Citations

Objective We provide evidence‐based recommendations regarding the treatment of interstitial lung disease (ILD) in adults with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARDs). Methods We developed clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, and outcomes questions. A systematic literature review was then performed, and the available evidence was rated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology. A panel of clinicians and patients reached consensus on the direction and strength of the recommendations. Results Thirty‐five recommendations were generated (including two strong recommendations) for first‐line SARD‐ILD treatment, treatment of SARD‐ILD progression despite first‐line ILD therapy, and treatment of rapidly progressive ILD. The strong recommendations were against using glucocorticoids in systemic sclerosis–ILD as a first‐line ILD therapy and after ILD progression. Otherwise, glucocorticoids are conditionally recommended for first‐line ILD treatment in all other SARDs. Conclusion This clinical practice guideline presents the first recommendations endorsed by the American College of Rheumatology and American College of Chest Physicians for the treatment of ILD in people with SARDs.

Objective We provide evidence‐based recommendations regarding the treatment of interstitial lung disease (ILD) in adults with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARDs). Methods We developed clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, and outcomes questions. A systematic literature review was then performed, and the available evidence was rated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology. A panel of clinicians and patients reached consensus on the direction and strength of the recommendations. Results Thirty‐five recommendations were generated (including two strong recommendations) for first‐line SARD‐ILD treatment, treatment of SARD‐ILD progression despite first‐line ILD therapy, and treatment of rapidly progressive ILD. The strong recommendations were against using glucocorticoids in systemic sclerosis–ILD as a first‐line ILD therapy and after ILD progression. Otherwise, glucocorticoids are conditionally recommended for first‐line ILD treatment in all other SARDs. Conclusion This clinical practice guideline presents the first recommendations endorsed by the American College of Rheumatology and American College of Chest Physicians for the treatment of ILD in people with SARDs.

ObjectiveWe provide evidence‐based recommendations regarding screening for interstitial lung disease (ILD) and the monitoring for ILD progression in people with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARDs), specifically rheumatoid arthritis, systemic sclerosis, idiopathic inflammatory myopathies, mixed connective tissue disease, and Sjögren disease.MethodsWe developed clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, and outcomes questions related to screening and monitoring for ILD in patients with SARDs. A systematic literature review was performed, and the available evidence was rated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology. A Voting Panel of interdisciplinary clinician experts and patients achieved consensus on the direction and strength of each recommendation.ResultsFifteen recommendations were developed. For screening people with these SARDs at risk for ILD, we conditionally recommend pulmonary function tests (PFTs) and high‐resolution computed tomography of the chest (HRCT chest); conditionally recommend against screening with 6‐minute walk test distance (6MWD), chest radiography, ambulatory desaturation testing, or bronchoscopy; and strongly recommend against screening with surgical lung biopsy. We conditionally recommend monitoring ILD with PFTs, HRCT chest, and ambulatory desaturation testing and conditionally recommend against monitoring with 6MWD, chest radiography, or bronchoscopy. We provide guidance on ILD risk factors and suggestions on frequency of testing to evaluate for the development of ILD in people with SARDs.ConclusionThis clinical practice guideline presents the first recommendations endorsed by the American College of Rheumatology and American College of Chest Physicians for the screening and monitoring of ILD in people with SARDs.

Objective We provide evidence‐based recommendations regarding screening for interstitial lung disease (ILD) and the monitoring for ILD progression in people with systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (SARDs), specifically rheumatoid arthritis, systemic sclerosis, idiopathic inflammatory myopathies, mixed connective tissue disease, and Sjögren disease. Methods We developed clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, and outcomes questions related to screening and monitoring for ILD in patients with SARDs. A systematic literature review was performed, and the available evidence was rated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology. A Voting Panel of interdisciplinary clinician experts and patients achieved consensus on the direction and strength of each recommendation. Results Fifteen recommendations were developed. For screening people with these SARDs at risk for ILD, we conditionally recommend pulmonary function tests (PFTs) and high‐resolution computed tomography of the chest (HRCT chest); conditionally recommend against screening with 6‐minute walk test distance (6MWD), chest radiography, ambulatory desaturation testing, or bronchoscopy; and strongly recommend against screening with surgical lung biopsy. We conditionally recommend monitoring ILD with PFTs, HRCT chest, and ambulatory desaturation testing and conditionally recommend against monitoring with 6MWD, chest radiography, or bronchoscopy. We provide guidance on ILD risk factors and suggestions on frequency of testing to evaluate for the development of ILD in people with SARDs. Conclusion This clinical practice guideline presents the first recommendations endorsed by the American College of Rheumatology and American College of Chest Physicians for the screening and monitoring of ILD in people with SARDs.

AbstractObjectiveCritical components of the nasal endoscopic examination have not been definitively established for either the normal examination or for clinical disorders. This study aimed to identify concordance among rhinologists regarding the importance of examination findings for various nasal pathologies.Study DesignA consortium of 19 expert rhinologists across the United States was asked to rank the importance of findings on nasal endoscopy for 5 different sinonasal symptom presentations.SettingAn online questionnaire was distributed in July 2023.MethodsThe questionnaire utilized JotForm® software and featured 5 cases with a set of 4 identical questions per case, each covering a common indication for nasal endoscopy. Rankings were synthesized into Normalized Attention Scores (NASs) and Weighted Normalized Attention Scores (W‐NASs) to represent the perceived importance of each feature, scaled from 0 to 1.ResultsGeneral concordance was found for examination findings on nasal endoscopy within each case. The perceived features of importance differed between cases based on clinical presentation. For instance, in evaluating postnasal drip, the middle meatus was selected as the most important structure to examine (NAS, 0.73), with mucus selected as the most important abnormal finding (W‐NAS, 0.66). The primary feature of interest for mucus was whether it was purulent or not (W‐NAS, 0.67). Similar analyses were performed for features in each case.ConclusionThe implicit framework existing among rhinologists may help standardize examinations and improve diagnostic accuracy, augment the instruction of trainees, and inform the development of artificially intelligent algorithms to enhance clinical decision‐making during nasal endoscopy.

Spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) is a spontaneous intimal tear of the coronary artery wall. A factor rarely associated with SCAD is autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD). Using the PRISMA guidelines, we identified 10 unique cases of SCAD in ADPKD patients reported between 1998 and 2021. Ages ranged from 36 to 59 years, with an average of 44.6 years. The majority of patients were female (80%). Each case was diagnosed with a cardiovascular event: ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in 40%, non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) in 50%, and stable angina in 10%. Conservative management was used in 60% of cases. There is a significant gap in our understanding of the relationship between SCAD and ADPKD. Polycystin complex can lead to structural abnormalities in blood vessels, resulting in vascular leaks and vessel rupture. This suggests that ADPKD patients may have an elevated risk of arteriopathies, including coronary artery dissection.

ABSTRACTIntroductionThe decision to become a living donor requires consideration of a complex, interactive array of factors that could be targeted for clinical, policy, and educational interventions. Our objective was to assess how financial barriers interact with motivators, other barriers, and facilitators during this process.MethodsData were obtained from a public survey assessing motivators, barriers, and facilitators of living donation. We used multivariable logistic regression and consensus k‐means clustering to assess interactions between financial concerns and other considerations in the decision‐making process.ResultsAmong 1592 respondents, the average age was 43; 74% were female and 14% and 6% identified as Hispanic and Black, respectively. Among employed respondents (72%), 40% indicated that they would not be able to donate without lost wage reimbursement. Stronger agreement with worries about expenses and dependent care challenges was associated with not being able to donate without lost wage reimbursement (OR = 1.2, 95% CI = 1.0–1.3; OR = 1.2, 95% CI = 1.1–1.3, respectively). Four respondent clusters were identified. Cluster 1 had strong motivators and facilitators with minimal barriers. Cluster 2 had barriers related to health concerns, nervousness, and dependent care. Clusters 3 and 4 had financial barriers. Cluster 3 also had anxiety related to surgery and dependent care.ConclusionsFinancial barriers interact primarily with health and dependent care concerns when considering living organ donation. Targeted interventions to reduce financial barriers and improve provider communication regarding donation‐related risks are needed.

Objectives The aim of this study was to create and validate a 3-dimensional (3D) ultrasound model with normal and abnormal pediatric hip joint anatomy that is comparable to a pediatric hip joint in appearance and anatomy and replicates sonographic characteristics of a pediatric hip joint. Methods A 3D rendering of the bone and soft tissue was created from a computed tomography pelvic scan of a pediatric patient. This rendering was modified to include a unilateral joint effusion. The bone was 3D printed with a photopolymer plastic, whereas the soft tissue was cast with a silicone mixture in a 3D-printed mold. The effusion was simulated by injecting saline into the soft tissue cavity surrounding the bone. The ultrasound model was validated by pediatric point-of-care ultrasonographers at an international pediatric ultrasound conference. Results A pediatric hip ultrasound model was developed that simulates both normal and abnormal pediatric hip joint anatomy, each with an appropriately sized, measurable joint effusion. Validation by pediatric point-of-care ultrasonographers showed that the key aspects of a normal pediatric hip joint (femoral physis, sloped femoral neck, and adequate soft tissue) with an identifiable and measurable effusion were included in the ultrasound model. Conclusions In this study, we successfully created a cost-effective, reusable, and reproducible 3D pediatric hip ultrasound model. The majority of pediatric point-of-care ultrasonographers who evaluated the model agreed that this model is comparable to a pediatric patient for the purpose of teaching ultrasound skills and joint space measurement.

Abstract Aims Diagnosing myocardial infarction (MI) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is difficult as they often have increased high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) concentrations. Methods and results Observational US cohort study of emergency department patients undergoing hs-cTnT measurement. Cases with ≥1 hs-cTnT increase > 99th percentile were adjudicated following the Fourth Universal Definition of MI. Diagnostic performance of baseline and serial 2 h hs-cTnT thresholds for ruling-in acute MI was compared between those without and with CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2). The study cohort included 1992 patients, amongst whom 501 (25%) had CKD. There were 75 (15%) and 350 (70%) patients with CKD and 80 (5%) and 351 (24%) without CKD who had acute MI and myocardial injury. In CKD patients with baseline hs-cTnT thresholds of ≥52, >100, >200, or >300 ng/L, positive predictive values (PPVs) for MI were 36% (95% CI 28–45), 53% (95% CI 39–67), 73% (95% CI 50–89), and 80% (95% CI 44–98), and in those without CKD, 61% (95% CI 47–73), 69% (95% CI 49–85), 59% (95% CI 33–82), and 54% (95% CI 25–81). In CKD patients with a 2 h hs-cTnT delta of ≥10, >20, or >30 ng/L, PPVs were 66% (95% CI 51–79), 86% (95% CI 68–96), and 88% (95% CI 68–97), and in those without CKD, 64% (95% CI 50–76), 73% (95% CI 57–86), and 75% (95% CI 58–88). Conclusion Diagnostic performance of standard baseline and serial 2 h hs-cTnT thresholds to rule-in MI is suboptimal in CKD patients. It significantly improves when using higher baseline thresholds and delta values.