A 33-Year-Old Man With Shortness of Breath, Leukocytosis, and Intermittent Fevers.

CASE PRESENTATION: A 33-year-old man with ulcerative colitis (UC) and primary sclerosing cholangitis presented with worsening shortness of breath, nonproductive cough, and intermittent fevers after he was found to have a WBC count of 27,000 cells/µL on an outpatient laboratory evaluation. He reported feeling progressively unwell with intermittent right upper quadrant pain and shortness of breath since a hospital admission for a UC flare 6 months prior, during which he was first diagnosed with primary sclerosing cholangitis. He noted that prior to that admission 6 months ago, his UC had been in remission for > 10 years. He reported fevers up to 38.9°C on and off for several weeks but was afebrile (37.2°C) on presentation. He endorsed non-bloody diarrhea, chills, night sweats, leg swelling, and associated leg pain. He had a cough but denied sputum production. He reported no recent travels and denied sick contacts. His medications included mesalamine, ursodiol, montelukast, and an albuterol inhaler.

Anthrax lethal and edema toxins produce different patterns of cardiovascular and renal dysfunction and synergistically decrease survival in canines.

BACKGROUND: High mortality in the 2001 US and recent European anthrax outbreaks suggests that better understanding of the effects of the toxins produced by this bacterium is needed to improve treatment. METHODS AND RESULTS: Here, 24-h edema (ETx) and lethal (LeTx) toxin infusions were investigated for 96 hin sedated canines receiving mechanical ventilation. The initial study compared similarly lethal doses of ETx (n=8) or LeTx (n=15) alone. ETx was 24 times less lethal than LeTx, and the median time to death in nonsurvivors (n=6 and n=9, respectively) was shorter with ETx (42 vs 67 h; P=.04). Compared with controls(n=9), both toxins decreased arterial and central venous pressures and systemic vascular resistance and increased heart rate, cardiac index, blood urea nitrogen (BUN) level, creatinine (Cr) concentration, BUN:Cr ratio, and hepatic transaminase levels (P ≤ .05 for toxin effect or time interaction). However, ETx stimulated early diuresis,reduced serum sodium levels, and had more pronounced vasodilatory effects, compared with LeTx, as reflected by greater or earlier central venous pressures, systemic vascular resistance, and changes in the BUN:Cr ratio(P ≤ .01). LeTx progressively decreased the left ventricular ejection fraction (P ≤ .002). In a subsequent study, a lethal dose of LeTx with an equimolar nonlethal ETx dose (n=8) increased mortality, compared with LeTx alone (n=8; P= .05). CONCLUSION: Shock with ETx or LeTx may require differing supportive therapies, whereas toxin antagonists should likely target both toxins.

Bundled care for septic shock: an analysis of clinical trials.

CONTEXT: Sepsis bundles have been developed to improve patient outcomes by combining component therapies. Valid bundles require effective components with additive benefits. Proponents encourage evaluation of bundles, both as a whole and based on the performance of each component. OBJECTIVE: Assess the association between outcome and the utilization of component therapies in studies of sepsis bundles. DATA SOURCE: Database searches (January 1980 to July 2008) of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, using the terms sepsis, bundles, guidelines, and early goal directed therapy. DATA EXTRACTION: Inclusion required comparison of septic adults who received bundled care vs. nonprotocolized care. Survival and use rates for individual interventions were abstracted. MAIN RESULTS: Eight unblinded trials, one randomized and seven with historical controls, were identified. Sepsis bundles were associated with a consistent (I2 = 0%, p = .87) and significant increase in survival (odds ratio, 1.91; 95% confidence interval, 1.49-2.45; p < .0001). For all studies reporting such data, there were consistent (I2 = 0%, p > or = .64) decreases in time to antibiotics, and increases in the appropriateness of antibiotics (p < or = .0002 for both). In contrast, significant heterogeneity was seen across trials for all other treatments (antibiotic use within a specified time period; administration of fluids, vasopressors, inotropes, and packed red blood cells titrated to hemodynamic goals; corticosteroids and human recombinant activated protein C use) (all I2 > or = 67%, p < .002). Except for antibiotics, sepsis bundle components are still being investigated for efficacy in randomized controlled trials. CONCLUSION: Bundle use was associated with consistent and significant improvement in survival and antibiotic use. Use of other bundle components changed heterogeneously across studies, making their impact on survival uncertain. However, this analysis should be interpreted cautiously as these studies were unblinded, and only one was randomized.

Hypertensive emergency and severe hypertension: what to treat, who to treat, and how to treat.

Remember to treat patients, not numbers. Use fast acting shortterm medicines only when convincing evidence of rapidly evolving end-organ damage is present. For all patients, emergent or asymptomatic, the treatment goal is long-term control of hypertension. Potent IV agents for the im-mediate control of elevated blood pressure need to be used cautiously,bearing in mind both the side effects and the hazards of overly rapid control of hypertension. Conventional oral medication regimens demonstrated to modify the risks of chronic hypertension should be used whenever possible and as early as is practical to promote gradual control of hypertension. Whenever a patient presents for the evaluation of severe hypertension in an emergent setting, take the opportunity to encourage appropriate ongoing follow-up; after all, hypertension is not a single episode, it is an ongoing threat to good health.