortality and morbidity rates and reduce its associated costs. Continuous updates in guidelines for the treatment of heart failure, especially for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), have become evident in the last 5 years. An extensive literature search was conducted and the most recently published guideline recommendations for managing HFrEF in China, Canada, Europe, Portugal, Russia, and the United States were extracted. The differences in the treatment recommendations and the associated burdens, including mortality and morbidity rates and associated costs were analyzed. The HFrEF management guidelines recommended the clinical use of medicines belonging to 4 classes: an angiotensin II-receptor blocker plus neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), beta-blockers (BB), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA), and sodium/glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i). Several differences in the management guidelines from resulted in significant variability in the disease burden in each country. The annual cost was the lowest in Russia, however, it showed the highest prevalence and incidence rates. In China, disease prevalence and incidence rates were the lowest and the annual cost was also comparatively low. The annual cost was highest in Canada, but it was associated with low prevalence. The annual cost was low in Portugal, but the prevalence was high. There were no significant differences in the prevalence and incidence rates as well as the annual costs between the United States and Europe. The global 5-year mortality rate of heart failure (HF) ranged between 50% and 70%. The research articles from the United States were cited the most (35.8%) in the guidelines. The results indicate differences between HFrEF management guidelines from different countries and their association with increased global disease burden. This study suggests that a unified global collaborative effort between countries is imperative to improve the guidelines for managing HFrEF to lower the associated burden for both the patients and the healthcare systems.

暂无摘要。