Evaluation of a multimodal analgesic regimen on outcomes following laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy.

Postoperative pain is a significant source of morbidity in patients undergoing living donor nephrectomy (LDN) and a deterrent for candidates. We implemented a standardized multimodal analgesic regimen, which consists of pharmacist-led pre-procedure pain management education, a combination transversus abdominis plane and rectus sheath block performed by the regional anesthesia team, scheduled acetaminophen and gabapentin, and as-needed opioids. This single-center retrospective study evaluated outcomes between patients undergoing LDN who received a multimodal analgesic regimen and a historical cohort. The multimodal cohort had a significantly shorter length of stay (LOS) (days, mean ± SD: 1.8 ± 0.7 vs. 2.6 ± 0.8; p < .001) and a greater proportion who were discharged on postoperative day (POD) 1 (38.6% vs. 1.5%; p < .001). The total morphine milligram equivalents (MME) that patients received during hospitalization were significantly less in the multimodal cohort on POD 0-2. The outpatient MME prescribed through POD 60 was also significantly less in the multimodal cohort (median [IQR]; 180 [150-188] vs. 225 [150-300]; p < .001). The mean patient-reported pain score (PRPS) was significantly lower in the multimodal cohort on POD 0-2. The maximum PRPS was significantly lower on POD 0 (mean ± SD: 7 ± 2 vs. 8 ± 1, respectively; p = .02). This study suggests that our multimodal regimen significantly reduces LOS, PRPS, and opioid requirements and has the potential to improve the donation experience.

Management of severe BK viremia in a patient receiving a kidney transplant from a hepatitis C virus-positive donor: A case report.

PURPOSE: A case of BK nephropathy in a kidney transplant recipient who received an organ from a hepatitis C virus (HCV)-positive donor is reported. SUMMARY: A 66-year-old male negative for HCV with chronic kidney disease secondary to diabetic glomerulosclerosis received a kidney transplant from an HCV-viremic donor. His initial postoperative course was uncomplicated, and HCV treatment with glecaprevir/pibrentasvir was initiated after discharge. On postoperative day (POD) 60, the patient developed BK viremia and his mycophenolate mofetil dose was decreased. Over the next few months, the BK viral load increased, with mycophenolate mofetil stopped and the tacrolimus goal lowered in response. On POD 130, the patient was admitted for a hypertensive crisis and found to have decreased renal function. During this hospitalization, the patient received a course of intravenous immune globulin (IVIG). Despite an initial response to the modification of immunosuppression therapy and several courses of IVIG over the following months, the patient's renal function continued to decline. At 18 months after transplantation, the patient was restarted on dialysis and taken off all immunosuppression. CONCLUSION: Utilization of organs from HCV-positive donors in HCV-negative recipients allows for expansion of the donor pool and facilitates shorter times on the waitlist. Although initial data in HCV-discordant transplantation did not find an increased risk for opportunistic infections, more recent studies have shown that such risk may be present. This case report describes a patient who developed BK viremia and eventual allograft failure after an HCV-discordant transplantation.

Evaluation of the safety of a novel peripheral vasopressor pilot program and the impact on central line placement in medical and surgical intensive care units.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this quality improvement project was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of peripheral vasopressor administration in an attempt to minimize the placement and improve early removal of unnecessary central lines to reduce central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) rates. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted on patients who received vasopressors via peripheral infusion over 3 months, starting at the time of guideline implementation. RESULTS: We identified 129 vasopressor orders among 79 patients that were administered peripherally. Among these orders, 3 events were documented as possible extravasation events. Forty-five patients (57%) did not require central line placement due to increasing vasopressor requirements. Standard utilization ratio data suggest minimal central line impact of the protocol implementation. December 2020 to February 2021 was associated with a large second peak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in our region. Utilization of central lines was less than predicted in December 2020 to February 2021 in 2 of our 3 intensive care units (ICUs); however, the differences were statistically significant on only 3 occasions. In the third ICU, utilization was greater than predicted, but this unit housed a majority of the most critically ill patients with COVID-19. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that short-term use of select vasopressors at conservative doses is safe for peripheral administration and points toward efficacy at preventing central line placement. Further analysis is required to confirm efficacy.

A call for student pharmacist education on vaping and vaping device use.

INTRODUCTION: The use of vaping devices, including e-cigarettes, has been steadily increasing in recent years, especially among younger populations. COMMENTARY: With many vaping devices on the market and misconceptions about the safety of vaping, there is a substantial amount of information that healthcare professionals need to know. As a response to this growing public health concern, doctor of pharmacy (PharmD) curricula should include opportunities for students to learn more about vaping, vaping devices, associated health outcomes, and role in smoking cessation. IMPLICATIONS: Incorporating faculty driven content, active student learning, cessation counseling, service learning, and/or co-curricular opportunities focused on vaping education and vaping device use into PharmD curricula will better prepare student pharmacists to counsel patients on this increasingly prevalent topic.

Renal Denervation for Uncontrolled and Resistant Hypertension: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.

Comparative efficacy and safety of renal denervation (RDN) interventions for uncontrolled (UH) and resistant hypertension (RH) is unknown. We assessed the comparative efficacy and safety of existing RDN interventions for UH and RH. Six search engines were searched up to 1 May 2020. Primary outcomes were mean 24-h ambulatory and office systolic blood pressure (SBP). Secondary outcomes were mean 24-h ambulatory and office diastolic blood pressure (DBP), clinical outcomes, and serious adverse events. Frequentist random-effects network meta-analyses were used to evaluate effects of RDN interventions. Twenty randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (n = 2152) were included, 15 in RH (n = 1544) and five in UH (n = 608). Intervention arms included radiofrequency (RF) in main renal artery (MRA) (n = 10), RF in MRA and branches (n = 4), RF in MRA+ antihypertensive therapy (AHT) (n = 5), ultrasound (US) in MRA (n = 3), sham (n = 8), and AHT (n = 9). RF in MRA and branches ranked as the best treatment to reduce 24-h ambulatory, daytime, and nighttime SBP and DBP versus other interventions (p-scores: 0.83 to 0.97); significant blood pressure effects were found versus sham or AHT. RF in MRA+AHT was the best treatment to reduce office SBP and DBP (p-scores: 0.84 and 0.90, respectively). RF in MRA and branches was the most efficacious versus other interventions to reduce 24-h ambulatory SBP and DBP in UH or RH.