Swiss medical weekly最新文献

Background and study aims: Alveolar echinococcosis, an orphan zoonosis affecting the liver, is of increasing concern worldwide. Most symptomatic cases present at an advanced and inoperable stage, sometimes with biliary obstruction prompting biliary tract interventions. These are, however, associated with a high risk of infectious complications. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the effectiveness and safety of conservative and interventional treatment approaches in patients with newly diagnosed alveolar echinococcosis and biliary obstruction.

Patients and methods: Alveolar echinococcosis patients treated at two referral centres in Switzerland, presenting with hyperbilirubinaemia (total bilirubin >1.5 Upper Limit of Normal) at diagnosis were included, unless another underlying aetiology, i.e. common bile duct stones or decompensated cirrhosis, was identified. Patients were divided into two groups, according to whether they initially received a biliary tract intervention. The primary endpoint was normalisation of bilirubin levels within a 6-month period. Secondary endpoints included, among others, the occurrence of early and late biliary complications, the need for biliary tract interventions during follow-up and overall duration of hospital stays for treatment initiation and for biliary complications.

Results: 28 patients were included in this study, of whom 17 received benzimidazole therapy alone and 11 additionally received a biliary tract intervention. Baseline characteristics did not differ between groups. All but one patient in each group achieved the primary endpoint (p=0.747). Biliary tract intervention was associated with faster laboratory improvement (t1/2 1.3 vs 3.0 weeks), but also with more frequent early biliary complications (7/11 vs 1/17, p=0.002) and longer initial hospital stay (18 days vs 7 days, p=0.007).

Conclusion: Biliary obstruction in patients with newly diagnosed alveolar echinococcosis can be treated effectively with benzimidazole therapy alone. Biliary tract intervention, on the other hand, is associated with a high complication rate and should probably be reserved for patients with insufficient response to benzimidazole therapy.

Background and aim: Liver transplant recipients show suboptimal vaccine-elicited immune responses to severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination. This study aimed to assess real-world data on SARS-CoV-2 antibodies after the second and third SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in liver transplant recipients in Switzerland.

Methods: We enrolled liver transplant recipients who attended regular follow-up visits between 01/07/2021 and 30/04/2022 at the outpatient clinic of the Department of Visceral Surgery and Medicine at Bern University Hospital, Switzerland. Following the Swiss Federal Office of Public Health recommendations, we measured SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike IgG antibodies in 117 liver transplant recipients ≥4 weeks after the second SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination from 07/2021-04/2022. In case of antibody levels of <100 AU/ml, patients received a third vaccination and antibodies were re-measured. Patients with antibody levels of >100 AU/ml were defined as "responders", those with 12-100 AU/ml as "partial responders" and those with <12 AU/ml as "non-responders".

Results: After two vaccinations, 36/117 (31%) were responders, 42/117 (36%) were partial responders and 39/117 (33%) were non-responders. The humoral immune response improved significantly after the third vaccination, resulting in 31/55 (56%) responders among the previous partial or non-responders. A total of 26 patients developed COVID-19, of whom two had a moderate or severe course (both non-responders after three doses).

Discussion: One third of liver transplant recipients showed an optimal response following two vaccinations; a third dose achieved a complete antibody response in more than half of partial and non-responders. We observed only one severe course of COVID-19 and no deaths from COVID-19 in the vaccinated liver transplant recipients.

No abstract available.

Background: Primary care databases collect electronic medical records with routine data from primary care patients. The identification of chronic diseases in primary care databases often integrates information from various electronic medical record components (EMR-Cs) used by primary care providers. This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of selected chronic conditions using a large Swiss primary care database and to examine the importance of different EMR-Cs for case identification.

Methods: Cross-sectional study with 120,608 patients of 128 general practitioners in the Swiss FIRE ("Family Medicine Research using Electronic Medical Records") primary care database in 2019. Sufficient criteria on three individual EMR-Cs, namely medication, clinical or laboratory parameters and reasons for encounters, were combined by logical disjunction into definitions of 49 chronic conditions; then prevalence estimates and measures of importance of the individual EMR-Cs for case identification were calculated.

Results: A total of 185,535 cases (i.e. patients with a specific chronic condition) were identified. Prevalence estimates were 27.5% (95% CI: 27.3-27.8%) for hypertension, 13.5% (13.3-13.7%) for dyslipidaemia and 6.6% (6.4-6.7%) for diabetes mellitus. Of all cases, 87.1% (87.0-87.3%) were identified via medication, 22.1% (21.9-22.3%) via clinical or laboratory parameters and 19.3% (19.1-19.5%) via reasons for encounters. The majority (65.4%) of cases were identifiable solely through medication. Of the two other EMR-Cs, clinical or laboratory parameters was most important for identifying cases of chronic kidney disease, anorexia/bulimia nervosa and obesity whereas reasons for encounters was crucial for identifying many low-prevalence diseases as well as cancer, heart disease and osteoarthritis.

Conclusions: The EMR-C medication was most important for chronic disease identification overall, but identification varied strongly by disease. The analysis of the importance of different EMR-Cs for estimating prevalence revealed strengths and weaknesses of the disease definitions used within the FIRE primary care database. Although prioritising specificity over sensitivity in the EMR-C criteria may have led to underestimation of most prevalences, their sex- and age-specific patterns were consistent with published figures for Swiss general practice.

Aim of the study: Newly approved therapies with high and uncertain budget impact pose challenges to public health care systems worldwide. One recent example is chimeric antigen receptor T cell (CAR-T) therapies for adults with large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL). This study's primary objective is to examine the expenditures of Swiss public payers before, during, and after CAR-T cell therapy in patients with LBCL aged ≥30 years. Its secondary objective is to analyse 24-month survival rates.

Methods: This retrospective observational data analysis used the administrative databases of the Swiss health insurers Concordia, CSS, Groupe Mutuel, Helsana, ÖKK, Sanitas, SWICA, Sympany, and Visana. These health insurers or groups provide mandatory health insurance to approximately 78% of Swiss residents in 2021. Using the relevant procedure codes, we identified CAR-T therapies administered between October 2018 (first approval) and June 2021 (treatment identification cut-off). Patients aged <30 years were excluded because they might be treated for pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukaemia. Expenditures were categorised as pre-infusion, peri-infusion (excluding CAR-T therapy acquisition costs), and post-infusion based on the time of service provision. Overall survival rates were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

Results: This study identified 81 patients aged ≥30 years, with a median follow-up period for censored observations of 27 months (interquartile range: 21-31 months). The median age group was 70-74, and 60% of patients were male. Mean healthcare expenditures per patient per month amounted to CHF 8,115-22,564 pre-infusion, CHF 38,490 peri-infusion, and CHF 5,068-11,342 post-infusion. For the total peri- and post-infusion period (i.e. 1-month before infusion to 23 months after infusion), mean healthcare expenditures amounted to CHF 215,737. The 24-month overall survival rate was 48% (95% confidence interval: 38-61%).

Conclusions: Healthcare expenditures after CAR-T cell infusion are relatively high compared to previous estimates of patients with LBCL in the last year of treatment. Further research is needed to understand the drivers behind these post-infusion expenditures. Especially, clinical data should be used to assess the time until disease progression. The analysis of 24-month overall survival is consistent with results from the pivotal trials. Our findings stress the importance of post-approval studies to monitor real-world expenditures and outcomes related to innovative therapies.

No abstract available.

Introduction: Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) should be deprescribed when an indication is lacking or the dose is too high. Academic and media reports have tried to raise awareness and thereby reduce the inappropriate prescribing of PPIs. However, pharmacoepidemiologic studies have shown an unchanged frequency of such inappropriate prescribing over time. Little is known about whether or how general practitioners (GPs) adapt their prescribing practices once their awareness of inappropriate PPI prescribing has been raised.

Objective: We aimed to investigate the prevalence of potentially inappropriate PPI prescribing (too high dose or no indication) in a consecutive sample of patients in Swiss primary care settings. Our goal was then to evaluate how GPs managed the patients with potentially inappropriate PPI prescribing over 12 months after flagging these patients.

Methods: In this observational study, 11 GPs from the canton of Bern in Switzerland used their medical records to identify 20 patients who had been prescribed a PPI for ≥8 weeks and flagged potentially inappropriate PPI prescribing in their records. After 12 months, we asked the same GPs whether the PPI prescriptions of those patients had changed and, if so, how.

Results: Of 1,376 patients consecutively screened, 206 (15%) had been prescribed a PPI for ≥8 weeks. Of these 206 patients, 85 (41%) had a potentially inappropriate PPI prescription. Of these 85 patients, 55 (65%) had no indication for PPI, and 30 (35%) had a too-high dose. After one year, only 29 (35%) of the 84 flagged potentially inappropriate PPIs were stopped or reduced. The most frequently mentioned reasons that deprescribing was not possible were a lack of discussion with the patient (no contact or no time), the presence of symptoms requiring the PPI, or the unwillingness of the patient to deprescribe.

Conclusion: In the Swiss primary care setting, the rate of potentially inappropriate PPI prescribing is high. Having GPs flag potentially inappropriate PPI prescribing did not result in PPI deprescribing in most patients over 12 months. Our findings suggest that more personalised and targeted interventions are necessary to successfully implement the deprescribing of potentially inappropriate PPIs. We see the need to co-design interventions with patients and providers and test behavioural change techniques to enable the deprescribing of inappropriate PPIs.

No abstract available.

Purpose: Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening for men at risk of prostate cancer is controversial. The current recommendation is to raise awareness of prostate cancer and offer PSA screening in accordance with shared decision- making. Whether the possibility of a PSA screen is discussed with the patient depends on the treating physician, but data on physicians' attitudes towards PSA screening are scarce. This study aimed to examine internists' and urologists' personal PSA screening activity as an indicator of their attitude towards PSA screening.

Materials and methods: Members of the Swiss Society of Urology and the Swiss Society of General Internal Medicine were asked in 08/2020 to anonymously complete an online survey about personal PSA screening behaviour for themselves, their fathers, brothers and partners. Categorical and continuous variables were compared by chi-squared tests and t-tests, respectively.

Results: In total, 190/295 (response rate: 64%) urologists and 893/7400 (response rate: 12%) internists participated in the survey. Of the participants, 297/1083 (27.4%) were female. Male urologists >50 years of age screened themselves more often than male internists >50 years of age (89% vs 70%, p <0.05). Furthermore, urologists reported recommending screening statistically significantly more often than internists to their brother, father or partner regardless of their sex (men: 38.1% vs 18.5%; p <0.05; women: 81.8% vs 32.2%; p <0.05).   CONCLUSIONS: Most participating male physicians >50 years of age have screened themselves for prostate cancer. Furthermore, PSA screening of relatives was significantly associated with the urology specialty. The reasons physicians screen themselves substantially more often than the public and why male and female urologists as well as male internists perform PSA screening more frequently in their private environment than female internists should be further examined.