Claudio Azzolini

Bio: Claudio Azzolini is an academic researcher from University of Insubria. The author has contributed to research in topics: Visual acuity & Vitrectomy. The author has an hindex of 25, co-authored 103 publications receiving 2445 citations. Previous affiliations of Claudio Azzolini include University of Milan & Seconda Università degli Studi di Napoli.

Detection of Keratoconus With a New Biomechanical Index

Abstract: Purpose To evaluate the ability of a new combined biomechanical index called the Corvis Biomechanical Index (CBI) based on corneal thickness profile and deformation parameters to separate normal from keratoconic patients. Methods Six hundred fifty-eight patients (329 eyes in each database) were included in this multicenter retrospective study. Patients from two clinics located on different continents were selected to test the capability of the CBI to separate healthy and keratoconic eyes in more than one ethnic group using the Corvis ST (Oculus Optikgerate GmbH, Wetzlar, Germany). Logistic regression was employed to determine, based on Database 1 as the development dataset, the optimal combination of parameters to accurately separate normal from keratoconic eyes. The CBI was subsequently independently validated on Database 2. Results The CBI included several dynamic corneal response parameters: deformation amplitude ratio at 1 and 2 mm, applanation 1 velocity, standard deviation of deformation amplitude at highest concavity, Ambrosio's Relational Thickness to the horizontal profile, and a novel stiffness parameter. The receiver operating characteristic curve analysis of the training database showed an area under the curve of 0.983. With a cut-off value of 0.5, 98.2% of the cases were correctly classified with 100% specificity and 94.1% sensitivity. In the validation dataset, the same cut-off point correctly classified 98.8% of the cases with 98.4% specificity and 100% sensitivity. Conclusions The CBI was shown to be highly sensitive and specific to separate healthy from keratoconic eyes. The presence of an external validation dataset confirms this finding and suggests the possible use of the CBI in everyday clinical practice to aid in the diagnosis of keratoconus. [J Refract Surg. 2016;32(12):803-810.].

Efficacy and Safety of Three Different Cumulative Doses of Intravenous Methylprednisolone for Moderate to Severe and Active Graves' Orbitopathy

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Optimal doses of i.v. glucocorticoids for Graves' orbitopathy (GO) are undefined. METHODS: We carried out a multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial to determine efficacy and safety of three doses of i.v. methylprednisolone in 159 patients with moderate to severe and active GO. Patients were randomized to receive a cumulative dose of 2.25, 4.98, or 7.47 g in 12 weekly infusions. Efficacy was evaluated objectively at 12 wk by blinded ophthalmologists and subjectively by blinded patients (using a GO specific quality of life questionnaire). Adverse events were recorded at each visit. RESULTS: Overall ophthalmic improvement was more common using 7.47 g (52%) than 4.98 g (35%; P = 0.03) or 2.25 g (28%; P = 0.01). Compared with lower doses, the high-dose regimen led to the most improvement in objective measurement of ocular motility and in the Clinical Activity Score. The Clinical Activity Score decreased in all groups and to the least extent with 2.25 g. Quality of life improved most in the 7.47-g group, although not reaching statistical significance. No significant differences occurred in exophthalmos, palpebral aperture, soft tissue changes, and subjective diplopia score. Dysthyroid optic neuropathy developed in several patients in all groups. Because of this, differences among the three groups were no longer apparent at the exploratory 24-wk visit. Major adverse events were slightly more frequent using the highest dose but occurred also using the lowest dose. Among patients whose GO improved at 12 wk, 33% in the 7.47-group, 21% in the 4.98-group, and 40% in the 2.25-group had relapsing orbitopathy after glucocorticoid withdrawal at the exploratory 24-wk visit. CONCLUSIONS: The 7.47-g dose provides short-term advantages over lower doses. However, this benefit is transient and associated with slightly greater toxicity. The use of a cumulative dose of 7.47 g of methylprednisolone provides short-term advantage over lower doses. This may suggest that an intermediate-dose regimen be used in most cases and the high-dose regimen be reserved to most severe cases of GO.

Prevalence and natural history of Graves' orbitopathy in a large series of patients with newly diagnosed graves' hyperthyroidism seen at a single center.

Abstract: Background: The prevalence and natural history of Graves' orbitopathy (GO) are poorly documented. Methods: A large series of 346 patients with newly diagnosed and recent onset Graves' hyperthyroidism seen at a single (nontertiary referral) center over an 8-year period were enrolled in an observational prospective study and evaluated for GO activity and severity according to the EUGOGO (European Group on Graves' Orbitopathy) criteria. After excluding patients immediately treated for moderate-to-severe GO, patients undergoing total thyroidectomy or radioactive iodine treatment, and patients lost to follow-up, 237 patients were submitted to antithyroid drug (ATD) treatment, with ocular evaluation at 6, 12, and 18 months. Results: Among the whole cohort, at presentation 255 (73.7%) had no ocular involvement, 70 (20.2%) had mild and inactive GO, 20 (5.8%) had moderate-to-severe and active GO, and 1 (0.3%) had sight-threatening GO with dysthyroid optic neuropathy. Of the 237 patients who completed the 18-month ...

Influence of Pachymetry and Intraocular Pressure on Dynamic Corneal Response Parameters in Healthy Patients.

Abstract: Purpose To evaluate the influence of pachymetry, age, and intraocular pressure in normal patients and to provide normative values for all dynamic corneal response parameters (DCRs) provided by dynamic Scheimpflug analysis. Methods Seven hundred five healthy patients were included in this multicenter retrospective study. The biomechanical response data were analyzed to obtain normative values with their dependence on corrected and clinically validated intraocular pressure estimates developed using the finite element method (bIOP), central corneal thickness (CCT), and age, and to evaluate the influence of bIOP, CCT, and age. Results The results showed that all DCRs were correlated with bIOP except deflection amplitude (DefA) ratio, highest concavity (HC) radius, and inverse concave radius. The analysis of the relationship of DCRs with CCT indicated that HC radius, inverse concave radius, deformation amplitude (DA) ratio, and DefA ratio were correlated with CCT (rho values of 0.343, -0.407, -0.444, and -0.406, respectively). The age group subanalysis revealed that primarily whole eye movement followed by DA ratio and inverse concave radius were the parameters that were most influenced by age. Finally, custom software was created to compare normative values to imported examinations. Conclusions HC radius, inverse concave radius, DA ratio, and DefA ratio were shown to be suitable parameters to evaluate in vivo corneal biomechanics due to their independence from IOP and their correlation with pachymetry and age. The creation of normative values allows the interpretation of an abnormal examination without the need to match every case with another normal patient matched for CCT and IOP. [J Refract Surg. 2016;32(8):550-561.].

Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine

Abstract: The 11th edition of Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine welcomes Anthony Fauci to its editorial staff, in addition to more than 85 new contributors. While the organization of the book is similar to previous editions, major emphasis has been placed on disorders that affect multiple organ systems. Important advances in genetics, immunology, and oncology are emphasized. Many chapters of the book have been rewritten and describe major advances in internal medicine. Subjects that received only a paragraph or two of attention in previous editions are now covered in entire chapters. Among the chapters that have been extensively revised are the chapters on infections in the compromised host, on skin rashes in infections, on many of the viral infections, including cytomegalovirus and Epstein-Barr virus, on sexually transmitted diseases, on diabetes mellitus, on disorders of bone and mineral metabolism, and on lymphadenopathy and splenomegaly. The major revisions in these chapters and many

2016 American Thyroid Association Guidelines for Diagnosis and Management of Hyperthyroidism and Other Causes of Thyrotoxicosis

Abstract: Background Thyrotoxicosis has multiple etiologies, manifestations, and potential therapies. Appropriate treatment requires an accurate diagnosis and is influenced by coexisting medical conditions and patient preference. This document describes evidence-based clinical guidelines for the management of thyrotoxicosis that would be useful to generalist and subspecialty physicians and others providing care for patients with this condition. Methods The American Thyroid Association (ATA) previously cosponsored guidelines for the management of thyrotoxicosis that were published in 2011. Considerable new literature has been published since then, and the ATA felt updated evidence-based guidelines were needed. The association assembled a task force of expert clinicians who authored this report. They examined relevant literature using a systematic PubMed search supplemented with additional published materials. An evidence-based medicine approach that incorporated the knowledge and experience of the panel was used to update the 2011 text and recommendations. The strength of the recommendations and the quality of evidence supporting them were rated according to the approach recommended by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Group. Results Clinical topics addressed include the initial evaluation and management of thyrotoxicosis; management of Graves' hyperthyroidism using radioactive iodine, antithyroid drugs, or surgery; management of toxic multinodular goiter or toxic adenoma using radioactive iodine or surgery; Graves' disease in children, adolescents, or pregnant patients; subclinical hyperthyroidism; hyperthyroidism in patients with Graves' orbitopathy; and management of other miscellaneous causes of thyrotoxicosis. New paradigms since publication of the 2011 guidelines are presented for the evaluation of the etiology of thyrotoxicosis, the management of Graves' hyperthyroidism with antithyroid drugs, the management of pregnant hyperthyroid patients, and the preparation of patients for thyroid surgery. The sections on less common causes of thyrotoxicosis have been expanded. Conclusions One hundred twenty-four evidence-based recommendations were developed to aid in the care of patients with thyrotoxicosis and to share what the task force believes is current, rational, and optimal medical practice.

Optical Coherence Tomography of the Human Retina

Abstract: Objective: To demonstrate optical coherence tomography for high-resolution, noninvasive imaging of the human retina. Optical coherence tomography is a new imaging technique analogous to ultrasound B scan that can provide cross-sectional images of the retina with micrometer-scale resolution. Design: Survey optical coherence tomographic examination of the retina, including the macula and optic nerve head in normal human subjects. Settings Research laboratory. Participants: Convenience sample of normal human subjects. Main Outcome Measures: Correlation of optical coherence retinal tomographs with known normal retinal anatomy. Results: Optical coherence tomographs can discriminate the cross-sectional morphologic features of the fovea and optic disc, the layered structure of the retina, and normal anatomic variations in retinal and retinal nerve fiber layer thicknesses with 10- μm depth resolution. Conclusion: Optical coherence tomography is a potentially useful technique for high depth resolution, cross-sectional examination of the fundus.

Rapid, point-of-care antigen and molecular-based tests for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Abstract: Background Accurate rapid diagnostic tests for SARS‐CoV‐2 infection could contribute to clinical and public health strategies to manage the COVID‐19 pandemic. Point‐of‐care antigen and molecular tests to detect current infection could increase access to testing and early confirmation of cases, and expediate clinical and public health management decisions that may reduce transmission. Objectives To assess the diagnostic accuracy of point‐of‐care antigen and molecular‐based tests for diagnosis of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. We consider accuracy separately in symptomatic and asymptomatic population groups. Search methods Electronic searches of the Cochrane COVID‐19 Study Register and the COVID‐19 Living Evidence Database from the University of Bern (which includes daily updates from PubMed and Embase and preprints from medRxiv and bioRxiv) were undertaken on 30 Sept 2020. We checked repositories of COVID‐19 publications and included independent evaluations from national reference laboratories, the Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics and the Diagnostics Global Health website to 16 Nov 2020. We did not apply language restrictions. Selection criteria We included studies of people with either suspected SARS‐CoV‐2 infection, known SARS‐CoV‐2 infection or known absence of infection, or those who were being screened for infection. We included test accuracy studies of any design that evaluated commercially produced, rapid antigen or molecular tests suitable for a point‐of‐care setting (minimal equipment, sample preparation, and biosafety requirements, with results within two hours of sample collection). We included all reference standards that define the presence or absence of SARS‐CoV‐2 (including reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT‐PCR) tests and established diagnostic criteria). Data collection and analysis Studies were screened independently in duplicate with disagreements resolved by discussion with a third author. Study characteristics were extracted by one author and checked by a second; extraction of study results and assessments of risk of bias and applicability (made using the QUADAS‐2 tool) were undertaken independently in duplicate. We present sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each test and pooled data using the bivariate model separately for antigen and molecular‐based tests. We tabulated results by test manufacturer and compliance with manufacturer instructions for use and according to symptom status. Main results Seventy‐eight study cohorts were included (described in 64 study reports, including 20 pre‐prints), reporting results for 24,087 samples (7,415 with confirmed SARS‐CoV‐2). Studies were mainly from Europe (n = 39) or North America (n = 20), and evaluated 16 antigen and five molecular assays. We considered risk of bias to be high in 29 (37%) studies because of participant selection; in 66 (85%) because of weaknesses in the reference standard for absence of infection; and in 29 (37%) for participant flow and timing. Studies of antigen tests were of a higher methodological quality compared to studies of molecular tests, particularly regarding the risk of bias for participant selection and the index test. Characteristics of participants in 35 (45%) studies differed from those in whom the test was intended to be used and the delivery of the index test in 39 (50%) studies differed from the way in which the test was intended to be used. Nearly all studies (97%) defined the presence or absence of SARS‐CoV‐2 based on a single RT‐PCR result, and none included participants meeting case definitions for probable COVID‐19. Antigen tests Forty‐eight studies reported 58 evaluations of antigen tests. Estimates of sensitivity varied considerably between studies. There were differences between symptomatic (72.0%, 95% CI 63.7% to 79.0%; 37 evaluations; 15530 samples, 4410 cases) and asymptomatic participants (58.1%, 95% CI 40.2% to 74.1%; 12 evaluations; 1581 samples, 295 cases). Average sensitivity was higher in the first week after symptom onset (78.3%, 95% CI 71.1% to 84.1%; 26 evaluations; 5769 samples, 2320 cases) than in the second week of symptoms (51.0%, 95% CI 40.8% to 61.0%; 22 evaluations; 935 samples, 692 cases). Sensitivity was high in those with cycle threshold (Ct) values on PCR ≤25 (94.5%, 95% CI 91.0% to 96.7%; 36 evaluations; 2613 cases) compared to those with Ct values >25 (40.7%, 95% CI 31.8% to 50.3%; 36 evaluations; 2632 cases). Sensitivity varied between brands. Using data from instructions for use (IFU) compliant evaluations in symptomatic participants, summary sensitivities ranged from 34.1% (95% CI 29.7% to 38.8%; Coris Bioconcept) to 88.1% (95% CI 84.2% to 91.1%; SD Biosensor STANDARD Q). Average specificities were high in symptomatic and asymptomatic participants, and for most brands (overall summary specificity 99.6%, 95% CI 99.0% to 99.8%). At 5% prevalence using data for the most sensitive assays in symptomatic people (SD Biosensor STANDARD Q and Abbott Panbio), positive predictive values (PPVs) of 84% to 90% mean that between 1 in 10 and 1 in 6 positive results will be a false positive, and between 1 in 4 and 1 in 8 cases will be missed. At 0.5% prevalence applying the same tests in asymptomatic people would result in PPVs of 11% to 28% meaning that between 7 in 10 and 9 in 10 positive results will be false positives, and between 1 in 2 and 1 in 3 cases will be missed. No studies assessed the accuracy of repeated lateral flow testing or self‐testing. Rapid molecular assays Thirty studies reported 33 evaluations of five different rapid molecular tests. Sensitivities varied according to test brand. Most of the data relate to the ID NOW and Xpert Xpress assays. Using data from evaluations following the manufacturer’s instructions for use, the average sensitivity of ID NOW was 73.0% (95% CI 66.8% to 78.4%) and average specificity 99.7% (95% CI 98.7% to 99.9%; 4 evaluations; 812 samples, 222 cases). For Xpert Xpress, the average sensitivity was 100% (95% CI 88.1% to 100%) and average specificity 97.2% (95% CI 89.4% to 99.3%; 2 evaluations; 100 samples, 29 cases). Insufficient data were available to investigate the effect of symptom status or time after symptom onset. Authors' conclusions Antigen tests vary in sensitivity. In people with signs and symptoms of COVID‐19, sensitivities are highest in the first week of illness when viral loads are higher. The assays shown to meet appropriate criteria, such as WHO's priority target product profiles for COVID‐19 diagnostics (‘acceptable’ sensitivity ≥ 80% and specificity ≥ 97%), can be considered as a replacement for laboratory‐based RT‐PCR when immediate decisions about patient care must be made, or where RT‐PCR cannot be delivered in a timely manner. Positive predictive values suggest that confirmatory testing of those with positive results may be considered in low prevalence settings. Due to the variable sensitivity of antigen tests, people who test negative may still be infected. Evidence for testing in asymptomatic cohorts was limited. Test accuracy studies cannot adequately assess the ability of antigen tests to differentiate those who are infectious and require isolation from those who pose no risk, as there is no reference standard for infectiousness. A small number of molecular tests showed high accuracy and may be suitable alternatives to RT‐PCR. However, further evaluations of the tests in settings as they are intended to be used are required to fully establish performance in practice. Several important studies in asymptomatic individuals have been reported since the close of our search and will be incorporated at the next update of this review. Comparative studies of antigen tests in their intended use settings and according to test operator (including self‐testing) are required.