Search

Acute asthmatic exacerbation is a common condition for pediatric emergency visits. Recently, dexamethasone has increasingly been used as an alternative to prednisone. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of dexamethasone (DEX) against prednisone/prednisolone (PRED) in managing pediatric patients with acute asthmatic exacerbation. Cochrane, Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for articles from their inception to August 2022 by two independent reviewers using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) system. The review was registered prospectively with PROSPERO (CRD42022353462). From 316 studies screened, seventeen studies met the eligibility criteria, with 5967 pediatric patients experiencing an asthma exacerbation requiring treatment with either DEX (n = 2865) or PRED (n = 3102). Baseline patient characteristics (age, sex, PRAM (pediatric respiratory assessment measure), previous corticosteroid and beta-agonist inhaler) were comparable between groups. After treatment administration, the DEX group had fewer vomiting incidents (OR = 0.24, 95% CI: 0.11, 0.51, I2 = 58%) and reduced noncompliance events (OR = 0.12, 95% CI: 0.04, 0.34, I2 = 0%) when compared to the PRED group. Regarding emergency-department (ED)-related outcomes, there were no differences in hospital admission rates (OR = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.58, 1.19, I2 = 15%), time spent in the ED (MD= −0.11 h, 95% CI: −0.52; 0.30, I2 = 82%) or relapse occurrences (OR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.30, 1.49, I2 = 52%) between both groups. Although there were no differences between the DEX and PRED groups in terms of hospital admission rates, time spent in the ED or relapse events, pediatric patients receiving DEX experienced lower noncompliance and vomiting rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Among liver injury causes, few result in marked elevation of liver enzymes to a level > 1,000 international units per liter (IU/L). This review summarizes common etiologies of marked transaminase elevation and associated prognostic factors. Methods: We performed a comprehensive search on PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar from inception through December 2022 using MOOSE guidelines for studies reporting frequency of etiologies of marked transaminase elevation. We used a proportion meta-analysis to pool frequencies with corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). I2 was used to adjudicate heterogeneity. We used CMA software for statistical analysis. Results: Seven relevant studies (n = 1608 patients) were included. The pooled frequency of ischemic hepatitis was 51% (95% CI 42–60%, I2 = 91%), viral hepatitis was 13.1% (95% CI 9.7–17.6%, I2 = 80%), toxins or drug-induced liver injury (DILI) was 13% (95% CI 8–18%, I2 = 85%), and pancreaticobiliary-related injury was 7.8% (95% CI 4.4–13.6%, I2 = 89%). Mortality was significantly higher in ischemic hepatitis versus other causes of marked transaminase elevation, with an odds ratio of 21 (95% CI 9.9–44.8, P value < 0.0001, I2 = 64% Q 11.1). Discussion: This is the first meta-analysis to examine etiologies of marked transaminase elevation > 1000 IU/L. Liver ischemia is the most common cause, while other causes include DILI or toxins, viral hepatitis, and biliary pathologies. We found biliary pathologies to be the fourth most common cause. This is clinically relevant as it has been traditionally linked to a cholestatic pattern of liver injury. Being aware of this presentation may help prevent delayed or missed diagnoses and unnecessary testing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations were found to be highly effective in phase 3 clinical trials. However, these trials have not reported data regarding the subgroup of liver disease or excluded patients with liver disease. The effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines among liver cirrhosis (LC) patients is unclear. We conducted this meta-analysis to assess the effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in LC patients. A comprehensive literature search was conducted to include all the relevant studies that compared the outcomes of LC patients who received SARS-CoV-2 vaccines vs. unvaccinated patients. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by the Mantel-Haenszel method within a random-effect model. Four studies with 51,834 LC patients (20,689 patients received at least one dose vs 31,145 were unvaccinated) were included. COVID-19–related complications, including hospitalization (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.59–0.91, P = 0.004), mortality (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.16–0.55, P = 0.0001), and need for invasive mechanical ventilation (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.11–0.77, P = 0.01), were significantly lower in the vaccinated group compared to the unvaccinated group. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in LC patients reduced COVID-19–related mortality, intubation, and hospitalization. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is highly effective in LC. Further prospective studies, preferably randomized controlled trials, are necessary to validate our findings and determine which vaccine is superior in patients with LC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. There is limited information describing the hospital outcomes of COVID-19 patients in regard to specific body mass index (BMI) categories. Methods: We utilized the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) 2020 database to collect information on patients hospitalized for COVID-19 in the United States. Using the International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) coding system, adult patients (≥18 years of age) with a primary hospitalization for COVID-19 were identified. Adjusted analyses were performed to assess for mortality, morbidity, and resource utilization, and compare the outcomes among patients categorized according to BMI. Results: A total of 305,284 patients were included in this study. Of them, 248,490 had underlying obesity, defined as BMI ≥ 30. The oldest patients were observed to have BMI < 19, while youngest patients were in the BMI > 50 category. BMI < 19 category had the highest crude in-hospital mortality rate. However, after adjusted regression, patients with BMI > 50 (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.63, 95% CI 1.48–1.79, p-value < 0.001) had the highest increased odds, at 63%, of in-hospital mortality compared to all other patients in the study. Patients with BMI > 50 also had the highest increased odds of needing invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) and mortality associated with IMV compared to all other patient, by 37% and 61%, respectively. Obese patients were noted to have shorter average hospital length of stay (LOS), by 1.07 days, compared to non-obese patients, but there was no significant difference in average hospitalization charges. Conclusion: Among obese patients primarily hospitalized with COVID-19, those with BMI ≥ 40 had significantly increased rates of all-cause in-hospital mortality, need for IMV, mortality associated with IMV, and septic shock. Overall, obese patients had shorter average hospital LOS, however, did not have significantly higher hospitalization charges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to explore overall prevalence of burnout among physicians during early and late COVID-19 pandemic and geographical differences in burnout. Methods: This review was registered prospectively with PROSPERO (CRD42022327959). A comprehensive search of several databases, including Ovid MEDLINE(R) and Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations and Daily, Ovid Embase, Ovid Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PsycINFO, and Scopus, spanning from December 2019 to May 2022 was conducted. Eligible studies included physicians or medical professionals including physicians that worked directly or indirectly with COVID-19 patients, whilst reporting burnout outcomes using a validated scale. Literature that did not include physicians or did not occur in a hospital setting were excluded. Literature including medical students were also excluded. Results: Forty-five observational studies were included, all of which were crosssectional studies. The pooled estimate of overall prevalence of burnout was 54.60% (95% CI: 46.7, 62.2). Mean emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and personal accomplishment was found to be 22.06% (95% CI: 18.19, 25.94), 8.72 (95% CI: 6.48, 10.95) and 31.18 (95% CI: 27.33, 35.03) respectively. Frontline workers displayed higher rates of burnout than second-line healthcare workers (HCW) (OR: 1.64, 95% CI: 1.13, 2.37). Studies from the early pandemic period reported burnout prevalence of 60.7% (95% CI: 48.2, 72) compared to a prevalence of 49.3% (95% CI: 37.7, 60.9) from the late pandemic period. Geographically, burnout was highest amongst Middle East and North Africa (MENA) studies (66.6%, 95% CI: 54.7, 78.5), followed by Europe (48.8%, 95% CI: 40.3, 57.3) and then South America (42%, 95% CI: -0.4, 84.4). Lastly, burnout prevalence overall (OR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.36, 1.67) emotional exhaustion (MD = -0.36, 95% CI: -4.64, 3.91), depersonalization (MD = -0.31, 95% CI: -1.80, 1.18), and personal accomplishment (MD = 0.55, 95% CI: -0.73, 1.83) were found comparable between physicians and nurses. Conclusion: COVID-19 has had significant consequences on HCW burnout. Further research is needed to examine early signs of burnout and to develop effective coping strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Patients with cancer are considered a vulnerable population and might have an increased risk for severe outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We used the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) 2020 database, the largest inpatient database in the United States, to assess COVID-19 outcomes in cancer patients. We have demonstrated that cancer patients hospitalized for COVID-19 have increased odds of all-cause in-hospital mortality and acute respiratory failure compared with non-cancer patients. Lung cancer patients have been demonstrated to have the worst mortality outcome. Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused significant mortality and mortality worldwide. There is limited information describing the outcomes of COVID-19 in cancer patients. Methods: We utilized the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) 2020 database to collect information on cancer patients hospitalized for COVID-19 in the United States. Using the International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) coding system, adult (≥18 years) patients with COVID-19 were identified. Adjusted analyses were performed to assess for mortality, morbidity, and resource utilization among cancer patients. Results: A total of 1,050,045 patients were included. Of them, 27,760 had underlying cancer. Cancer patients were older and had more comorbidities. The all-cause in-hospital mortality rate in cancer patients was 17.58% vs. 11% in non-cancer. After adjusted logistic regression, cancer patients had a 21% increase in the odds of all-cause in-hospital mortality compared with those without cancer (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.21, 95%CI 1.12–1.31, p-value < 0.001). Additionally, an increased odds in acute respiratory failure rate was found (aOR 1.14, 95%CI 1.06–1.22, p-value < 0.001). However, no significant differences were found in the odds of septic shock, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and mechanical ventilation between the two groups. Additionally, no significant differences in the mean length of hospital stay and the total hospitalization charges between cancer and non-cancer patients. Conclusion: Cancer patients hospitalized for COVID-19 had increased odds of all-cause in hospital mortality and acute respiratory failure compared with non-cancer patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Biologics have emerged as an effective treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, there is a significant proportion of patients who fail to respond to biologics. Identifying the predictors that affect the response to biologics remains challenging. A comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases was conducted through May 1, 2022. We included all studies that used a multivariate model to assess for the predictors of remission in RA patients treated with biologics. We calculated pooled odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for risk factors reported in ≥ 3 studies using a random-effects model. A total of 16,934 patients with RA who were treated with biologics were included in twenty-one studies. Our study showed that old age (OR 0.98 (0.97, 0.99), P < 0.00001), female gender (OR 0.66 (0.56, 0.77), P < 0.00001), smoking history (OR 0.86 (0.75, 0.99), P 0.04), obesity (OR 0.95 (0.91, 0.99), P 0.02), poor functional status (OR 0.62 (0.48, 1.27), P < 0.00001), high disease activity (OR 0.90 (0.85, 0.96), P 0.0005), and elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate (OR 0.99 (0.98, 1.00), P 0.009) were poor predictors of remission. On the other hand, positive anti-citrullinated protein antibodies (OR 2.52 (1.53, 4.12), P 0.0003) was associated with high remission rate. Old age, female gender, obesity, smoking history, poor functional status, high disease activity, and elevated ESR at the time of diagnosis have been associated with poor response to biologics. Our findings could help establish a risk stratification model for predicting the remission rate in RA patients receiving biologics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Inhaled pulmonary vasodilators (IPVD) have been previously studied in patients with non-coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The use of IPVD has been shown to improve the partial pressure of oxygen in arterial blood (PaO2), reduce fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) requirements, and ultimately increase PaO2/ FiO2 (P/F) ratios in ARDS patients. However, the role of IPVD in COVID-19 ARDS is still unclear. Therefore, we performed this meta-analysis to evaluate the role of IPVD in COVID-19 patients. Methods: Comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases from inception through April 22, 2022 was performed for all published studies that utilized IPVD in COVID-19 ARDS patients. The single arm studies and case series were combined for a 1-arm metaanalysis, and the 2-arm studies were combined for a 2-arm meta-analysis. Primary outcomes for the 1-arm and 2-arm meta-analyzes were change in pre- and post-IPVD P/F ratios and mortality, respectively. Secondary outcomes for the 1-arm meta-analysis were change in pre- and post-IPVD positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and lung compliance, and for the 2-arm meta-analysis the secondary outcomes were need for endotracheal intubation and hospital length of stay (LOS). Results: 13 single arm retrospective studies and 5 case series involving 613 patients were included in the 1-arm meta-analysis. 3 studies involving 640 patients were included in the 2-arm meta-analysis. The pre-IPVD P/F ratios were significantly lower compared to post-IPVD, but there was no significant difference between pre- and post-IPVD PEEP and lung compliance. The mortality rates, need for endotracheal intubation, and hospital LOS were similar between the IPVD and standard therapy groups. Conclusion: Although IPVD may improve oxygenation, our investigation showed no benefits in terms of mortality compared to standard therapy alone. However, randomized controlled trials are warranted to validate our findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen and noninvasive ventilation (NIV) have been widely used in patients with acute hypoxic respiratory failure (AHRF) due to COVID-19. However, the impact of HFNC versus NIV on clinical outcomes of COVID-19 is uncertain. Therefore, we performed this meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of HFNC versus NIV in COVID-19-related AHRF. METHODS: Several electronic databases were searched through February 10, 2022, for eligible studies comparing HFNC and NIV in COVID-19-related AHRF. Our primary outcome was intubation. The secondary outcomes were mortality, hospital length of stay (LOS), and P.../F... changes. Pooled risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) with the corresponding 95% CI were obtained using a random-effect model. Prediction intervals were calculated to indicate the variance in outcomes that would be expected if new studies were conducted in the future. RESULTS: Nineteen studies involving 3,606 subjects (1,880 received HFNC and 1,726 received NIV) were included. There were no differences in intubation (RR 1.01 [95% CI 0.85-1.20], P = .89) or LOS (MD 0.38 d [95% CI -0.61 to 1.37], P = .45) between groups, with consistent results on the subgroup of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Mortality was lower in NIV (RR 0.81 [95% CI 0.66-0.98], P = .03). However, the prediction interval was 0.41-1.59, and subgroup analysis of RCTs showed no difference in mortality between groups. There was a greater improvement in Pa.../F... with NIV (MD 22.80 [95% CI 5.30-40.31], P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that despite the greater improvement in P.../F... with NIV, intubation rates and LOS were similar between HFNC and NIV. Although mortality was lower with HFNC than NIV, the prediction interval included the null value, and there was no difference in mortality between HFNC and NIV on a subgroup of RCTs. Future large-scale RCTs are necessary to support our findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Systemic steroids are associated with reduced mortality in hypoxic patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). However, there is no consensus on the doses of steroid therapy in these patients. Several studies showed that pulse dose steroids (PDS) could reduce the progression of COVID‐19 pneumonia. However, data regarding the role of PDS in COVID‐19 is still unclear. Therefore, we performed this meta‐analysis to evaluate the role of PDS in COVID‐19 patients compared to nonpulse steroids (NPDS). Comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases from inception through February 10, 2022 was performed for all published studies comparing PDS to NPDS therapy to manage hypoxic patients with COVID‐19. Primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes were the need for endotracheal intubation, hospital length of stay (LOS), and adverse events in the form of superimposed infections. A total of 10 observational studies involving 3065 patients (1289 patients received PDS and 1776 received NPDS) were included. The mortality rate was similar between PDS and NPDS groups (risk ratio [RR]: 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.92–1.65, p = 0.16). There were no differences in the need for endotracheal intubation (RR: 0.71, 95%: CI 0.37–1.137, p = 0.31), LOS (mean difference: 1.93 days; 95% CI: −1.46–5.33; p = 0.26), or adverse events (RR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.56–1.57, p = 0.80) between the two groups. Compared to NPDS, PDS was associated with similar mortality rates, need for endotracheal intubation, LOS, and adverse events. Given the observational nature of the included studies, randomized controlled trials are warranted to validate our findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous studies have reported contradictory findings on the utility of remote physiological monitoring (RPM)-guided management of patients with chronic heart failure (HF). Multiple databases were searched for studies that evaluated the clinical efficacy of RPM-guided management versus standard of care (SOC) for HF patients. The primary outcome was HF-related hospitalization (HFH). The secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality, cardiovascular-related (CV) mortality, and emergency department (ED) visits. Pooled relative risk (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated and combined using a random-effects model. A total of 16 randomized controlled trials, including 8679 HF patients (4574 managed with RPM-guided therapy vs. 4105 managed with SOC), were included in the final analysis. The average follow-up period was 15.2 months. There was no significant difference in HFH rate between the two groups (RR: 0.94; 95% CI: 0.84–1.07; P = 0.36). Similarly, there were no significant differences in CV mortality (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.73–1.02, P = 0.08) or in ED visits (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.59–1.08, P = 0.14). However, RPM-guided therapy was associated with a borderline statistically significant reduction in all-cause mortality (RR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.78–1.00; P = 0.05). Subgroup analysis based on the strategy of RPM showed that both hemodynamic and arrhythmia telemonitoring–guided management can reduce the risk of HFH (RR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.64–0.97; P = 0.02) and (RR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.67–0.94; P = 0.008) respectively. Our study demonstrated that RPM-guided diuretic therapy of HF patients did not reduce the risk of HFH but can improve survival. Hemodynamic and arrhythmia telemonitoring–guided management could reduce the risk of HF-related hospitalizations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Catheter placement and stability are well‐known challenges in atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. As a result, steerable sheaths (SS) were developed to improve catheter stabilization and maintain proper catheter–tissue contact. The purpose of this systematic review and meta‐analysis is to see if employing a SS influences procedure outcome. Method: We performed a comprehensive literature search for studies that evaluated the efficacy and safety of SS compared to nonsteerable sheaths (NSS) in AF ablation. The primary outcome was the rate of atrial arrhythmia (AA) freedom by the time of the last follow‐up. The secondary outcomes were the procedure‐related complications and procedural characteristics. Risk ratio (RR) or the mean difference (MD) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the random‐effects model. Results: A total of 10 studies, including 967 AF patients (mean age: 59.2 ± 11.1 years, 516 patients managed with SS vs. 454 with NSS), were included. SS group showed a higher rate of freedom of AA compared to NSS (RR: 1.19; 95% CI 1.09–1.29; p <.001). Both techniques had similar rate for procedural‐related complication (RR: 1.09, 95% CI 0.50–2.39; p =.83). The SS strategy had a shorter procedure time (MD −10.6 [min], 95% CI −20.97, −0.20; p =.05) but comparable fluoroscopic and radiofrequency application times to the NSS group. Conclusions: The SS for AF catheter ablation not only reduced the total procedure time but also significantly increased the rate of successful ablation while maintaining a similar safety profile when compared to the traditional NSS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sinus of Valsalva aneurysm (SOVA) is a rare cardiac defect. In most cases, SOVA presents as an incidental finding during cardiac imaging. A dreadful complication of SOVA is spontaneous rupture, most commonly occurring into the right side of the heart resulting in an abrupt or insidiously progressive congestive heart failure. Ruptured SOVA is associated with poor prognosis with high mortality unless timely surgical intervention is deemed. We present a 23-year-old female who presented with a continuous heart murmur and exertional dyspnea. Transesophageal echocardiogram showed a ruptured 1.8 cm sinus of Valsalva aneurysm of the non-coronary cusp to the right ventricle, which resulted in a significant left-to-right shunt and pulmonary hypertension. Associated cardiac defects included ostium secundum atrial septal defect, peri-membranous ventricular septal defect, and moderate aortic and mitral valve insufficiency. The patient underwent successful surgical correction with significant resolution of the shunt and normalization of the pulmonary pressure. Despite being rare, SOVA can rupture spontaneously, resulting in decompensated heart failure. SOVA should be considered in the differential diagnosis of a continuous heart murmur. Early recognition and timely surgical intervention are pivotal in these cases to prevent further clinical deterioration or even death. LEARNING POINTS: Sinus of Valsalva aneurysms (SOVA) are usually silent until acute rupture. Rupture most commonly occurs into either the right ventricle or right atrium. A new continuous murmur is the most striking physical finding; it is always significant and must prompt urgent echocardiography to facilitate timely diagnosis and treatment. Ruptured SOVA has a poor prognosis with high mortality unless timely surgical intervention is deemed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Insulin resistance (IR) is a major contributor to the pathogenesis of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). The triglyceride-glucose (TyG) index has recently gained popularity for the assessment of IR and NAFLD due to its ease of acquisition and calculation. Therefore, we conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize the existing studies in the literature and provide a quantitative assessment of the significance of the TyG index in predicting the incidence of NAFLD. A comprehensive literature search in PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases from inception until 25 March 2022 was conducted. Published observational studies that evaluated the association between TyG index and NAFLD among the adult population and reported the hazard ratio (HR) or odds ratio (OR) for this association after multivariate analysis were included. The random-effects model was used as the primary statistical analysis model in the estimation of pooled ORs and HRs with the corresponding confidence intervals (CIs). A total of 17 observational studies, including 121,975 participants, were included. For studies analyzing the TyG index as a categorical variable, both pooled OR (6.00, CI 4.12–8.74) and HR (1.70, CI 1.28–2.27) were significant for the association between TyG index and incident NAFLD. For studies analyzing the TyG index as a continuous variable, pooled OR (2.25, CI 1.66–3.04) showed similar results. Consistent results were obtained in subgroup analyses according to the study design, sample size, ethnicity, and diabetic status. In conclusion, our meta-analysis demonstrates that a higher TyG index is associated with higher odds of NAFLD. TyG index may serve as an independent predictive tool to screen patients at high risk of NAFLD in clinical practice, especially in primary care settings. Patients with a high TyG index should be referred for a liver ultrasound and start intense lifestyle modifications. However, further large-scale prospective cohort studies are necessary to validate our findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Pulmonary edema is a leading cause of hospital admissions, morbidity, and mortality in heart failure (HF) patients. A point-of-care lung ultrasound (LUS) is a useful tool to detect subclinical pulmonary edema. We performed a comprehensive literature search of multiple databases for studies that evaluated the clinical utility of LUS-guided management versus standard care for HF patients in the outpatient setting. The primary outcome of interest was HF hospitalization. The secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality, urgent visits for HF worsening, acute kidney injury (AKI), and hypokalemia rates. Pooled risk ratio (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated and combined using random-effect model meta-analysis. A total of 3 randomized controlled trials including 493 HF patients managed in the outpatient setting (251 managed with LUS plus physical examination (PE)–guided therapy vs. 242 managed with PE-guided therapy alone) were included in the final analysis. The mean follow-up period was 5 months. There was no significant difference in HF hospitalization rate between the two groups (RR 0.65; 95% CI 0.34–1.22; P = 0.18). Similarly, there was no significant difference in all-cause mortality (RR 1.39; 95% CI 0.68–2.82; P = 0.37), AKI (RR 1.27; 95% CI 0.60–2.69; P = 0.52), and hypokalemia (RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.21–2.44; P = 0.59). However, LUS-guided therapy was associated with a lower rate for urgent care visits (RR 0.32; 95% CI 0.18–0.59; P = 0.0002). Our study demonstrated that outpatient LUS-guided diuretic therapy of pulmonary congestion reduces urgent visits for worsening symptoms of HF. Further studies are needed to evaluate LUS utility in the outpatient treatment of HF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The crystalloid fluid of choice in sepsis remains debatable. We aimed to perform a comprehensive meta-analysis to compare the effect of balanced crystalloids (BC) vs. normal saline (NS) in adults with sepsis. A systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Sciences databases through 22 January 2022, was performed for studies that compared BC vs. NS in adults with sepsis. Our outcomes included mortality and acute kidney injury (AKI), need for renal replacement therapy (RRT), and ICU length of stay (LOS). Pooled risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) with the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were obtained using a random-effect model. Fifteen studies involving 20,329 patients were included. Overall, BC showed a significant reduction in the overall mortality (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.81–0.96), 28/30-day mortality (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.79–0.95), and AKI (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.77–0.93) but similar 90-day mortality (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.90–1.03), need for RRT (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.76–1.08), and ICU LOS (MD −0.25 days, 95% CI −3.44, 2.95), were observed between the two groups. However, subgroup analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) showed no statistically significant differences in overall mortality (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.82–1.02), AKI (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.47–1.06), and need for RRT (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.36–1.41). Our meta-analysis demonstrates that overall BC was associated with reduced mortality and AKI in sepsis compared to NS among patients with sepsis. However, subgroup analysis of RCTs showed no significant differences in both overall mortality and AKI between the groups. There was no significant difference in the need for RRT or ICU LOS between BC and NS. Pending further data, our study supports using BC over NS for fluid resuscitation in adults with sepsis. Further large-scale RCTs are necessary to validate our findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Awake prone positioning (APP) has been recently proposed as an adjunctive treatment for non-intubated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients requiring oxygen therapy to improve oxygenation and reduce the risk of intubation. However, the magnitude of the effect of APP on clinical outcomes in these patients remains uncertain. We performed a comparative systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of APP to improve the clinical outcomes in non-intubated subjects with COVID-19. METHODS: The primary outcomes were the need for endotracheal intubation and mortality. The secondary outcome was hospital length of stay. Pooled risk ratio (RR) and mean difference with the corresponding 95% CI were obtained by the Mantel-Haenszel method within a random-effect model. RESULTS: A total of 14 studies (5 randomized controlled trials [RCTs] and 9 observational studies) involving 3,324 subjects (1,495 received APP and 1,829 did not) were included. There was a significant reduction in the mortality rate in APP group compared to control (RR 0.68 [95% CI 0.51-0.90]; P=5 .008, I² 5 52%) with no significant effect on intubation (RR 0.85 [95% CI 0.66-1.08]; P = .17, I² 5 63%) or hospital length of stay (mean difference 23.09 d [95% CI-10.14-3.96]; P = .39, I² = 97%). Subgroup analysis of RCTs showed significant reduction in intubation rate (RR 0.83 [95% CI 0.72-0.97]; P = .02, I² 5 0%). CONCLUSIONS: APP has the potential to reduce the in-hospital mortality rate in COVID-19 subjects with hypoxemia without a significant effect on the need for intubation or length of hospital stay. However, there was a significant decrease in the need for intubation on subgroup analysis of RCTs. More large-scale trials with a standardized protocol for prone positioning are needed to better evaluate its effectiveness in this select population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) is a recently introduced therapeutic modality in the management of calcified coronary lesions (CCAD). IVL delivers sonic pressure waves to modulate calcium, hence promote vessel compliance and optimize stent deployment.Methods: We performed a comprehensive literature search for studies that evaluated the utility of adjunctive IVL. The primary outcomes of our study were the clinical success, defined as the ability of IVL to produce residual diameter stenosis <50% (RDS < 50%) after stenting with no evidence of in-hospital major adverse cardiac events, and the angiographic success, defined as success in facilitating stent delivery with RDS < 50% and without serious angiographic complications. The secondary outcomes included post-IVL and post-stenting changes in lumen area, calcium angle, and the maximum calcium thickness. Proportional analysis was used for binary data and mean difference was used for continuous data. All meta-analyses were conducted using a random-effect model and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were included.Results: A total of eight single-arm observational studies, including 980 patients (1011 lesions), were included. 48.8% of the patients presented with acute coronary syndrome. Severe calcifications were present in 97% of lesions. Clinical success was achieved in 95.4% of patients (95%CI:92.9%-97.9%). Angiographic success was achieved in 97% of patients (95%CI:95%-99%). There was an overall increase in postprocedural lumen area as well as significant reduction of calcium angle and maximum calcium thickness.Conclusions: IVL seems to have excellent efficacy and safety in the management of CCAD. However, adequately powered RCTs are needed to evaluate IVL compared to other calcium/plaque modifying techniques. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL) is a rare form of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) that can be aggressive with rapid speed, thus mandating a timely diagnosis to optimize treatment and deter progression. NHL classically presents with lymphadenopathy and constitutional symptoms. However, ALCL can present with nonspecific cutaneous manifestations with minimal or absent constitutional symptoms. The cutaneous involvement may resemble common dermatologic conditions, delaying diagnosis. We present a case of an aggressive cutaneous ALCL lesion mimicking facial cellulitis that rapidly progressed from a small comedone to a large, exophytic mass over the course of 1 month. Prior to presentation at our institution, the patient was previously diagnosed and treated for suspected bacterial infection with no response to therapy. Core needle biopsy of the forehead lesion confirmed the diagnosis of anaplastic lymphoma kinase-negative ALCL. Chemotherapy with brentuximab vedotin, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone was planned for a total of 6–8 cycles with curative intent. By cycle 5, positron emission tomography and computed tomography demonstrated response to therapy with no enlarged or metabolically active lymph nodes appreciated. Our case report highlights the importance of developing a broad differential diagnosis for ulcerative facial masses, particularly when unresponsive to antimicrobial therapies. Lymphomas should be included in the differential diagnosis of patients with rapidly growing facial lesions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]