Search

The purpose of this review is to understand the underlying mechanism that leads to pericarditis in systemic autoimmune and autoinflammatory diseases. The underlying mechanism plays a vital role in the appropriate management of patients. In addition, we will review the current landscape of available cardiac imaging modalities with emphasis on pericardial conditions as well as proposed treatment and management tailored toward pericardial autoimmune and autoinflammatory processes.Approximately 22% of all cases of pericarditis with a known etiology are caused by systemic autoimmune diseases such as systemic lupus erythematosus, rheumatoid arthritis, systemic sclerosis, and vasculitis. In recent years, there have been advancements of imaging modalities including cardiac MRI, cardiac CT scan, and PET scan and their respective nuances in regard to contrast use, technique, and views which clinicians may utilize to better understand the extent of a patient's pericardial pathology and the trajectory of his or her disease process. In this review, we will discuss systemic autoimmune and autoinflammatory diseases that involve the pericardium. We will also review different imaging modalities that are currently used to further characterize such conditions. Having a deeper understanding of such techniques will improve patient outcomes by helping clinicians tailor treatment plans according to the unique underlying condition.

Marijuana use is on the rise in the United States. By the end of 2019, 33 states have legalized marijuana use and marijuana byproduct use for medical purposes. However, marijuana use does not come without side effects. This manuscript reviews the increasing usage of marijuana and the different forms (natural and synthetic) that patients may use when presenting to clinicians. It also addresses the biochemical and behavioral changes observed with marijuana use, including the location and changes associated with cannabinoid receptors (abbreviated CB1 and CB2). These two topics lead into an extensive review of the side effects of marijuana use. This manuscript discusses gastrointestinal side-effects, such as Cannabinoid Hyperemesis Syndrome, pancreatitis, and hepatotoxicity. It also briefly reviews cardiovascular, neurologic, and pulmonary side effects. This article provides an overview of therapeutic effects of marijuana including the antiemetic effect, its medical utility as an appetite stimulant, and usefulness in cancer patients post-chemotherapy. A thorough social history pertaining to marijuana use is an important consideration for clinicians in patients presenting with a variety of symptoms, including those effecting the gastrointestinal, cardiovascular, pulmonary, or neurologic systems.

Background Interscalene block provides optimal shoulder surgery analgesia, but concerns over its associated risks have prompted the search for alternatives. Suprascapular block was recently proposed as an interscalene block alternative, but evidence of its comparative analgesic effect is conflicting. This meta-analysis compares the analgesic effect and safety of suprascapular block versus interscalene block for shoulder surgery. Methods Databases were searched for randomized trials comparing interscalene block with suprascapular block for shoulder surgery. Postoperative 24-h cumulative oral morphine consumption and the difference in the area under curve for pooled rest pain scores were designated as primary outcomes. Analgesic and safety outcomes, particularly block-related and respiratory complications, were evaluated as secondary outcomes. Results were pooled using random-effects modeling. Results Data from 16 studies (1,152 patients) were analyzed. Interscalene block and suprascapular block were not different in 24-h morphine consumption. The difference in area under the curve of pain scores for the 24-h interval favored interscalene block by 1.1 cm/h, but this difference was not clinically important. Compared with suprascapular block, interscalene block reduced postoperative pain but not opioid consumption during recovery room stay by a weighted mean difference (95% CI) of 1.5 cm (0.6 to 2.5 cm; P < 0.0001). Pain scores were not different at any other time. In contrast, suprascapular block reduced the odds of block-related and respiratory complications. Conclusions This review suggests that there are no clinically meaningful analgesic differences between suprascapular block and interscalene block except for interscalene block providing better pain control during recovery room stay; however, suprascapular block has fewer side effects. These findings suggest that suprascapular block may be considered an effective and safe interscalene block alternative for shoulder surgery.