Evaluating the Risk of Developing Thrombocytopenia Within Five Days of Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy Initiation in Septic Patients.

BACKGROUND: The differential diagnosis for thrombocytopenia in critical illness is often extensive. This study was performed to determine the incidence of thrombocytopenia in septic patients undergoing continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) versus those not undergoing CRRT. OBJECTIVE: The primary outcome of this study was to compare the development of thrombocytopenia, defined as a platelet count ≤ 100 × 103/mm3, in septic patients within 5 days of time zero. Time zero was defined as the baseline platelet count upon hospital admission or CRRT initiation. METHODS: An IRB approved, retrospective cohort study was conducted evaluating thrombocytopenia development in critically ill, septic patients who were initiated on CRRT versus those whom were not. Baseline and clinical characteristics were displayed using descriptive statistics. The primary outcome was evaluated overall and in subgroups of CRRT using Chi-square tests. RESULTS: One hundred sixty patients, 80 per arm, were included in the study. Thrombocytopenia development within 5 days occurred more frequently in the renal replacement therapy (RRT) group compared to the control group (67.5% vs. 6.3%, p < 0.001). In the subgroup analysis of the RRT cohort, thrombocytopenia development within 5 days occurred more frequently in the continuous veno-venous hemofiltration (CVVH) group compared to the accelerated veno-venous hemofiltration (AVVH) group (76% vs. 53.3%, p = 0.049). CONCLUSION: There is a high likelihood that septic patients initiated on CRRT will develop thrombocytopenia during their hospital stay. Patients receiving CVVH may develop thrombocytopenia more frequently than those receiving AVVH. Overall, CRRT should remain a differential diagnosis for thrombocytopenia development in this patient population.

Impact of Prior-to-Admission Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Nares Screening in Critically Ill Adults With Pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: The high negative predictive value (NPV) of a negative nasal methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) result in suspected MRSA pneumonia is well established; however, data are limited on the NPV of samples collected prior to hospital admission for critically ill patients. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the predictive characteristics of MRSA nares screening performed prior to hospital admission in critically ill adult patients diagnosed with pneumonia. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted in critically ill patients with pneumonia and MRSA nares screening within 60 days of respiratory culture. The primary outcome was NPV of MRSA nares for MRSA pneumonia using samples within 60 days compared to in-hospital respiratory cultures. A sensitivity analysis was performed for samples within 30 days. Secondary outcomes were prevalence, positive predictive value (PPV), sensitivity, specificity, and MRSA pneumonia risk factors. RESULTS: The NPV for MRSA nares screening collected prior to hospital admission was high at 98% (95% CI = 96%-99%) for samples collected within 60 days (n = 243) and 99% (95% CI: 94%-99.9%) for samples within 30 days (n = 119). Specificity for MRSA nares collected 60 days prior to admission (96%, 95% CI: 93-98) and 30 days (96%, 95% CI: 91%-99%) were both high. PPV and sensitivity were lower. Risk factors for MRSA pneumonia were similar. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: MRSA nares screening within 60 days of intensive care unit admission has a high NPV and specificity for MRSA pneumonia in critically ill patients and may be a powerful stewardship tool for avoidance of empirical anti-MRSA therapy.

A comparison of insulin doses for treatment of hyperkalaemia in intensive care unit patients with renal insufficiency.

BACKGROUND: Hyperkalaemia is a complication in patients with chronic kidney disease or acute kidney injury and occurs frequently in the intensive care unit. One treatment approach includes intravenous (IV) insulin to shift potassium intracellularly. OBJECTIVES: The primary outcome was hypoglycaemia (blood glucose <70 mg/dL) after insulin administration. Secondary outcomes included change in serum potassium levels and incidence of severe hypoglycaemia. METHODS: This was a single-centre, retrospective study evaluating critically ill adult patients with chronic kidney disease stage III-V, end-stage renal disease, or acute kidney injury who received IV insulin for treatment of hyperkalaemia from March 2008 to September 2018. Patients were divided into two insulin-dosing regimen groups: 5 units or 10 units. RESULTS: Of the 174 patients included, hypoglycaemia after insulin administration occurred in eight of 87 patients (9.2%) in the 5-unit group and 17 of 87 patients (19.5%) in the 10-unit group (p = 0.052). There was no difference in rates of severe hypoglycaemia or change in serum potassium levels. CONCLUSIONS: In critically ill patients requiring treatment for hyperkalaemia, a lower dose of IV insulin does not result in lower statistically significant rates of hypoglycaemia. However, lower insulin doses provide a similar potassium-lowering effect and cause a meaningful decrease in hypoglycaemic episodes. Intensive care unit providers may consider 5 units of IV insulin over 10 units although further larger controlled studies are needed.

Under the Microscope: A Look Into the Role of Critical Care Pharmacists During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Among disciplines, the COVID-19 pandemic has reinforced the importance of critical care pharmacists in assuming responsibility for managing medication therapy in direct patient care settings. Historically, pharmacists have been relied upon for prospective evaluation of drug therapy for appropriate indications, dosage, drug interactions, and drug allergies; monitoring patients' pharmacotherapeutic regimens for effectiveness and adverse effects; providing drug information to providers; and educating health professionals regarding drug therapies. Specific to COVID-19, pharmacists have been an integral member of the multidisciplinary rounding team, assisting with drug shortages and strategies for drug conservation; participating in emergencies, such as advanced cardiac life support (ACLS) and rapid sequence intubations; and creating as well as integrating evidence-based guidelines and pathways during the pandemic into clinical practice. The purpose of this article is to demonstrate the various roles of critical care pharmacists among the healthcare team in caring for critically ill COVID-19 patients.

The impact of antihypertensive use in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke in patients receiving alteplase.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of acute ischemic stroke (AIS) with intravenous alteplase within 4.5 h of symptom onset is associated with neurologic improvement. High baseline blood pressure (BP) and BP variability during the first 24 h of AIS is associated with increased early adverse events and death. The purpose of this study is to characterize the incidence of poor neurologic outcome in patients treated with alteplase for AIS who received antihypertensive medications prior to and within the first 24 h following alteplase administration compared with patients who did not. METHODS: This was a multicenter, retrospective cohort of patients >18 years diagnosed with AIS from January 1, 2011 through December 31, 2015 who received one or more antihypertensive medication in the first 24 h of AIS in patients receiving alteplase compared to controls. The primary endpoint was poor neurologic outcome at 90 days, according to modified Rankin Scale ≥3. Univariate analysis was conducted using Chi-square, Fisher's exact test, or Mann-Whitney U test. Multivariable logistic regression was conducted to determine independent predictors of poor outcome. RESULTS: Of the 587 patients evaluated, 351 (59.7%) were included, of which 127 (36.2%) received antihypertensive(s). More patients in the antihypertensive treatment group had a history of hypertension (88.2% vs. 69.6%, p < 0.01), diabetes (37% vs. 25.5%, p = 0.03) and chronic kidney disease (19.7% vs. 8.5%, p < 0.01). Intravenous push labetalol was most commonly administered (81.2%), followed by nicardipine (44.1%), and hydralazine (22%). More patients in the antihypertensive treatment group experienced poor neurologic outcome at 90 days (53.5% vs. 38.8%, p < 0.01), however, this finding was not observed after multivariable logistic regression. CONCLUSION: Antihypertensive treatment in the first 24 h of AIS was associated with poor neurologic outcomes at 90 days. However, after controlling for other clinical factors in a multivariable logistic regression, this association was no longer observed.

Emergency department methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus nare screen effect on pneumonia treatment duration.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine if performing a methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) nasal screen in the emergency department (ED) decreased general medicine patient exposure to anti-MRSA antibiotics for pneumonia. METHODS: This was a single-center, retrospective study evaluating patients who had a diagnosis of pneumonia and were initiated on anti-MRSA therapy (vancomycin or linezolid) in the ED and subsequently admitted to a general medicine floor. Patients were divided into two groups: 1) did not receive a MRSA nares screen in the ED (No MRSA screen group) or 2) received a MRSA nares screen in the ED (MRSA screen group). The primary outcome was anti-MRSA antibiotic duration. Secondary outcomes included vancomycin level evaluation, hospital survival, and acute kidney injury. RESULTS: Of the 116 patients included, 37 patients received a MRSA nares screen in the ED and 79 patients did not. Median duration of antibiotic exposure was similar for both groups (No MRSA screen, 30.5 h [interquartile range (IQR) 20.5-52.5] vs. MRSA screen, 24.5 h [IQR 20.6-40.3]; p = 0.28). Of patients who were screened, 35 were negative and 2 were positive. Secondary outcomes were similar. CONCLUSION: Performing a MRSA nares screen in the ED for patients diagnosed with pneumonia, initiated on anti-MRSA antibiotics, and admitted to a general medicine floor did not decrease duration of anti-MRSA antibiotics. At this time, ED providers do not need to consider a MRSA nasal screen in the ED for patients being admitted to general medicine, although larger studies could be considered.

Predictors of a response to dexmedetomidine in intubated, critically ill adult patients.

BACKGROUND: Dexmedetomidine is a centrally acting α-2 receptor agonist used to maintain light analgosedation in mechanically ventilated adults. This study was conducted to determine factors predictive of successful maintenance of light sedation (Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) 0 to -2) for ≥60% of the first 48 h of mechanical ventilation with dexmedetomidine. METHODS: This was a single-center, retrospective, cohort study of critically ill adult patients receiving dexmedetomidine and admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) between January 1, 2013, and August 31, 2019. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed in patients receiving dexmedetomidine for sedation to assess patient and clinical characteristics associated with a positive clinical response to dexmedetomidine. RESULTS: Of 1065 patients reviewed for study inclusion, 158 patients were included. Sixty-two percent of patients initiated on dexmedetomidine to maintain light sedation were able to remain within this sedation target ≥60% of the time during the first 48 hours of therapy. Patients maintained within the target RASS score ≥60% of the time had a higher percentage of ventilator-free days at 14 days (p = 0.044). The odds of having a mean time within goal RASS score ≥60% in the first 48 hours of mechanical ventilation after intubation were decreased by 9% for every point increase in sequential organ failure assessment score (odds ratio: 0.91, 95% confidence interval: 0.82-0.99). CONCLUSION: Patients were less likely to maintain light sedation with dexmedetomidine as their degree of critical illness increased. The duration of time maintained within goal sedation after dexmedetomidine initiation and the impact on patient outcomes remain a research priority.

Short Versus Extended Duration Vancomycin and Piperacillin/Tazobactam and the Incidence of Acute Kidney Injury in Noncritically Ill Patients.

BACKGROUND: Vancomycin plus piperacillin-tazobactam (VPT) is a commonly used empiric combination of antimicrobials. Recently, studies have demonstrated an increase in acute kidney injury (AKI) associated with combination therapy of VPT. However, the majority of studies required patients to be on VPT for a minimum of 48 to 72 hours to be considered for inclusion and had extended treatment durations longer than most empiric, short course regimens. OBJECTIVE: To assess the incidence of AKI in noncritically ill patients being treated with VPT for short-courses (24 to 60 hours) compared to patients receiving extended-courses (72 hours to 7 days). METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study comparing the incidence of AKI in noncritically ill patients receiving VPT for short and extended durations between January 2016 and August 2018. Fishers exact tests were used for differences in nominal data between groups and Mann-Whitney U tests were used for continuous data. RESULTS: Of the 2567 screened, 154 patients were included in the short-course group and 106 were included in the extended-course group. The incidence of AKI for patients in the short-course group was 12% (19/154) versus 26% (28/106) in the extended-course group (odds ratio: 2.55, 95% CI: 1.33-4.87; P = .004). CONCLUSION: In noncritically ill patients, a short-course of VPT experienced less AKI compared to an extended-course. Clinicians should continue to practice strict antimicrobial stewardship for VPT therapies expected to continue beyond 72 hours.

Bisphosphonate Versus Bisphosphonate and Calcitonin for the Treatment of Moderate to Severe Hypercalcemia of Malignancy.

BACKGROUND: Historically, intravenous (IV) bisphosphonates with calcitonin are the treatment of choice for hypercalcemia of malignancy. However, evidence is lacking. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the use of bisphosphonate versus bisphosphonate with calcitonin for moderate to severe hypercalcemia of malignancy. METHODS: This was a retrospective study evaluating patients who received bisphosphonate and/or calcitonin for treatment of moderate to severe hypercalcemia of malignancy. Patients received usual care plus either (1) bisphosphonate or (2) bisphosphonate with calcitonin. The primary outcome was change in corrected serum calcium concentrations 48 hours after treatment. Secondary outcomes included corrected calcium levels, incidence of normocalcemia and hypocalcemia, time to normocalcemia, hospital length of stay, and cost avoidance. RESULTS: The 48-hour decrease in corrected calcium was less in the bisphosphonate group than in the combination group (2.4 [1.6-3.4] vs 3.9 [3.5-5.3]; P < 0.001). However, initial calcium levels in the combination group were higher than in the bisphosphonate group, and calcium levels at 24, 48, and 72 hours were similar. Secondary outcomes did not differ. Average cost avoidance with bisphosphonate monotherapy was $11 248 per patient and $291 448 per year. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In the treatment of moderate to severe hypercalcemia of malignancy, IV bisphosphonate in combination with calcitonin resulted in a higher difference in corrected calcium levels at 48 hours compared with bisphosphonate therapy alone. However, corrected calcium levels in the first 72 hours, time to normocalcemia, and clinical outcomes were similar. The addition of calcitonin increases cost without substantial clinical benefit, and providers may consider avoiding calcitonin.

Evaluation of the blood pressure effects of diltiazem versus metoprolol in the acute treatment of atrial fibrillation with rapid ventricular rate.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the difference in blood pressure effects of diltiazem intravenous push (IVP) and metoprolol IVP in the acute management of atrial fibrillation with rapid ventricular rate (AF with RVR). METHODS: This was a single-center, retrospective cohort study evaluating patients who presented to the emergency department (ED) between January 2012 and September 2018 in AF with RVR and received either diltiazem IVP or metoprolol IVP as the first agent for rate control. The primary objective was the change in systolic blood pressure (SBP) within one hour of initial medication administration. Secondary outcomes included repeat doses within one hour, rate control to <110 beats per minute, and SBP <90 mmHg or decrease by >40% within three hours. Subgroup analysis of patients with a baseline SBP <110 mmHg was conducted. RESULTS: Of the 160 patients included, 80 received diltiazem and 80 metoprolol. The primary outcome of median change in SBP at one hour was a difference of -9 [-21 to 6] mmHg in the diltiazem group versus a difference of -4 [-18 to 9] mmHg in the metoprolol group (p = 0.102). Subgroup analysis (n = 28) of patients with a baseline SBP <110 mmHg demonstrated an increase of 7 [-0.25 to 19] mmHg in the diltiazem group versus increase of 7 [0 to 13] in the metoprolol group (p = 0.910). CONCLUSION: No significant difference was observed in the blood pressure effects of diltiazem IVP versus metoprolol IVP in the acute management of AF with RVR.

Levetiracetam vs. phenytoin as 2nd-line treatment for status epilepticus: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of levetiracetam (LEV) or phenytoin (PHT) as second-line treatment for status epilepticus (SE). METHODS: PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS), Scopus, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar were assessed for prospective randomized trials comparing LEV with PHT as second-line treatment of SE published from inception until December 18th, 2019. The primary outcome was seizure cessation. Data were analyzed using a random-effects model. Quality analysis was performed using version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB 2). The study protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020136417). RESULTS: Nine studies with a total of 1732 patients were included. Overall, seizure cessation occurred in 657 of 887 (74%) of patients in the LEV group and 600 of 845 (71%) in the PHT group. Treatment success did not differ significantly between groups, and the relative risk (RR) was 1.05 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.98-1.12; I2 = 53%). Six of the studies were at low risk of bias, one study had some risk, and two studies had high risk. CONCLUSIONS: The use of LEV or PHT as second-line agents after benzodiazepine (BZD) for the treatment of SE was not associated with a difference in seizure cessation. Because there are minimal differences in efficacy at this time, clinicians should consider alternative factors when deciding on an antiepileptic drug (AED).

Effect of Cefepime on Neurotoxicity Development in Critically Ill Adults With Renal Dysfunction.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacodynamic and pathophysiologic changes in critically ill adults receiving cefepime may increase the risk of adverse events. RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the impact of cefepime exposure on neurotoxicity development in critically ill adults with renal dysfunction? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Critically ill adults with creatinine clearance < 60 mL/min who received cefepime for ≥ 48 hours between January 1, 2014 and July 31, 2018 were evaluated for cefepime-associated neurotoxicity (CAN) development. Higher- and lower-dose cefepime exposure groups stratified by moderate (≥ 8 g vs < 8 g in first 48 hours) or severe (≥ 4 g vs < 4 g in first 48 hours) renal dysfunction were compared. Between-group comparisons were performed using Fisher exact tests. CAN-free survival was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank tests. RESULTS: Cefepime total dose in the first 48 hours was greater in the higher-dose cefepime group (3.7 ± 1.6 g vs 7.7 ± 2.2 g; P < .001). Cefepime-associated neurotoxicity occurred infrequently in both lower- (n = 108) and higher-dose (n = 92) cefepime groups (4% vs 10%, OR 2.82, 95% CI, 0.84-9.48, P = .093). The frequencies of cefepime-associated neurotoxicity were similar between lower- and higher-dose cefepime groups when moderate renal dysfunction subgroups were compared (5% vs 7%, OR 1.42, 95% CI, 0.34-5.92, P = .72) and numerically greater in the higher-dose cefepime group in the severe renal dysfunction subgroup (0 vs 16%, P = .064). Times to cefepime-associated neurotoxicity development and resolution were similar between lower- and higher-dose groups. Durations of CAN-free survival were similar between lower- and higher-dose groups. Most patients who developed cefepime-associated neurotoxicity displayed altered mental status (n = 12, 92%). INTERPRETATION: Cefepime-associated neurotoxicity is an uncommon occurrence in critically ill adults. Patients with severe renal dysfunction receiving higher-dose cefepime may be at greater risk of cefepime-associated neurotoxicity, although this requires additional investigation.

Factors associated with unsuccessful follow-up in patients undertreated for gonorrhea and chlamydia infections.

INTRODUCTION: Neisseria gonorrhea (GC) and Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) are two commonly encountered sexually transmitted infections in the Emergency Department (ED). METHODS: The study was a single-center, retrospective cohort of patients screened for GC/CT infections at an urban, academic medical center ED. Participants were identified through electronic medical record reports. Patients were excluded if they absconded, were discharged against medical advice, or had a chief complaint of sexual assault. Patients were classified as having tested positive or negative for GC/CT and further classified as having received adequate treatment, overtreatment, or undertreatment. The undertreatment group was further assessed for successful versus unsuccessful follow-up. The primary aim was to determine factors associated with unsuccessful follow-up in patients undertreated. Secondary aims included rate of overtreatment, rate of undertreatment, and method of contact in patients with successful follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 10,452 patients were included. Of the 456 undertreated patients, follow-up was successful in 425 (93.2%) patients and unsuccessful in 31 (6.8%) patients. No history of STIs was associated with a higher rate of unsuccessful follow-up in patients undertreated for GC/CT infections (52.9% versus 74.2%, difference = -21.3%, 95% CI -37.4%, -5.1%). Rate of overtreatment was 19.1%, and rate of undertreatment was 46.5%. Phone contact was the most frequent method of successful contact, which occurred in 98.6% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: GC/CT infections continue to be overtreated in the ED. Based on this study, no history of prior sexually transmitted infections was associated with unsuccessful follow-up in patients undertreated for GC/CT infections after discharge from the ED.

Reversal of Warfarin-Associated Major Hemorrhage: Activated Prothrombin Complex Concentrate versus 4-Factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate.

BACKGROUND: Warfarin-associated major hemorrhage is frequently treated with prothrombin complex concentrates to correct international normalized ratio (INR). OBJECTIVE: This article aims to investigate the efficacy of activated prothrombin complex concentrate (aPCC) versus 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4PCC) for vitamin K antagonist reversal in patients with warfarin-associated major hemorrhage. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a multicenter, retrospective cohort study. Patients included were age ≥ 18 years with pretreatment INR of > 1.5. Exclusion criteria were patients treated for urgent procedures without hemorrhage, treated but not taking warfarin, unavailable INR values, and pregnant patients. Patients were stratified into two groups: aPCC or 4PCC. The primary outcome was achievement of INR ≤ 1.5 at the posttreatment INR sampling. Secondary outcomes focused on thrombotic events and mortality. RESULTS: Of 342 patients, 237 patients received aPCC and 105 patients received 4PCC. After 1:1 propensity score matching, 86 patients remained in each group. In the matched cohort, the proportion of patients who achieved target INR ≤ 1.5 was greater with 4PCC (aPCC = 61 [70.9%] vs. 4PCC = 76 [88.4%]; 95% confidence interval [CI] -29.2% to -5.7%) and groups had comparable in-hospital thrombotic events and mortality. In the unmatched cohort, achievement of target INR ≤ 1.5 was greater with 4PCC (aPCC = 151 [63.7%] vs. 4PCC = 92 [87.6%]; 95% CI -32.7% to -15.1%). CONCLUSION: In the treatment of warfarin-associated major hemorrhage, 4PCC compared with aPCC was associated with greater achievement of INR ≤ 1.5 with comparable thrombotic events and mortality. Further controlled studies are needed to confirm these findings and determine the optimal dosing strategy that maximizes efficacy and safety.

Single-dose sodium polystyrene sulfonate for hyperkalemia in chronic kidney disease or end-stage renal disease.

BACKGROUND: The use of sodium polystyrene sulfonate (SPS) for the treatment of hyperkalemia lacks sufficient efficacy data in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage renal disease (ESRD); however, use remains widespread. Recent evidence suggests that this population may be at risk for serious gastrointestinal adverse effects with SPS. Methods. We conducted a single-center retrospective cohort study. Adult patients with CKD Stages 4, 5, or ESRD maintained on renal replacement therapy with serum potassium >5 mEq/L and receipt of SPS were screened for inclusion. Our primary outcome was decrease in potassium within 24 h post-30 g oral SPS suspended in 33% sorbitol. Secondary outcomes included decrease in potassium within 24 h from 15 or 30 g SPS doses and gastrointestinal adverse events. RESULTS: Of 596 records, 114 were included for analysis. At the first serum potassium level within 24 h post-30 g oral SPS the median potassium decrease was 0.8 mEq/L [interquartile range (IQR) 0.4-1.1; P < 0.001]. At the first potassium level within 24 h post-15 or 30 g SPS, the median potassium decrease was 0.7 mEq/L (IQR 0.4-1.0; P < 0.001]. Post-SPS potassium levels occurred 14-16 h post-SPS. Gastrointestinal side effects occurred within 30 days of SPS in 5% of patients, although only two cases were classified as possibly associated. CONCLUSIONS: The use of single-dose SPS monotherapy resulted in a significant decrease in serum potassium levels within 24 h in patients with CKD Stage 4, 5, or ESRD. However, it remains unclear if SPS is associated with an increased risk of gastrointestinal injury in this population.

Glucagon for Relief of Acute Esophageal Foreign Bodies and Food Impactions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Glucagon is frequently used for the relief of esophageal impactions. This systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of glucagon for acute esophageal foreign body and food impactions. PubMed, CINAHL, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS), Scopus, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception to March 1, 2018. Retrospective, observational, and randomized controlled trials assessing glucagon for the relief of acute esophageal foreign body and food impaction were included. There were no language or age restrictions. Only studies conducted on humans and with a comparator (e.g., control or placebo) were included. Study quality analysis was performed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Quality of evidence analysis was performed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations approach. A total of 1988 studies were identified, and five studies with a total of 1185 subjects were included. Treatment success occurred in 213 of 706 (30.2%) patients in the glucagon group and 158 of 479 (33.0%) patients in the control group (odds ratio [OR] 0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69-1.17, p=0.42). There was minimal statistical heterogeneity (I2  = 14%, p=0.33). No publication bias was identified. Adverse events were identified in 24 (15.0%) patients in the glucagon group and 0 (0%) patients in the placebo group (risk difference [RD] 0.18, 95% CI 0.03-0.33, p=0.02). Vomiting events occurred more frequently in the glucagon group (17 of 160 [10.6%] vs 0 of 53 [0%]) but was not statistically significant (RD 0.07, 95% CI -0.03-0.17, p=0.19). Glucagon was not associated with a difference in treatment success but had a higher rate of adverse events for the treatment of esophageal foreign body and food impaction. Further controlled studies are needed to confirm the efficacy of glucagon with adequate power to assess adverse events.

Systemic Antibiotics for the Treatment of Skin and Soft Tissue Abscesses: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The addition of antibiotics to standard incision and drainage is controversial, with earlier studies demonstrating no significant benefit. However, 2 large, multicenter trials have recently been published that have challenged the previous literature. The goal of this review was to determine whether systemic antibiotics for abscesses after incision and drainage improve cure rates. METHODS: PubMed, the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Scopus, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and bibliographies of selected articles were assessed for all randomized controlled trials comparing adjuvant antibiotics with placebo in the treatment of drained abscesses, with an outcome of treatment failure assessed within 21 days. Data were dual extracted into a predefined worksheet and quality analysis was performed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. RESULTS: Four studies (n=2,406 participants) were identified. There were 89 treatment failures (7.7%) in the antibiotic group and 150 (16.1%) in the placebo group. The calculated risk difference was 7.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.8% to 12.1%), with an odds ratio for clinical cure of 2.32 (95% CI 1.75 to 3.08) in favor of the antibiotic group. There was also a decreased incidence of new lesions in the antibiotic group (risk difference -10.0%, 95% CI -12.8% to -7.2%; odds ratio 0.32, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.44), with a minimally increased risk of minor adverse events (risk difference 4.4%, 95% CI 1.0% to 7.8%; odds ratio 1.29, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.58). CONCLUSION: The use of systemic antibiotics for skin and soft tissue abscesses after incision and drainage resulted in an increased rate of clinical cure. Providers should consider the use of antibiotics while balancing the risk of adverse events.

Metoprolol vs. diltiazem in the acute management of atrial fibrillation in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to examine the effects of metoprolol versus diltiazem in the acute management of atrial fibrillation (AF) with rapid ventricular response (RVR) in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). METHODS: This retrospective cohort study of patients with HFrEF in AF with RVR receiving either intravenous push (IVP) doses of metoprolol or diltiazem was conducted between January 2012 and September 2016. The primary outcome was successful rate control within 30 min of medication administration, defined as a heart rate (HR) < 100 beats per minute or a HR reduction ≥ 20%. Secondary outcomes included rate control at 60 min, maximum median change in HR, and incidence of hypotension, bradycardia, or conversion to normal sinus rhythm within 30 min. Signs of worsening heart failure were also evaluated. RESULTS: Of the 48 patients included, 14 received metoprolol and 34 received diltiazem. The primary outcome, successful rate control within 30 min, occurred in 62% of the metoprolol group and 50% of the diltiazem group (p = 0.49). There was no difference in HR control at predefined time points or incidence of hypotension, bradycardia, or conversion. Although baseline HR varied between groups, maximum median change in HR did not differ. Signs of worsening heart failure were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: For the acute management of AF with RVR in patients with HFrEF, IVP diltiazem achieved similar rate control with no increase in adverse events when compared to IVP metoprolol.

Topical Tranexamic Acid for the Treatment of Acute Epistaxis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To compare topical tranexamic acid (TXA) with control groups for the treatment of acute epistaxis assessing bleeding cessation, discharge within 2 hours, rebleeding rates, complication rates, and patient satisfaction. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, CINAHL, LILACS, Scopus, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception to November 2018. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: All randomized controlled trials comparing topical TXA with control groups for the treatment of acute epistaxis in humans were included. There were no age, language, or date restrictions. Data were double extracted into a predefined worksheet, and quality analysis was performed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. DATA SYNTHESIS: Three studies (n = 408 patients) were identified. Topical TXA was not associated with a statistically significant difference in cessation of bleeding within 30 minutes. However, more patients were discharged within 2 hours of arrival, there were fewer episodes of rebleeding within both the first 24 hours and at 1 week, and there was higher patient satisfaction in the TXA group. There was no difference identified in complication rates. Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice: This review compares topical TXA with control groups for epistaxis and discusses the risks and benefits of adding this therapy to usual care. CONCLUSIONS: Topical TXA appears to be a reasonable option for the treatment of acute epistaxis, with reduced rebleeding rates, shorter discharge times, and minimal risk of complications. Topical TXA may be considered as part of the treatment of acute epistaxis.