Anesthetic neurotoxicity in the developing brain: an update on theinsights and implications for fetal surgery.

This review describes an in-depth analysis of the neurotoxicity associated with the anesthetic agents used during fetal surgery, intending to highlight the importance of understanding the effects of general anesthetics on the developing brain, particularly in the context of open fetal surgery, where high doses are applied to facilitate surgical access and augment uterine relaxation. We examined evidence from preclinical studies in rodents and primates, along with studies in human subjects, with the results collectively suggesting that general anesthetics can disrupt brain development and lead to long-lasting neurological deficits. Our review underscores the clinical implications of these findings, indicating an association between extensive anesthetic exposure in early life and subsequent cognitive deficits. The current standard of anesthetic care for fetal surgical procedures was scrutinized, and recommendations have been proposed to mitigate the risk of anesthetic neurotoxicity. These recommendations emphasize the need for careful selection of anesthetic techniques to minimize fetal exposure to potentially harmful agents. In conclusion, while the benefits of fetal surgery in addressing immediate risks often outweigh the potential neurotoxic effects of anesthesia, the long-term developmental impacts nevertheless warrant consideration. Our analysis suggests that the use of general anesthetics in fetal surgery, especially at high doses, poses a significant risk of developmental neurotoxicity. As such, it is imperative to explore safer alternatives, such as employing different methods of uterine relaxation and minimizing the use of general anesthetics, to achieve the necessary surgical conditions. Further research, particularly in clinical settings, is essential to fully understand the risks and benefits of anesthetic techniques in fetal surgery.

Factors Associated With Missed Appointments at an Academic Pain Treatment Center: A Prospective Year-Long Longitudinal Study.

BACKGROUND: Interventional pain treatment centers represent an integral part of interdisciplinary care. Barriers to effective treatment include access to care and financial issues related to pain clinic operations. To address these challenges, specialty clinics have taken steps to identify and remedy missed clinic appointments. However, no prospective study has sought to identify factors associated with pain clinic "no-shows." METHODS: We performed a prospective, longitudinal year-long study in an inner-city, academic pain clinic in which patients scheduled for office visits and procedures were categorized as to whether they showed up or did not show up for their scheduled appointment without cancelling the day before. Twenty demographic (age, employment status), clinical (eg, diagnosis, duration of pain), and environmental (season, time and day of appointment) variables were assessed for their association with missing an appointment. The logistic regression model predicting no-shows was internally validated with crossvalidation and bootstrapping methods. A predictive nomogram was developed to display effect size of predictors for no-shows. RESULTS: No-show data were collected on 5134 patients out of 5209 total appointments for a capture rate of 98.6%. The overall no-show rate was 24.6% and was higher in individuals who were young (<65 years), single, of ethnic minority background, received Medicare/Medicaid, had a primary diagnosis of low back pain or headaches, were seen on a day with rain or snow or for an initial consult, and had at least 1 previous pain provider. Model discrimination (area under curve) was 0.738 (99% confidence interval, 0.70-0.85). A minimum threshold of 350 points on the nomogram predicted greater than 55% risk of no-shows. CONCLUSIONS: We found a high no-show rate, which was associated with predictable and unpredictable (eg, snow) factors. Steps to reduce the no-show rate are discussed. To maximize access to care, operation managers should consider a regression model that accounts for patient-level risk of predictable no-shows. Knowing the patient level, no-show rate can potentially help to optimize the schedule programming by staggering low- versus high-probability no-shows.

Reconstructive treatment for antiretroviral-associated facial lipoatrophy: a prospective study comparing autologous fat and synthetic substances.

Lipodystrophy is one of the foremost concerns among the HIV-positive population, and is often associated with psychosocial disorders. We evaluated the clinical efficacy of facial infiltrations with autologous fat, polylactic acid, and polyacrylamide gel using clinical inspection and facial photographs (ordinal scale). Additionally, we assessed the safety of the infiltration techniques and determined changes in patient satisfaction, emotional status, and quality of life. Evaluations were made at 48- and 96-week follow-up visits. This paper presents the 48- week follow-up results. The current analysis includes 138 patients: 8, 25, and 105 in the fat, polylactic acid, and polyacrylamide gel groups, respectively. At baseline, almost 50% of the patients (67/138) presented grades 3 and 4 lipoatrophy, but at week 48 only 7.5% (7/93) remained in these advanced grades (no patients from the polyacrylamide group). A new round of infiltrations at week 48 was necessary in 35% (33/93) of patients (88%, 84%, and 8% in the fat, polylactic, and polyacrylamide groups, respectively). No serious adverse events were detected with any of the substances. Patient satisfaction and quality of life improved significantly in all three groups. Infiltrations with autologous fat, polylactic acid, or polyacrylamide gel appear to be an effective and safe alternative to repair facial lipoatrophy, at least up to 48 weeks, significantly improving patient quality of life. Similar results were observed for all degrees of severity and between genders. Polyacrylamide gel provided the longest lasting benefits.

Ezetimibe, a promising lipid-lowering agent for the treatment of dyslipidaemia in HIV-infected patients with poor response to statins.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetic interactions of ezetimibe in HIV-infected patients with poorly controlled antiretroviral-associated dyslipidaemia while taking pravastatin alone. DESIGN: A prospective, open-label, one-arm study of 24 weeks duration. PATIENTS AND SETTING: Nineteen patients (18 on stable HAART), with low density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol values of > or = 130 mg/dl despite the use of pravastatin. METHODS: Ezetimibe, 10 mg/day, was added to pravastatin 20 mg/day, while patients maintained the same antiretroviral regimen. Determinations of total, LDL-, and high density lipoprotein (HDL)-cholesterol, triglycerides, apoproteins, and inflammatory factors (homocystein and C-reactive protein) were performed at baseline, and at weeks 6, 12, and 24. Liver enzymes and creatinine phosphokinase were also assessed. Protease inhibitor (PI) or non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) Cmin was determined just before and 12 weeks after ezetimibe introduction. RESULTS: At week 24, 61.5% of patients achieved the endpoint of the study (LDL-cholesterol < 130 mg/dl). Significant declines in mean total and LDL-cholesterol levels were observed between baseline and weeks 6, 12, and 24, irrespective of antiretroviral type (PI or NNRTI). Mean HDL-cholesterol and apoprotein A increased significantly. No patients discontinued therapy due to intolerance or presented toxicity of grade 2 or more. No differences were observed in lopinavir or nevirapine Cmin measured just before and 12 weeks after ezetimibe introduction. CONCLUSION: The addition of ezetimibe to ongoing pravastatin seems to be an effective and safe option for HIV-infected patients not achieving the NCEP ATPIII LDL-cholesterol goals while receiving a statin alone. Its high tolerability and the lack of interactions with the cytochrome CYP3A4 indicate that ezetimibe will not increase the risk of toxicity or pharmacokinetic interactions with antiretrovirals.

Long-term safety and efficacy of nevirapine-based approaches in HIV type 1-infected patients.

Using a multicenter, cross-sectional, observation study, the long-term safety, metabolic profile, and viral efficacy of nevirapine (NVP)-based approaches in HIV-1-infected patients treated for at least 2 years were assessed. For 4 months, all consecutive HIV-1-infected patients who had been receiving an NVP-containing regimen for at least 2 years were recruited. A total of 613 patients were included with a median follow-up period of 43 months (IQR: 31-51). At baseline, 24.5% (150 patients) were treatment naive, 41.5% (254 patients) switched for simplification purposes, and 34% (209 patients) were failing HAART. Increases by five times or more in AST/ALT values were observed in fewer than 2% of patients. Only 5.7% of all adverse events reported during the investigation were attributable to NVP. The percentage of patients with normal HDL cholesterol levels rose from 17.7% at baseline to 35.4% at the last visit. At the latest time point available for analysis, 76% of naive and 74% of those who had switched had HIV-1 RNA loads of <50 copies/ml, while 59% of salvage patients achieved this level of viral suppression. Factors associated with viral suppression at the latest visit were adequate adherence (OR: 2.58, 95% CI: 0.85-7.78, p < 0.001), first-line treatment (OR: 3.02, 95% CI: 1.52-6.00, p = 0.002), and baseline CD4 cells >400 cells/microl (OR: 2.34, 95% CI: 1.22-4.47, p = 0.010). Exposure to nevirapine for up to 4 years is safe. Liver toxicity is infrequent and generally mild. HDL cholesterol levels consistently increase over time and viral suppression is maintained.