Notes

Protein Catabolism throughout Crops.
While the physiatric community increasingly embraces Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM), the current state of EBM training for trainees in physiatry is unclear. The purpose of this article is to report the results of the Association of Academic Physiatrists (AAP)'s surveys of physiatry residency programs in the United States (US), to discuss the implications of their findings, and to better delineate the 'baseline' upon which sound and clear recommendations for systematic EBM training can be made. The two AAP surveys of US physiatry residency programs reveal that most survey respondents report that they include EBM training in their programs that covers the five recommended steps of EBM core competencies. However, while most respondents reported using traditional pedagogical methods of training such as journal club, very few reported that their EBM training used a structured and systematic approach. Future work is needed to support and facilitate physiatry residency programs interested in adopting structured EBMs needed to support and facilitate physiatry residency programs interested in adopting structured EBM training curricula that include recommended EBM core-competencies and the evaluation of their impact.
In the field of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (PM&R), there is a continuous need to conduct literature search in advancing evidence-based practice. In addition to the traditional meta-analysis (MA) approach, many clinicians have turned their attention to systematic reviews (SyR) and scoping reviews (ScR) for research evidence to support clinical practice. In this article, the authors aim to (1) compare the similarities, differences, pros, and cons between a scoping review (ScR), a systematic review (SyR), and a meta-analysis (MA); (2) summarize the fundamental stages in conducting a scoping review (ScR). Examples of recently published articles relevant to PM&R are presented to illustrate the concept and value of scoping reviews (ScR).
In the field of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (PM&R), there is a continuous need to conduct literature search in advancing evidence-based practice. In addition to the traditional meta-analysis (MA) approach, many clinicians have turned their attention to systematic reviews (SyR) and scoping reviews (ScR) for research evidence to support clinical practice. In this article, the authors aim to (1) compare the similarities, differences, pros, and cons between a scoping review (ScR), a systematic review (SyR), and a meta-analysis (MA); (2) summarize the fundamental stages in conducting a scoping review (ScR). Examples of recently published articles relevant to PM&R are presented to illustrate the concept and value of scoping reviews (ScR).
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most frequent sustained arrhythmia. It increases the risk of stroke, heart failure, death, hospitalizations, and costs.

Several scores were introduced to stratify the stroke risk and need for anticoagulation in patients (pts) with AF . CHA2DS2-VASc, the most frequently used score, as well as other stroke risk scores have been additionally applied to estimate outcomes for different other conditions, with inhomogeneous results. To date, there has been no consensus regarding the usefulness of these scores to estimate outcomes outside of thromboembolic risk assessment, and their value in estimating different end-point outcomes is still a subject of debate. We conducted this review to investigate whether the stroke risk scores' utility can be extended for the prediction of other severe outcomes in pts with AF.

We searched PubMed database and included studies that stratified the outcome of pts with AF by different stroke risk scores. We also included studies with a separate anats, but not with serious bleeding.
CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc are useful tools in identifying pts with AF at higher risk for all-cause death, regardless of other pathologies. Both scores correlated with the development of acute myocardial infarction, cardiovascular hospitalization, outcome in stroke, major adverse cardiovascular events, and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebral events, but not with serious bleeding.
Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) represents a major tool of non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) management. The real-world usage of potent P2Y12 inhibitors within DAPT in middle-income countries is poorly described.

To assess the factors that influence P2Y12 inhibitor choice at discharge in invasively managed NSTE-ACS patients, without an indication for oral anticoagulation, treated across Romania.

The Romanian National NSTE-ACS Registry allows the consecutive enrollment of NSTE-ACS patients admitted in 11 (of 24) interventional centers reimbursed from public funds.

NSTE-ACS patients that received DAPT at discharge were identified. Deceased patients, those with an indication for oral anticoagulation or not receiving DAPT at discharge, were excluded. Fumarate hydratase-IN-1 cost P2Y12 inhibitor choice was analyzed based on demographic, clinical, and invasive management characteristics.

One thousand fifty (63 ± 10 years, 73% male) of 1418 patients enrolled between 2016 and 2019 were analyzed. The P2Y12 inhibitor pntroduced in November 2017 doubled its yearly usage.
DAPT, P2Y12 inhibitor pretreatment, and single vessel PCI are the standards of care in invasively managed NSTE-ACS patients in Romania. Besides the clinical and invasive characteristics that favor its use, the full reimbursement of ticagrelor introduced in November 2017 doubled its yearly usage.
Left ventricular thrombus (LVT) may develop in systolic heart failure or after acute myocardial infarction. The current recommendations support the use of vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for the treatment of LVT. Limited data exist regarding the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with LVT. This meta-analysis aims to investigate the efficacy and safety of DOACs versus VKAs for LVT.

We performed a comprehensive literature search using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases through November 2020 for all studies that evaluated the efficacy and safety of DOACs versus VKAs in patients with LVT. The primary outcomes were LVT resolution, overall thromboembolic events, and thromboembolic stroke. The secondary outcomes were major bleeding and all-cause mortality. Pooled risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were obtained by the Mantel-Haenszel method within a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed by I2 statistic.

A total of 11 studies including 2153 patients with LVT on anticoagulation (570 on DOACs vs.
Homepage: https://www.selleckchem.com/products/fumarate-hydratase-in-1.html