The conundrum of differentiating Cushing's syndrome from non-neoplastic hypercortisolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

CONTEXT: Once hypercortisolemia is confirmed, differential diagnosis between Cushing's syndrome (CS) due to neoplastic endogenous hypercortisolism and non-neoplastic hypercortisolism (NNH, pseudo-Cushing's syndrome) is crucial. Due to worldwide corticotropin-releasing hormone (CRH) unavailability, accuracy of alternative tests to dexamethasone (Dex)-CRH, is clearly needed. OBJECTIVE: Assess the diagnostic accuracy of Dex-CRH test, desmopressin stimulation test, midnight serum cortisol (MSC), and late-night salivary cortisol (LNSC) levels to distinguish CS from NNH. METHODS: Articles through March 2022 were identified from Scopus, Web of Science, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed. All steps through the systematic review were performed independently and in duplicate and strictly adhered to the updated PRISMA-DTA checklist. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 24 articles (1900 patients) were included. Dex-CRH had a pooled sensitivity and specificity of 91% (95%CI 87-94%; I2 0%) and 82% (73-88%; I2 50%), desmopressin test 86% (81-90%; I2 28%) and 90% (84-94%; I2 15%), MSC 91% (85-94%; I2 66%) and 81% (70-89%; I2 71%), and LNSC 80% (67-89%; I2 57%) and 90% (84-93%; I2 21%), respectively. Summary receiver operating characteristics areas under the curve were Dex-CRH 0.949, desmopressin test 0.936, MSC 0.942, and LNSC 0.950 without visual or statistical significance. The overall risk of studies bias was moderate. CONCLUSION: Dex-CRH, the desmopressin stimulation test, and MSC have similar diagnostic accuracy, with Dex-CRH and MSC having slightly higher sensitivity, and the desmopressin test being more specific. LNSC was the least accurate, probably due to high heterogeneity, intrinsic variability, different assays, and lack of consistent reported cutoffs. When facing this challenging differential diagnosis, the results presented here should increase clinicians' confidence when deciding which test to perform.

Gastrointestinal Cytomegalovirus Infection in a Transplantation Recipient With a Negative Serum Viral Load: Case Report.

BACKGROUND: Kidney transplant recipients are vulnerable to infections, especially cytomegalovirus (CMV) disease. It is recommended that clinicians plan their prophylaxis and therapeutic regimens based on viral load testing. OBJECTIVE: CMV viral load monitoring testing provides useful information for identifying virologic response and possible antiviral resistance. Due to the paucity of medical literature on guiding viral therapy in cases of CMV tissue disease with nondetectable serum viral load, we intend to provide physicians with evidence on how to guide medical therapy in these cases. CASE REPORT: A 49-year-old Hispanic male recipient of a kidney transplant from a cadaver donor presented to the emergency department with anorexia, asthenia, diarrhea, weight loss, and supraclavicular and mediastinal adenomegalies at 2 months post-transplantation. Both patients were serum IgG- and IgM-positive for CMV, which classified them as intermediate risk for developing CMV disease or tissue-invasive disease (donor-positive/recipient-positive [D+/R+]). The patient was induced with basiliximab and methylprednisolone and received maintenance therapy with tacrolimus, mycophenolic acid, and prednisone. Real-time polymerase chain reaction analyses were performed due to suspicion for BK virus, B19 parvovirus, Epstein-Barr virus, and CMV, with an undetectable viral load for all. A biopsy specimen taken from the gastrointestinal tract confirmed CMV infection, which was corroborated through immunocytochemistry. CONCLUSIONS: Histopathologic testing is a possible option for patients with CMV tissue disease symptoms but no detectable serum viral load. Clinical observation is fundamental when viral monitoring is difficult.

Atorvastatin before percutaneous coronary intervention: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Atorvastatin is widely recommended for long-term secondary prevention in STEMI patients with no contraindication. Although high-dose atorvastatin has been shown to reduce important patient outcomes such as MACE, there is still doubt that high-dose atorvastatin could have the same protective effect in patients undergoing PCI in the short and long term. We searched the following electronic databases: Scopus, Web of Science, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central considering studies that enrolled adult patients with a confirmed diagnosis of STEMI or NSTEMI undergoing PCI. The intervention must have been atorvastatin alone compared to a placebo, standard care, or a different atorvastatin dose. A total of (n = 11) studies were included in the quantitative analysis. Information on (N = 5,399) patients was available; 2,654 were assigned to receive high-dose atorvastatin therapy, and 2,745 comprised the control group. High-dose atorvastatin pre-loading significantly reduced MACE at one month of follow-up (RR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.67-0.91; p = 0.014) in both STEMI and NSTEMI. All-cause mortality was reduced in patients with STEMI (RR: 0.28; 95% CI: 0.10-0.81; p = 0.029). The quality of the body of evidence was rated overall as moderate. Patients presenting with STEMI or NSTEMI benefit from high-dose atorvastatin pre-loading before PCI by reducing MACE at 30 days. The use of high-dose atorvastatin in STEMI patients reduced all-cause mortality. The beneficial effects of atorvastatin pre-loading are limited to 30 days post-PCI.