Clozapine Rechallenge or Continuation Despite Neutropenia, an Extended Follow-up of a Consecutive Quebec Case Series.

BACKGROUND: Clozapine is the most efficacious antipsychotic for treatment-resistant schizophrenia. However, clozapine-induced neutropenia may warrant treatment discontinuation, hindering recovery. Several case reports describe clozapine rechallenge or continuation despite neutropenia, although many are subject to selective reporting, with incomplete information and short follow-up periods. Thus, consecutive case series, devoid of such bias, with long-term comprehensive follow-up are needed to better assess this practice. This study aimed to describe consecutively the evolution of every patient in the Québec City catchment area for whom clozapine was either reintroduced after neutropenia during a previous clozapine trial or was maintained despite a first neutropenia. METHODS: Patients were identified through clozapine's national hematological monitoring database and their medical records between January 1, 2000, and October 22, 2017. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients were identified, 8 continued clozapine despite neutropenia, while 15 discontinued clozapine and attempted rechallenge; among the latter, 4 patients were successfully rechallenged after agranulocytosis without the use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors, which is the largest published consecutively. A total of 6 patients experienced further neutropenia episodes. Every patient who had a neutropenia recurrence also had a possible explanation for neutropenia other than exposure to clozapine. After a median follow-up of 4.8 years, 16 patients were still on clozapine and 3 cases discontinued because of a hematological event. CONCLUSIONS: This study adds further data on the subject of clozapine rechallenge or continuation despite neutropenia. Clozapine rechallenge after agranulocytosis may be less perilous than first thought, but a systematic review on this specific subject is needed.

Comparison of Anterior Suprascapular, Supraclavicular, and Interscalene Nerve Block Approaches for Major Outpatient Arthroscopic Shoulder Surgery: A Randomized, Double-blind, Noninferiority Trial.

BACKGROUND: The interscalene nerve block provides analgesia for shoulder surgery, but is associated with diaphragm paralysis. One solution may be performing brachial plexus blocks more distally. This noninferiority study evaluated analgesia for blocks at the supraclavicular and anterior suprascapular levels, comparing them individually to the interscalene approach. METHODS: One hundred-eighty-nine subjects undergoing arthroscopic shoulder surgery were recruited to this double-blind trial and randomized to interscalene, supraclavicular, or anterior suprascapular block using 15 ml, 0.5% ropivacaine. The primary outcome was numeric rating scale pain scores analyzed using noninferiority testing. The predefined noninferiority margin was one point on the 11-point pain scale. Secondary outcomes included opioid consumption and pulmonary assessments. RESULTS: All subjects completed the study through the primary outcome analysis. Mean pain after surgery was: interscalene = 1.9 (95% CI, 1.3 to 2.5), supraclavicular = 2.3 (1.7 to 2.9), suprascapular = 2.0 (1.4 to 2.6). The primary outcome, mean pain score difference of supraclavicular-interscalene was 0.4 (-0.4 to 1.2; P = 0.088 for noninferiority) and of suprascapular-interscalene was 0.1 (-0.7 to 0.9; P = 0.012 for noninferiority). Secondary outcomes showed similar opioid consumption with better preservation of vital capacity in the anterior suprascapular group (90% baseline [P < 0.001]) and the supraclavicular group (76% [P = 0.002]) when compared to the interscalene group (67%). CONCLUSIONS: The anterior suprascapular block, but not the supraclavicular, provides noninferior analgesia compared to the interscalene approach for major arthroscopic shoulder surgery. Pulmonary function is best preserved with the anterior suprascapular nerve block.

Validation of a Patient Satisfaction Scale in Patients Undergoing Bowel Preparation Prior to Colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy is the most widely used test to screen for colorectal cancer but its use may be hindered by patients' inability to complete the bowel preparation. Patient-reported satisfaction with bowel-cleansing preparations has received little attention. We assessed the reliability and validity of a patient satisfaction survey used in two large, multicenter, randomized, assessor-blinded colonoscopy trials. METHODS: Datasets from two pivotal trials were combined. Patients in both trials included men and women aged 18-80 years who were scheduled for an elective outpatient colonoscopy. Questions relevant to satisfaction with bowel preparation prior to colonoscopy were identified from the literature and incorporated into a 7-item survey administered to patients on the day of colonoscopy. Domain 1 of the satisfaction measure assessed difficulty using bowel-cleansing preparations, ability to consume preparations, acceptability of taste, and overall experience; questions regarding acceptance or refusal of future use of the same bowel preparation were asked in Domain 2. Responses from each item of Domain 1 were transformed on a scale ranging from 0 to 100 and summed as total satisfaction scores. Cronbach's alpha was used to measure reliability; validity was assessed by evaluating relationship between total satisfaction (Domain 1) and willingness to use preparation in the future (Domain 2). RESULTS: Mean age of the 1211 trial participants was 56: 61 % female, 89.5 % Caucasian. Domain 1 had a Cronbach's alpha of 0.79, with higher satisfaction predicting higher future acceptability (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The patient-reported satisfaction measure of bowel-cleansing preparations possesses good validity and reliability.

Serum magnesium concentrations in patients receiving sodium picosulfate and magnesium citrate bowel preparation: an assessment of renal function and electrocardiographic conduction.

BACKGROUND: We performed a post hoc analysis of two clinical trials to assess whether sodium picosulfate and magnesium (Mg(2+)) citrate (Prepopik(®) [P/MC]), a dual-action bowel preparation for colonoscopy, has an impact on serum Mg(2+) levels and cardiac electrophysiology. Although rare, hypermagnesemia has been reported in patients consuming Mg(2+)-containing cathartics, especially patients who are elderly and have renal impairment. METHODS: Data were analyzed from two prospective, Phase III, randomized, assessor-blinded, active-control, multicenter, pivotal studies that investigated split-dose/day-before P/MC. Serum Mg(2+) and creatinine clearance (CrCl) were measured at screening, on the day of colonoscopy, and 24-48 hours, 7 days, and 4 weeks after colonoscopy; electrocardiograms also were obtained at these time points. RESULTS: In total, 304 patients received split-dose P/MC and 294 patients received day-before P/MC. Only 10% of the patients had serum Mg(2+) above the upper limit of normal (1.05 mmol/L) on the day of colonoscopy. There was a slight inverse correlation between CrCl and Mg(2+) levels on the day of colonoscopy; however, even at the lowest CrCl, serum Mg(2+) remained below clinically significant levels of 2.0 mmol/L. Increases in serum Mg(2+) were transient, with levels returning to baseline within 24-48 hours, regardless of renal function. No patients with elevated Mg(2+) experienced a corrected QT (QTc) interval >500 milliseconds or a QTc interval increase of ≥60 milliseconds from baseline. P/MC had no impact on PR or QRS interval. CONCLUSION: P/MC produces little impact on serum Mg(2+) levels with no clinically significant effect on cardiac conduction in patients, including those with mild-to-moderate renal impairment.

Peripheral nerve blocks for ambulatory surgery.

Peripheral nerve blocks (PNBs) provide significant improvement in postoperative analgesia and quality of recovery for ambulatory surgery. Use of continuous PNB techniques extend these benefits beyond the limited duration of single-injection PNBs. The use of ultrasound guidance has significantly improved the overall success, efficiency, and has contributed to the increased use of PNBs in the ambulatory setting. More recently, the use of ultrasound guidance has been demonstrated to decrease the risk of local anesthetic systemic toxicity. This article provides a broad overview of the indications and clinically useful aspects of the most commonly used upper and lower extremity PNBs in the ambulatory setting. Emphasis is placed on approaches that can be used for single-injection PNBs and continuous PNB techniques.

Split-dose administration of a dual-action, low-volume bowel cleanser for colonoscopy: the SEE CLEAR I study.

BACKGROUND: New bowel cleansers for colonoscopy that lead to improved efficacy, safety, and tolerability are needed. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated a nonphosphate, dual-action, low-volume, orange-flavored preparation containing sodium picosulfate and magnesium citrate (P/MC). DESIGN: Multicenter, assessor-blinded, randomized, noninferiority study. SETTING: University hospitals, academic medical centers, and private clinics across the United States. PATIENTS: Adults preparing for colonoscopy. INTERVENTIONS: P/MC versus 2 L of polyethylene glycol solution (2L PEG-3350) and two 5-mg bisacodyl tablets. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: This phase 3 study investigated the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of split-dose administration of P/MC versus day-before dosing of 2L PEG-3350 and two 5-mg bisacodyl tablets (SEE CLEAR I study). Efficacy was evaluated by using the Aronchick and Ottawa scales; noninferiority and superiority analyses were performed. Safety was assessed by monitoring adverse events (AEs). Tolerability was measured via a patient questionnaire. RESULTS: The intent-to-treat population consisted of 601 patients who self-administered P/MC (n = 304) or 2L PEG-3350 and bisacodyl tablets (n = 297). P/MC was superior to 2L PEG-3350 and bisacodyl tablets in overall colon cleansing (84.2% vs 74.4%; 1-sided 97.5% confidence interval [CI], 3.4) (Aronchick scores of excellent or good) and in cleansing of the ascending (89.5% vs 78.8%; 1-sided 97.5% CI, 4.9), mid (transverse and descending) (92.4% vs 85.9%; 1-sided 97.5% CI, 1.6), and rectosigmoid (92.4% vs 87.2%; 1-sided 97.5% CI, 0.4) segments of the colon (Ottawa scores of excellent, good, or fair). Commonly reported AEs related to the bowel preparations were nausea, vomiting, headache, and chills. Patient-reported tolerability, including ease of consumption and taste, was significantly higher for P/MC than 2L PEG-3350 and bisacodyl tablets (P < .0001). LIMITATIONS: Because of differences in administration and volume of the bowel preparations, the study was designed to be a single-assessor, blinded study. CONCLUSIONS: The bowel-cleansing effects and patient acceptability of split-dose P/MC were superior to day-before dosing with 2L PEG-3350 and bisacodyl tablets.

A dual-action, low-volume bowel cleanser administered the day before colonoscopy: results from the SEE CLEAR II study.

OBJECTIVES: Optimal bowel preparation is vital for the efficacy and safety of colonoscopy. The inconvenience, discomfort, required consumption of large volumes of product, and potential adverse effects associated with some bowel preparations deter patients from colonoscopy and may provide inadequate cleansing. A dual-action, non-phosphate, natural orange-flavored, low-volume preparation containing sodium picosulfate and magnesium citrate (P/MC) is currently being reviewed for bowel cleansing. METHODS: This was a phase 3, randomized, multicenter, assessor-blinded, prespecified non-inferiority, head-to-head study to investigate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of day-before administration of P/MC vs. 2L polyethylene glycol solution and two 5-mg bisacodyl tablets (2L PEG-3350 and bisacodyl tablets (HalfLytely and Bisacodyl Tablets Bowel Prep Kit)) in adult patients preparing for colonoscopy (SEE CLEAR II Study). The primary objective of the study was to demonstrate the non-inferiority of P/MC to 2L PEG-3350 and bisacodyl tablets in overall colon cleansing using a modified Aronchick scale. In addition, efficacy in the ascending, mid (transverse and descending), and recto-sigmoid segments of colon was evaluated using a modified Ottawa scale. Patient acceptability and tolerability of the bowel preparations were assessed via a standard questionnaire. Safety was assessed based on the monitoring of adverse events (AEs) and meaningful findings on clinical evaluations including physical examinations, vital sign measurements, and electrocardiograms (ECGs). RESULTS: A total of 603 patients were randomized to receive either P/MC (n = 300) or 2L PEG-3350 and bisacodyl tablets (n = 303). Based on the Aronchick scale, successful overall cleansing was similar in patients receiving P/MC (83.0%) and patients receiving 2L PEG-3350 and bisacodyl tablets (79.7%). P/MC demonstrated non-inferiority to 2L PEG-3350 and bisacodyl tablets in overall cleansing of the colon, as measured by the Aronchick scale. Similarly, the efficacy of P/MC, as measured by the Ottawa scale, was non-inferior to 2L PEG-3350 and bisacodyl tablets in cleansing the ascending, mid, and recto-sigmoid segments of the colon. Patient-reported acceptability and tolerability for each item examined on the questionnaire was significantly greater for P/MC compared with 2L PEG-3350 and bisacodyl tablets (P<0.0001).Treatment-emergent AEs related to the bowel preparation reported by 1% of patients receiving P/MC or 2L PEG-3350 and bisacodyl tablets were nausea (3.0% vs. 4.3%), vomiting (1.4% vs. 2.0%), and headache (2.7% vs. 1.7%). No clinically meaningful changes were noted in either treatment arm in data collected from physical examinations, vital sign measurements, and ECGs. CONCLUSIONS: When administered as a day-before dose, the bowel cleansing effects of P/MC were non-inferior compared with 2L PEG-3350 and bisacodyl tablets using the clinician-rated Aronchick and Ottawa scales. Treatment acceptability was significantly more favorable in patients receiving P/MC than in patients receiving 2L PEG-3350 and bisacodyl tablets.

Expanding applications: the potential usage of 5-aminosalicylic acid in diverticular disease.

Diverticular disease is a common bowel condition, the pathogenesis of which is incompletely understood. Acute exacerbations of diverticular disease usually require dietary changes, antibiotic therapy, and may necessitate urgent surgery. Approximately 25-33% of patients experience symptomatic and acute inflammatory disease recurrence, suggesting that current long-term management is inadequate. Because inflammatory complications of diverticular disease, including diverticulitis, are similarities to inflammatory bowel diseases, evidence suggests that patients may respond to anti-inflammatory therapies used in these conditions. Here, we explore the rationale and evidence for use of inflammatory bowel disease treatment, namely 5-aminosalicylic acid (5-ASA; mesalamine), in diverticular disease, and review clinical data on the efficacy of mesalamine either alone or in combination with other agents for the treatment of diverticular disease. PubMed and conference abstracts were searched for clinical studies examining the use of mesalamine in treating diverticular disease. Studies were evaluated for treatment efficacy in symptom reduction, recurrence prevention, or improving quality of life. The results of our search suggest that single-agent mesalamine can reduce diverticular disease symptoms and improve quality of life more effectively than antibiotic treatment alone. Mesalamine in combination with antibiotics can also reduce symptoms and improve quality of life with greater efficacy than either treatment alone. Combining mesalamine and probiotics treatments may reduce recurrent attacks of diverticular disease. Further randomized, well-controlled studies are required for validation; however, it seems that mesalamine is an important agent in future diverticular disease management.

Recipient arterial sites of the upper extremity for microsurgical tissue transplantation: a cadaveric study and presentation of clinical cases

Objective: The objective of this study was to define and describe the anatomy of possible recipient arteries in the upper extremity that can be used for free tissue transplantation in a cadaveric model and to present clinical cases making use of these identified vessels. Methods: An anatomic study was carried out to define the possible recipient arteries in the upper extremity that can be used for free tissue transplantation on embalmed cadavers were dissected from the shoulder up to the wrist. The upper extremity was divided into two zones: Zone I was from the coracoid to the medial epicondyle of the humerus and Zone II was from the medial epicondyle up to the radial styloid of the wrist. Three clinical cases for Zone I and two clinical cases for Zone II are presented. Results: At least seven recipient arterial sites in Zone I and five recipient arterial sites in Zone II were suitable for microvascular anastomosis in cases of composite tissue transplantation in the upper extremity. In Zone I recipient sites, the thoraco-dorsal and posterior humeral circumflex arteries have the largest external diameter of around 4.3mm. The smallest external diameter was found to be the superior ulnar collateral artery at 2.0mm. In Zone II, the largest external diameter was found in the radial and ulnar arteries with an average diameter of 3.9mm. The smallest external diameter was the anterior interosseous artery at only 2mm. Conclusion: The upper extremity has many suitable recipient arterial sites for composite tissue transplantation. The knowledge regarding the location, vessel diameter and length will enable the microsurgeon to plan out the reconstructive procedure and know alternative recipient arterial sites when doing composite tissue transplantation of the upper extremity. Key words: recipient artery, composite tissue transplantation, upper extremity flaps

Clinical research training of Peruvian neurologists: a baseline assessment.

In Peru, despite a strong clinical research infrastructure in Lima, and Masters degree programs in epidemiology at three universities, few neurologists participate in clinical research. It was our objective to identify perceived needs and opportunities for increasing clinical research capacity and training opportunities for Peruvian neurologists. We conducted a descriptive, cross-sectional survey of Peruvian neurologists in Lima and Arequipa, Peru. Forty-eight neurologists completed written surveys and oral interviews. All neurologists reported interest in clinical research, but noted that lack of time and financial resources limited their ability to participate. Although most neurologists had received some training in epidemiology and research design as medical students or residents, the majority felt these topics were not adequately covered. Neurologists in Arequipa noted international funding for clinical research was uncommon outside the capital city of Lima. We concluded that clinical research is important to Peruvian neurologists. The three main barriers to increased participation in clinical research identified by neurologists were insufficient training in clinical research methodology, meager funding opportunities, and lack of dedicated time to participate in clinical research. Distance learning holds promise as a method for providing additional training in clinical research methodology, especially for neurologists who may have difficulty traveling to larger cities for additional training.

Effect of extended MMX mesalamine therapy for acute, mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis.

BACKGROUND: Many patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) respond to mesalamine therapy within 8 weeks. Those not achieving remission after 8 weeks are often treated with steroids or other immunosuppressive therapies. This study aimed to determine the effect of 8 weeks' high-dose MMX mesalamine extension therapy in patients with active, mild-to-moderate UC who had previously failed to achieve complete remission in 2 phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of MMX mesalamine (SPD476-301 and -302). METHODS: Patients with active, mild-to-moderate UC who did not achieve clinical and endoscopic remission after or=1 point reduction from baseline in sigmoidoscopy score. RESULTS: Overall, 304 patients who entered this acute extension study were evaluated; 59.5% achieved remission at week 8. Remission rates were similar irrespective of prior treatment in the initial acute phase III studies. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with mild-to-moderate UC who fail to achieve remission with up to 8 weeks' initial mesalamine therapy can achieve clinical and endoscopic remission following a further 8 weeks' treatment with high-dose MMX mesalamine therapy, thereby avoiding step-up therapy.

MMX Mesalamine for Induction and Maintenance Therapy in Mild-to-Moderate Ulcerative Colitis.

Two 8-week, randomized, placebo-controlled parent studies, SPD476-301 (by Lichtenstein and associates) and SPD476-302 (by Kamm and colleagues), of MMX Multi Matrix System (MMX) mesalamine have evaluated the induction of remission in ulcerative colitis patients, and a third study has evaluated the maintenance of remission in patients from these parent studies. Here, we examine data only from patients who received MMX mesalamine 2.4 g or 4.8 g daily in these trials. In total, 63.6% of patients (220/346) achieved remission following 8-16 weeks of MMX mesalamine therapy. Among these 220 eligible patients, 218 entered the 12-month maintenance phase, and of this group, 89.9% (196/218) were relapse-free at study end. Overall, 56.6% (196/346) of patients who started MMX mesalamine therapy both achieved and maintained remission for 12 months. The adverse-event profile of MMX mesalamine was similar to the profile of the parent studies' placebo arms at all doses and frequencies. Therefore, the majority of patients with active, mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis can achieve remission, including complete symptom resolution and mucosal healing, and remain relapse-free for at least 1 year with MMX mesalamine.

Effect of once- or twice-daily MMX mesalamine (SPD476) for the induction of remission of mild to moderately active ulcerative colitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: SPD476 (MMX mesalamine), a novel, once-daily mesalamine formulation, uses MMX Multi Matrix System (MMX) technology to delay and extend delivery of active drug throughout the colon. We performed a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, multicenter phase III study in patients with mild to moderately active ulcerative colitis. METHODS: Two hundred eighty patients with mild to moderately active ulcerative colitis received MMX mesalamine 2.4 g/day given twice daily (n = 93), 4.8 g/day given once daily (n = 94), or placebo (n = 93) for 8 weeks. The primary end point was the percentage of patients in clinical and endoscopic remission (modified ulcerative colitis disease activity index score of < or =1, with a score of 0 for rectal bleeding and stool frequency, and at least a 1-point reduction in sigmoidoscopy score) at week 8. Patients with mucosal friability were not considered to have achieved this end point. RESULTS: Clinical and endoscopic remission at week 8 was achieved by 34.1% and 29.2% of patients receiving MMX mesalamine 2.4 g/day given twice daily and MMX mesalamine 4.8 g/day given once daily, respectively, versus 12.9% receiving placebo (P < .01). MMX mesalamine was generally well-tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: MMX mesalamine given once or twice daily is well-tolerated and, compared with placebo, demonstrated efficacy for the induction of clinical and endoscopic remission in mild to moderately active ulcerative colitis.

Once-daily, high-concentration MMX mesalamine in active ulcerative colitis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: SPD476 (LIALDA in the US; MEZAVANT in the EU; otherwise known as MMX mesalamine; Shire Pharmaceuticals Inc., Wayne, PA, under license from Giuliani SpA, Milan, Italy) is a novel, once-daily, high-strength (1.2 g/tablet) formulation of mesalamine, utilizing MMX Multi Matrix System (MMX) technology designed to deliver the active drug throughout the colon. We performed a double-blind, multicenter study, comparing MMX mesalamine vs placebo for the treatment of active ulcerative colitis. A delayed-release oral mesalamine (ASACOL; Procter & Gamble, Cincinnati, OH) reference arm was included. METHODS: Three hundred forty-three patients with active, mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis received MMX mesalamine 2.4 g/day or 4.8 g/day given once daily, ASACOL 2.4 g/day given in 3 divided doses, or placebo for 8 weeks. The primary end point was the proportion of patients in clinical and endoscopic remission (modified ulcerative colitis disease activity index of < or =1 with rectal bleeding and stool frequency scores of 0, no mucosal friability, and a > or =1-point reduction in sigmoidoscopy score from baseline). RESULTS: A significantly greater proportion of patients receiving MMX mesalamine 2.4 g/day given once daily (40.5%; P = .01) and 4.8 g/day given once daily (41.2%; P = .007) achieved clinical and endoscopic remission at week 8, vs placebo (22.1%). The clinical and endoscopic remission rate for ASACOL (32.6%; P = .124) was not significantly superior to placebo. All active treatments were well-tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily MMX mesalamine was efficacious and well-tolerated for the induction of clinical and endoscopic remission. MMX mesalamine offers effective and convenient mesalamine therapy, potentially improving treatment compliance.

Comorbid conditions in kidney transplantation: association with graft and patient survival.

Although the impact of comorbidity on outcomes in ESRD has been evaluated extensively, its contribution after kidney transplantation has not been well studied. It is believed that comorbidity assessment is critical to the informed interpretation of kidney transplant outcomes. In this study, the Charlson Comorbidity Index was used to assess the comorbid conditions of 715 patients who underwent kidney transplantation at the Starzl Transplant Institute between January 1998 and January 2003. The impact of pretransplantation comorbidity on the development of acute cellular rejection after transplantation and on patient and graft survival was examined. The most common comorbid conditions among our patient population were diabetes (n = 217, 30.3%) and heart failure (n = 85, 11.9%). It was found the number of patients with high comorbidity at the Starzl Transplant Institute has increased significantly over time (P = 0.04). In multivariate adjusted models, high comorbidity was associated with an increased risk for patient death, both in the perioperative period (hazard ratio 3.20, 95% confidence interval 1.32 to 7.78; P = 0.01) and >3 mo after transplantation (hazard ratio 2.63; 95% confidence interval 1.62 to 4.28; P < 0.001). The Charlson Comorbidity Index is a practical tool for the evaluation of comorbidity in the transplant population, which has an increasing burden of comorbid disease. Increased comorbidity affects both perioperative and long-term patient outcomes and carries significant implications not only for the development of individual patient therapeutic strategies but also for the interpretation of patient trials and the development of policies that govern distribution of donor organs.