METHODS: We source daily death registry data for 4100 municipalities in Italy's north and match them to Census data. We augment the dataset with municipality-level data on a host of co-factors of COVID-19 mortality, which we exploit in a differences-in-differences regression model to analyze COVID-19-induced mortality.

RESULTS: We find that COVID-19 killed more than 0.15% of the local population during the first wave of the epidemic. We also show that official statistics vastly underreport this death toll, by about 60%. Next, we uncover the dramatic effects of the epidemic on nursing home residents in the outbreak epicenter: in municipalities with a high share of the elderly living in nursing homes, COVID-19 mortality was about twice as high as in those with no nursing home intown.

AREAS COVERED: Published and unpublished studies from January 1981 to June 2020 were systematically reviewed on PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus. Additionally, the reference list of all studies was hand-searched for additional studies. This effort identified a total of 104614 registered patients and suggests identification of at least 10590 additional PID patients, mainly from countries located in Asia and Africa. Molecular defects in genes known to cause PID were identified and reported in 13852 (13.2% of all registered) patients.

METHODS: This was a post-hoc analysis from the all-comers EASTBOURNE Registry (NCT03085823). Out of 2083 patients enrolled, an SCB was used to treat 968 (46.5%) ACS and 1115 (53.5%) CCS patients. The primary endpoint was target lesion revascularization at 12 months, while secondary endpoints were angiographic success and major adverse cardiovascular events.

RESULTS: Baseline demographics, mean reference vessel diameter and mean lesion length were comparable between ACS and CCS. Predilatation was more commonly performed in ACS (P=.007). SCB was inflated at a standard pressure in both groups with a slight trend toward longer inflation time in ACS. Angiographic success was high in both groups (ACS 97.4% vs CCS 97.7%, P=.820) with limited bailout stenting. Similarly, at 12 months the cumulative incidence of target lesion revascularization (ACS 6.6% vs CCS 5.2%, P=.258) was comparable between ACS and CCS. Conversely, a higher rate of major adverse cardiovascular events in acute presenters was mainly driven by myocardial infarction recurrencies (ACS 10.4% vs CCS 8.3%, P=.009). In-stent restenosis showed a higher proportion of target lesion revascularization and major adverse cardiovascular events than de novo lesions, independently of the type of presentation at the index procedure.

AIM: The primary objective is to determine the predictive capacity of the PPG for post-PCI FFR.

METHODS: This prospective, large-scale, controlled, investigator-initiated, multicenter study is enrolling patients with at least 1 lesion in a major epicardial vessel with a distal FFR ≤ 0.80 intended to be treated by PCI. The study will include 982 subjects. A standardized physiological assessment will be performed pre-PCI, including the online calculation of PPG from FFR pullbacks performed manually. PPG quantifies the CAD pattern by combining several parameters from the FFR pullback curve. Post-PCI physiology will be recorded using a standardized protocol with FFR pullbacks. We hypothesize that PPG will predict optimal PCI results (post-PCI FFR ≥ 0.88) with an area under the ROC curve (AUC) ≥ 0.80. Secondary objectives include patient-reported and clinical outcomes in patients with focal vs. diffuse CAD defined by the PPG. Clinical follow-up will be collected for up to 36 months, and an independent clinical event committee will adjudicate events.

RESULTS: Recruitment is ongoing and is expected to be completed in the second half of 2023.

METHODS AND RESULTS: Individual patient data for 16 922 patients from five randomized clinical trials and 46 914 patients from two HF registries were included. The registry patients were categorized into trial-eligible and non-eligible groups using the most commonly used inclusion and exclusion criteria. A total of 26 104 (56%) registry patients fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Unadjusted all-cause mortality rates at 1 year were lowest in the trial population (7%), followed by trial-eligible patients (12%) and trial-non-eligible registry patients (26%). After adjustment for age and sex, all-cause mortality rates were similar between trial participants and trial-eligible registry patients [standardized mortality ratio (SMR) 0.97; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.92-1.03] but cardiovascular mortality was higher in trial participants (SMR 1.19; 1.12-1.27). After full case-mix adjustment, the SMR for cardiovascular mortality remained higher in the trials at 1.28 (1.20-1.37) compared to RCT-eligible registry patients.

SUBJECT AND METHODS: The registry was developed and implemented using the general key steps from a resource titled "Registries for Evaluating Patient Outcomes: A User's Guide" as a guide for best practice, experience from a previously established pediatric diabetes registry in Kuwait and several other COVID-19 registries developed globally. During the pilot phase, a convenience sample of 120 children was included, of whom 66 (55%) were male.

RESULTS: Experience and expertise from other COVID-19 registries; guidance provided by the World Health Organization; and effective collaboration and cooperation between the stakeholders, study group, and data enterers during these challenging times were critical for the development and implementation of the registry. Our results were similar to international reports which showed that most children presented with mild disease (69.2%), majority (70.2%) had normal chest X-ray, and the most common symptom at presentation was fever (77%).

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to understand the role of a novel SCB for the treatment of coronary artery disease.

METHODS: EASTBOURNE (All-Comers Sirolimus-Coated Balloon European Registry) is a prospective, multicenter, investigator-driven clinical study that enrolled real-world patients treated with SCB. Primary endpoint was target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 12 months. Secondary endpoints were procedural success, myocardial infarction (MI), all-cause death, and major adverse clinical events (a composite of death, MI, and TLR). All adverse events were censored and adjudicated by an independent clinical events committee.

RESULTS: A total population of 2,123 patients (2,440 lesions) was enrolled at 38 study centers in Europe and Asia. The average age was 66.6 ± 11.3 years, and diabetic patients were 41.5%. De novo lesions (small vessels) were 56%, in-stent restenosis (ISR) 44%, and bailout stenting occurred in 7.7% of the patients. After 12 months, TLR occurred in 5.9% of the lesions, major adverse clinical events in 9.9%, and spontaneous MI in 2.4% of the patients. The rates of cardiac/all-cause death were 1.5% and 2.5%, respectively. The primary outcome occurred more frequently in the ISR cohort (10.5% vs 2.0%; risk ratio: 1.90; 95% CI: 1.13-3.19). After multivariate Cox regression model, the main determinant for occurrence of the primary endpoint was ISR (OR: 5.5; 95% CI: 3.382-8.881).

METHODS: This international, investigator-initiated, pragmatic, registry-based, single-blinded, randomised trial was undertaken in 85 intensive care units (ICUs) across 16 countries. We enrolled nutritionally high-risk adults (≥18 years) undergoing mechanical ventilation to compare prescribing high-dose protein (≥2·2 g/kg per day) with usual dose protein (≤1·2 g/kg per day) started within 96 h of ICU admission and continued for up to 28 days or death or transition to oral feeding. Participants were randomly allocated (1:1) to high-dose protein or usual dose protein, stratified by site. As site personnel were involved in both prescribing and delivering protein dose, it was not possible to blind clinicians, but patients were not made aware of the treatment assignment. The primary efficacy outcome was time-to-discharge-alive from hospital up to 60 days after ICU admission and the secondary outcome was 60-day morality. Patients were analysed in the group to which they were randomly assigned regardless of study compliance, although patients who dropped out of the study before receiving the study intervention were excluded. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03160547.

FINDINGS: Between Jan 17, 2018, and Dec 3, 2021, 1329 patients were randomised and 1301 (97·9%) were included in the analysis (645 in the high-dose protein group and 656 in usual dose group). By 60 days after randomisation, the cumulative incidence of alive hospital discharge was 46·1% (95 CI 42·0%-50·1%) in the high-dose compared with 50·2% (46·0%-54·3%) in the usual dose protein group (hazard ratio 0·91, 95% CI 0·77-1·07; p=0·27). The 60-day mortality rate was 34·6% (222 of 642) in the high dose protein group compared with 32·1% (208 of 648) in the usual dose protein group (relative risk 1·08, 95% CI 0·92-1·26). There appeared to be a subgroup effect with higher protein provision being particularly harmful in patients with acute kidney injury and higher organ failure scores at baseline.

INTERPRETATION: Delivery of higher doses of protein to mechanically ventilated critically ill patients did not improve the time-to-discharge-alive from hospital and might have worsened outcomes for patients with acute kidney injury and high organ failure scores.

METHODS: We conducted a scoping review adhering to PRISMA-ScR guidelines. We searched MEDLINE (PubMed), Google Scholar, Global Index Medicus, websites related to HF, and study references for eligible studies. Two reviewers independently performed the study selection and data extraction, including studies describing the use of individual patient records with the aim to improve the quality of care in older people with HF in LMICs.

RESULTS: A total of 222 abstracts were screened, 59 full-text articles were reviewed, and 10 studies regarding 3 registries were included in the analysis. Malaysia and Mexico implemented a HF registry in public hospitals whereas Argentina implemented a registry in the private setting. The Mexican registry, the most recent one, is the only one that publishes annual reports. There was significant variability in data fields between registries, particularly in functional evaluation and follow-up. The Ministry of Health finances the Malaysian registry, while Argentinian and Mexican registries founding was unclear.