Magnesium Sulfate Versus Lidocaine as an Adjunct for Renal Colic in the Emergency Department: A Randomized, Double-Blind Controlled Trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We wished to determine whether the addition of magnesium sulfate (MgSO4) or lidocaine to diclofenac could improve the analgesic efficacy in emergency department (ED) patients with acute renal colic. METHODS: In this prospective, double-blinded, randomized controlled trial of patients aged 18 to 65 years with suspected acute renal colic, we randomized them to receive 75 mg intramuscular (IM) diclofenac and then intravenous (IV) MgSO4, lidocaine, or saline solution control. Subjects reported their pain using a numerical rating scale (NRS) before drug administration and then 5, 10, 20, 30, 60, and 90 minutes afterwards. Our primary outcome was the proportion of participants achieving at least a 50% reduction in the NRS score 30 minutes after drug administration. RESULTS: We enrolled 280 patients in each group. A 50% or greater reduction in the NRS score at 30 minutes occurred in 227 (81.7%) patients in the MgSO4 group, 204 (72.9%) in the lidocaine group, and 201 (71.8%) in the control group, with significant differences between MgSO4 and lidocaine (8.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.89 to 15.7], P=.013) and between MgSO4 and control (9.9%, 95% CI [2.95 to 16.84], P=.004). Despite this, differences between all groups at every time point were below the accepted 1.3 threshold for clinical importance. There were no observed differences between groups in the frequency of rescue analgesics and return visits to the ED for renal colic. There were more adverse events, although minor, in the MgSO4 group. CONCLUSION: Adding intravenous MgSO4, but not lidocaine, to IM diclofenac offered superior pain relief but at levels below accepted thresholds for clinical importance.

Melatonin, vitamins and minerals supplements for the treatment of Covid-19 and Covid-like illness: A prospective, randomized, double-blind multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Melatonin, zinc, and multivitamins are among most recommended supplements in the fight against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We aimed to examine the efficacy and safety of this association in the treatment of COVID-19 and COVID-like illnesses. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter prospective, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial. Patients with no medical history consulting the emergency department for covid and covid-like illness and who were not hospitalized were included. Patients were assigned in a 1:1 ratio to the treatment or the placebo group. The primary outcome was studying the effectiveness of zinc multivitamin supplement and melatonin in the treatment of COVID and -like illnesses symptoms' according to the time from randomization to clinical improvement. The pre-specified secondary outcomes were date of disappearance of symptoms present on admission, appearance of an adverse effect due to the administration of the treatment, number of patients developing complications, requiring hospitalization, requiring respiratory support. RESULTS: One hundred sixty four patients were eligible for the study and were randomized to either the treatment group or the placebo group. Overall, 128 of the 164 patients had a PCR for SARS-CoV-2, yielding a positive PCR result in 49.1% of them. Regarding the disappearance of all initial presenting symptoms: on the 5th day of the follow-up, there was a significant difference between the two groups with a p value 0.04;On the 10th day, there was a significant difference too with p value of 0.038. There were no significant differences between the two groups in recovery during the 15th day of follow-up p>0.5. Finally, 100% of patients fully recovered in the treatment group vs 98.8% in the placebo group. No severe adverse events were reported throughout the trial. CONCLUSIONS: Our results showed that daily doses of Melatonin, zinc and vitamins did significantly reduce the duration of symptoms accelerating its disappearance among patients consulting with COVID-19 or COVID-19 like illness.

Canine olfactory detection and its relevance for the medical identification of patients with COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: The assessment of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) in exhaled breath or sweat represents a potential non-invasive and rapid diagnostic tool for respiratory diseases. OBJECTIVE: To determine if trained dogs can reliably identify the odour associated with COVID19. METHODS: This is a monocentric prospective study carried out in the Emergency Department (ED) of a university hospital fromJulyto November 2021.Axillary sweat samples from all patients were collected bytwo trained health care professionals. The samples were collected in the form of sterile gauze swabs placed under the armpits for at least 4 h for each patient.Then, Tubes wereshiftedto the double-blind dog training centre for VOC detection by two individuals. RESULTS: Dogs were tested using a total of 129 axillary sweat samples; 69 of the 107 patients who tested positive for COVID-19 based on their odours had a positive PCR/Antigen test and 19 of the 22 patients who were tested negative for COVID-19 by the dogs had a negative PCR test. The sniffer dog infection detection method had a sensitivity of 95.83% and a specificity of 33.33%. The PPV was 64.49% and the NPVwas 86.36%. The measurement of the intensity of the connection between the two variables (disease/sign) was very strong (Q = 0.84). This link is statistically significant (X2 = 19.13) with a probability p ≤ 0.001. CONCLUSION: Overall, the use of trained detection dogs as a screening method for SARS-CoV-2 is an interesting avenue of research that warrants further exploration and validation.

Piroxicam and paracetamol in the prevention of early recurrent pain and emergency department readmission after renal colic: Randomized placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Renal colic (RC) is a common urologic emergency often leading to significant pain and recurrent hospital visits. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of piroxicam versus paracetamol in preventing pain recurrence and hospital readmission in patients treated for RC and discharged from the emergency department (ED). METHODS: A prospective, randomized, single-blind trial was conducted in four EDs. Eligible adults with RC were randomized to receive oral piroxicam, paracetamol, or placebo for 5 days post-ED discharge. Primary outcomes included pain recurrence and ED readmission within 7 days. Secondary outcomes included time to recurrence and treatment-related side effects. RESULTS: Of 1383 enrolled patients, no significant differences were observed among the groups regarding baseline characteristics. Pain recurrence rates within 7 days were 29% (95% confidence interval [CI] 24.9%-33.2%) for piroxicam, 30.3% (95% CI 26.1%-34.5%) for paracetamol, and 30.8% (95% CI 26.6%-35.0%) for placebo, with no significant between-group differences (p = 0.84). Among patients experiencing recurrence, the majority encounter it within the initial 2 days following their discharge (86% in the piroxicam group, 84.1% in the paracetamol group, and 86% in the placebo group, respectively). ED readmission rates were similar across groups: 20.8% (95% CI 17.1%-24.5%) in the piroxicam group, 23.8% (95% CI 19.9%-27.7%) in the paracetamol group, and 22.9% (95% CI 19.1%-26.8%) in the placebo group (p = 0.52). The piroxicam group reported significantly higher adverse effects compared to others. CONCLUSIONS: Piroxicam and paracetamol did not demonstrate efficacy in preventing pain recurrence or ED readmission within the first week following RC treatment.