Comparison of efficacy and frequency of akathisia and dystonia between olanzapine, metoclopramide and prochlorperazine in ED headache patients.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and frequency of akathisia and dystonia between the dopamine antagonist headache medications olanzapine, metoclopramide and prochlorperazine. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational cohort study of patients presenting to a large urban level one trauma center between 2010 and 2018. Inclusion criteria was age ≥ 18 who presented to the emergency department with a chief complaint of headache who received either olanzapine, metoclopramide or prochlorperazine. The primary outcome was need for rescue medication. Secondary outcomes were receiving medication for either akathisia or dystonia. Logistic regression was used to identify differences between the three cohorts up to 72 h from initial presentation. RESULTS: There were 5643 patients who met inclusion criteria. Olanzapine was the most commonly used drug (n = 2994, 53%) followed by prochlorperazine (n = 2100, 37%) and metoclopramide (n = 549, 10%). After adjusting for age and gender, there were no differences in risk for receiving rescue therapy or developing akathisia or dystonia. CONCLUSION: During initial ED visit and up to 72 h after receiving olanzapine, metoclopramide or prochlorperazine, we found no difference in risk for requiring rescue medication or developing akathisia or dystonia.

Acid external and internal environment exchange the Oreochromis niloticus tissue immune gene expression compared to the mouse macrophage polarization model.

The water environment plays an important role in animal physiology. In this study, we sought to evaluate the effect of the acid environment on the Oreochromis niloticus (Nile tilapia) internal microenvironment immune response compare to the mouse macrophage model (J77A.1). The acid environment treated mouse macrophage J774A.1 model have shown that acidic treatment is able to polarize macrophages into M2-like macrophages via an increase in Ym1, Tgm2, Arg1, Fizz1, and IL-10 expression. Metabolic analysis of mouse macrophages (J774A.1) at pH 2 vs. pH 7 and pH 4 vs. pH 7 have been shown to promote the expression of intracellular acetylcholine, choline, prochlorperazine, L-leucine, and bisphenol A,2-amino-3-methylimidazo[4,5-f] quinolone metabolites in the M2-like macrophage. Immune gene expression of the O. niloticus spleen and liver treated at pH 2, 4, and 7 was shown to reduce TNF-α, IL-1 ß, IL-8, and IL-12 expression compared to pH 7 treatment. Immune gene was induced in O. niloticus following culture at pH 5, 6, and 7 fresh water environment. Taken together, we found that the acid internal environment polarizes tissues into an M2 macrophage developmental microenvironment. However, if the external environment is acid, tissues are exposed to an M1 macrophage developmental microenvironment.

2022 Taiwan Guidelines for Acute Treatment of Migraine.

The Taiwan Headache Society published its guidelines for acute migraine treatment in 2017. Since then, emerging drugs and treatment options have developed rapidly. The migraine-specific drugs gepants and ditans and several noninvasive neuromodulation devices have been approved for use in Europe and the United States. Although not all emerging drugs and treatment options have been approved for use in Taiwan, keeping pace with international trends and updating treatment guidelines are imperative. Therefore, the Treatment Guideline Subcommittee of the Taiwan Headache Society reviewed the quality of recent trials, evaluated the corresponding grade of evidence, and appraised the reported clinical efficacy to reach a new consensus. To ensure that the updated Taiwan guidelines are appropriate and feasible, the subcommittee also referred to the guidelines from the United States, Europe, Canada, and other countries concerning the main roles, recommendation levels, clinical efficacy, and adverse reactions of drugs for the acute migraine treatment. Several types of drugs are currently available for acute migraine treatment in Taiwan. These drugs can be categorized into migraine-specific and migraine-non-specific. Among them, migraine-specific triptans (oral or nasal spray formulations) and migraine-nonspecific acetaminophen and NSAIDs (diclofenac, ibuprofen, naproxen) are highly recommended because they are supported by strong evidence and demonstrate high efficacy. Prochlorperazine injection has been upgraded to a highly recommended level because of the rich clinical experience for this treatment. Ergotamine/caffeine remains a second-line drug because of its lower specificity and efficacy compared with triptans. High-dose aspirin was downgraded to rescue treatment because of potential gastrointestinal side effects. Although evidence supports the combination of oral tramadol and acetaminophen, this combination should be used as a rescue treatment due to concerns about dependence. Evidence supporting the use of intravenous tramadol or morphine is insufficient; therefore, their use is not recommended. As for non-pharmacological approaches, there are only limited controlled data. The choice of treatment for acute migraine attacks should follow the concept of "stratified care." For mild to moderate migraine attacks, oral NSAIDs are the first choice, with combination analgesics, intravenous/intramuscular NSAIDs as alternatives. For moderate to severe attacks, oral or nasal spray triptans and ergotamine/caffeine compounds are recommended and should be administered in the early stage of migraine attacks. Antiemetics can be used as supplements to alleviate nausea and vomiting. Other emerging migraine-specific drugs, such as gepants or ditans, may also have a role in the future. Notably, a combination of a triptan and a NSAID yielded a better efficacy compared with either therapy alone. Parenteral steroids and fluid supply are the first-line treatment for status migrainosus. Acetaminophen is suitable for mild to moderate migraine attacks and remains the first choice for children and pregnant women. To prevent medication overuse headache, the use of acute treatment should be limited to a maximum of 2 days per week. Key words: acute migraine treatment, evidence-based medicine, treatment guidelines, triptans, ergotamine, neuromodulation.

Development of Optimized Sumatriptan-Prochlorperazine Combined Orodispersible Films Without Disintegrant: in vitro, ex vivo and in vivo Characterization.

Sumatriptan succinate and prochlorperazine maleate are a clinically proven combination for treating migraine and associated nausea and vomiting. Classical oral dosage forms are not frequently workable in migraine because of the associated nausea/vomiting, and no effective fixed dose combination is available. Thus, the aim of the study was to optimize a combined sumatriptan-prochlorperazine orodispersible film for rapid release of drugs. Orodispersible films were prepared by solvent casting method using varied amounts of polyvinyl alcohol and glycerol as film former and plasticizer, respectively, along with fixed levels of other ingredients employing central composite design. The optimum film (VF) demonstrated disintegration and total dispersion times as 21 s and 2.3 min, respectively. Tensile strength and Young's modulus were 8.86 ± 0.37 MPa and 24.15 ± 0.07 MPa, respectively. The in vitro T80% of both drugs from the ODF was achieved within 4 min. The film was palatable and disintegrated in 2 min in buccal cavity of human volunteers. Permeation study through goat mucosa demonstrated 100% permeation of both drugs within 15 min. X-Ray diffraction and differential scanning calorimetry supported drugs being amorphous and Fourier transform infrared demonstrated drug-excipient compatibility in optimized film. A judicious combination of sumatriptan succinate and prochlorperazine maleate could be prepared in orodispersible films for the possible relief of migraine.

Simultaneous quantification of sumatriptan succinate and prochlorperazine maleate in orodispersible films using two validated UV-spectroscopic methods.

The study aimed at simultaneous quantification of sumatriptan succinate (SUM) and prochlorperazine maleate (PCP) in an orodispersible film using two validated spectroscopic methods viz. simultaneous equation (Method I) and the Q-absorption ratio (Method II). The Method I involved measurement of absorbances at λmax of both drugs while in Method II, absorbances were measured at isosbestic wavelength and λmax of one of the two components. Method validation were accomplished as per the ICH guidelines. A 1:1 mixture of the drugs and an orodispersible film (ODF) containing these drugs were assayed by both methods. The absorbance data of SUM and PCP in both methods were linear at respective wavelengths with correlation coefficient values >0.995. Both methods were precise as % RSD in repeatability, interday and intraday precision was less than 2. The estimation of SUM and PCP from the film dosage form by method I was104.74% and 98.34% and by method II was 103.45% and 98.85%, respectively, with a standard deviation <2. The study concluded that both the methods were simple, reliable and robust and can be applied successfully for the simultaneous quantification of SUM and PCP in mixture and orodispersible film dosage form.

Migraine in the Emergency Department: A Prospective Multinational Study of Patient Characteristics, Management, and Outcomes.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Migraine headache is commonly diagnosed in emergency departments (ED). There is relatively little real-world information about the epidemiology, investigation, management, adherence to therapeutic guidelines and disposition of patients treated in ED with a final diagnosis of migraine. The primary aim of the current study is to get a snapshot of assessment and management patterns of acute migraine presentations to the different settings of EDs with a view to raise awareness. METHODS: This is a planned sub-study of a prospective study conducted in 67 health services in 10 countries including Australia, New Zealand, Southeast Asia, Europe, and the UK investigating the epidemiology and outcome of adult patients presenting to ED with nontraumatic headache. Outcomes of interest for this study are demographics, clinical features (including severity), patterns of investigation, treatment, disposition, and outcome of patients diagnosed as having migraine as their final ED diagnosis. RESULTS: The cohort comprises 1,101 patients with a mean age of 39 years (SD ± 13.5; 73.7% [811]) were female. Most patients had had migraine diagnosed previously (77.7%). Neuroimaging was performed in 25.9% with a very low diagnostic yield or significant findings (0.07%). Treatment of mild migraine was in accordance with current guidelines, but few patients with moderate or severe symptoms received recommended treatment. Paracetamol (46.3%) and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (42.7%) were the most commonly prescribed agents. Metoclopramide (22.8%), ondansetron (19.2%), chlorpromazine (12.8%), and prochlorperazine (12.8%) were also used. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that therapeutic practices are not congruent with current guidelines, especially for patients with severe symptoms. Efforts to improve and sustain compliance with existing management best practices are required.

Kidney and Mortality Outcomes Associated with Ondansetron in Critically Ill Patients.

Background: Ondansetron is a preferred anti-emetic in critical care to treat nausea and vomiting, and has historically been considered a largely safe option. A recent pharmacoepidemiology study reported that ondansetron may be associated with an increased risk for acute kidney injury (AKI). Methods: We interrogated the High-Density Intensive Care (HiDenIC-15) database containing intensive care data for 13 hospitals across Western Pennsylvania between Oct 2008-Dec 2014. AKI was defined using the Kidney Disease, Improving Global Outcomes 2012 guidelines. Ondansetron use was considered as receiving any form of ondansetron within 24 h of admission. The subsequent 48 h (hours 25-72 after admission) were analyzed for outcomes. Primary outcome was development of AKI; secondary outcomes included 90-day mortality and time to AKI. Propensity-matched, multivariate logistic regression was applied for both outcomes. Comparator groups were metoclopramide and prochlorperazine using the same exposure criteria. Results:AKI occurred in 965 (5.6%), 12 (3.0%), and 61 (6.5%) patients receiving ondansetron, prochlorperazine, and metoclopramide, respectively. In the adjusted analysis, no anti-emetic was associated with a significant change in the odds of developing AKI. Ondansetron was associated with a 5.48% decrease (CI -6.17--4.79) in death within 90 days of ICU-admission, which was independent of AKI status; an effect not seen with other anti-emetics. Anti-emetic usage was not associated with a change in the time to first AKI. Conclusion:Anti-emetic usage did not alter AKI risk. Ondansetron was associated with a significant decrease in 90-day mortality that was not seen by other anti-emetics, which requires further exploration.

Prochlorperazine enhances radiosensitivity of non-small cell lung carcinoma by stabilizing GDP-bound mutant KRAS conformation.

Lung cancer is considered as leading cancer with the highest mortality. The KRAS-oncogenic mutations are dominant in lung carcinoma leading to poor prognosis and radioresistance, which is a major impediment to radiotherapy. Thus, KRAS mutant inhibitors that synergistically sensitize tumours to radiation are urgently needed. In pursuance of the search for a novel radiosensitizer, high-throughput screening of FDA-approved drugs was performed at active site of K-Ras. Prochlorperazine (PCZ), an antipsychotic drug, showed good binding affinity with KRAS-mutant proteins. PCZ binds to the GTP-binding pocket of KRAS-mutant protein and inhibits its constitutive activation by stabilizing the GDP-bound conformation of K-Ras mutants by 9 kcal/mol compared to WT. PCZ alongwith radiation decreased the clonogenic survival of KRAS-mutant NSCLC but not KRAS-WT cells. The combination treatment activates p-ATM, p53, and p21 proteins, leading to cell cycle arrest. PCZ with increasing radiation caused a linear increase in γH2AX foci, suggesting enhanced DSBs-associated apoptosis in radioresistant A549 cells. Pharmacokinetics study showed Cmax = 526 ng/ml at 30min, 4.6h half-life in plasma, and highest accumulation in tumours. PCZ and 10Gy irradiation synergistically radiosensitize mice xenografts via downregulation of Ras/Raf/MEK/ERK pathway. Our efforts have led to the discovery of PCZ as a lead compound. In preclinical analyses, treatment with PCZ alone and in combination with radiation led to regression of KRAS-G12S tumours.

A randomized study of IV prochlorperazine plus diphenhydramine versus IV hydromorphone for migraine-associated symptoms: A post hoc analysis.

OBJECTIVE: We conducted a randomized trial among emergency department patients with migraine to determine the relative impact on migraine-associated symptoms of hydromorphone, an opioid, versus prochlorperazine, an antidopaminergic antiemetic. METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of data from a double-blind study registered at http://clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02389829). Patients who met International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition criteria for migraine without aura or for probable migraine without aura were eligible for participation. Participants received either hydromorphone 1 mg IV or prochlorperazine 10 mg IV plus diphenhydramine 25 mg IV and could receive a second dose of the same medication 1 h later if needed. The outcomes were sustained relief of nausea, photophobia, and phonophobia. RESULTS: A total of 127 patients were enrolled, of whom 63 received prochlorperazine and 64 received hydromorphone. Of 49 patients in the prochlorperazine arm who reported nausea at baseline, 34 (69.4%) reported complete resolution without relapse versus 15/49 (30.6%) in the hydromorphone arm (absolute risk reduction [ARR] = 38.8%, 95% CI: 20.5%-57.0%, p < 0.001). Of 55 patients in the prochlorperazine arm who reported photophobia at baseline, 23 (41.8%) reported complete resolution without relapse versus 13/62 (20.9%) patients treated with hydromorphone (ARR = 20.8%, 95% CI: 4.3%-37.3%, p = 0.014). Of 56 patients in the prochlorperazine arm who reported phonophobia at baseline, 25 (44.6%) reported complete resolution without relapse versus 16/59 (27.1%) in the hydromorphone arm (ARR = 17.5%, 95% CI: 0.3%-34.8%, p = 0.049). For adverse events, three patients in the prochlorperazine arm reported anxiety or restlessness, and nine patients in the hydromorphone arm reported dizziness or weakness. CONCLUSIONS: Prochlorperazine plus diphenhydramine is more efficacious than hydromorphone for the treatment of migraine-associated symptoms.

An extrapyramidal reaction presenting as an acute temporomandibular episode: a case report.

This case report describes an adverse reaction (phenothiazine reaction) to prochlorperazine (Compazine), a commonly prescribed drug. The patient had been referred to a dental clinic for an oral evaluation because of muscle spasms in the oral musculature. He had severe muscle spasms, a reduced range of motion, difficulty registering a repeatable maximum intercuspation, facial grimacing, and difficulty speaking because of the spasms. The dental examination revealed no history of trauma to the musculature or the temporomandibular joints and no previous history of seizures. The patient was a young, healthy man who had recently been hospitalized for an upper respiratory infection and sinusitis. The drug regimen used to treat the sinusitis and respiratory infection caused some nausea and vomiting, and the patient received a prescription for prochlorperazine to control the symptoms. When questioned in the dental clinic about his medical and drug use history, he reported taking only amoxicillin for the infections. His symptoms worsened, necessitating a referral to a co-located emergency department. When he was asked specifically if he was taking Compazine, the patient reported that he had taken it earlier in the day. A tentative diagnosis of a phenothiazine reaction was made, and 50 mg of diphenhydramine was administered intramuscularly. The patient showed a marked alleviation of symptoms. Although the patient's reaction to the prochlorperazine is common, many dental care providers may never treat a patient with such symptoms. The phenothiazines are a common class of drugs, and some, such as prochlorperazine, are often prescribed by dentists. This case highlights the importance of taking an accurate history and being aware of possible adverse effects of medications.

A prospective, randomized, double-blind trial of intravenous chlorpromazine versus intravenous prochlorperazine for the treatment of acute migraine in adults presenting to the emergency department.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of intravenous chlorpromazine versus intravenous prochlorperazine for the treatment of acute migraine in adults presenting to the emergency department (ED). BACKGROUND: Migraine is a common, incapacitating neurological condition. Although chlorpromazine and prochlorperazine are known to be safe, efficacious treatments for migraine, they have never been directly compared. DESIGN: We performed a prospective, randomized, double-blind clinical trial at a tertiary hospital in Melbourne, Australia. Adults aged 18-65 years, who presented with migraine, were eligible for recruitment. Sixty-six patients were randomized to either chlorpromazine 12.5 mg or prochlorperazine 12.5 mg, both infused in 500 ml of sodium chloride 0.9% over 30 min. Headache severity score, nausea severity score, and the presence of photophobia and phonophobia were assessed at 0, 30, 60, and 120 min. Adverse effects and the need for rescue therapy were recorded. The primary outcome was a reduction in headache severity score from baseline at 60 min post-commencement of the study medicine infusion. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients were included in the analysis. There was a median reduction in headache severity score at 60 min of 3.0 (interquartile range 1.0-4.0) in the chlorpromazine arm versus 2.0 (1.0-4.0) in the prochlorperazine arm (median difference -0.5 (95% confidence interval, -1.9 to 0.9)). We saw no evidence of a difference in secondary outcomes at 30, 60, or 120 min. Side effects were reported in 16/32 (50%) patients in the chlorpromazine group versus 7/33 (21%) in the prochlorperazine group (p = 0.020). Rescue therapy was required in 7/32 (22%) patients in the chlorpromazine group versus 12/33 (36%) in the prochlorperazine group (p = 0.277). CONCLUSIONS: Both chlorpromazine and prochlorperazine are efficacious treatments for acute migraine in adult patients presenting to the ED. This trial found no evidence of superiority of either agent over the other. Caution should be used when prescribing these medicines in the borderline hypotensive patient; in that circumstance, prochlorperazine should be preferentially used.

Effectiveness of Standard Combination Therapy in Pediatric Migraine.

BACKGROUND: A combination of parenteral medications (often referred to as standard combination therapy) is frequently used in the treatment of acute migraine in the pediatric emergency department (PED). The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the two-hour, 24-hour, and seven-day impact of one such regimen on pain in children who present to the PED. Standard combination therapy for purposes of our study is defined as a bolus of intravenous saline, and a combination of intravenous ketorolac, prochlorperazine, and diphenhydramine. METHODS: This prospective observational study included 120 children between the ages seven and 18 years who presented to the PED with migraine, whose parents could read and understand the consent form in English, and who were treated with standard combination therapy. The primary outcome measure for this study was the change in severity of pain as noted by the child using the Faces Pain Scale-Revised. We analyzed normally distributed continuous variables by mean and standard deviation, whereas non-normally distributed continuous variables are reported by median and interquartile range. RESULTS: Nonparametric Friedman testing on the entire cohort (n = 120) noted that there was a statistically significant change in the Faces pain scale from before administration of standard combination therapy to the two-hour, 24-hour, and one-week time point with a reduction in pain score of 87.5%, 100%, and 50%, respectively, at the three time points. CONCLUSIONS: This study noted moderate relief of pain after administration of standard combination therapy, which persisted at one-week after administration.

Improving Acute Treatment of Pediatric Primary Headache Disorders With a Novel Headache Treatment Center: Retrospective Review of Preliminary Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To determine preliminary outcomes of targeted headache treatments provided at a novel outpatient acute care pediatric headache treatment center. BACKGROUND: Limitations exist in acute management of pediatric headaches, including inadequate access to specialty headache therapies and headache specialists in acute settings, variable success of emergency room treatments, and omission of comfort measures. An outpatient acute headache care clinic (the "Headache Treatment Center") was strategically initiated at a Midwestern pediatric academic hospital to provide acute and targeted headache therapies for children with active headaches. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review of 154 visits from September through November 2018 of patients ages 7-18 years visiting the Headache Treatment Center. RESULTS: On average, headache intensity (measured on an 11-point pain numeric rating scale) decreased after interventions used in the Headache Treatment Center (mean change = 2.85 ± 2.81, P < .05, Cohen d = 1.01). Large effect sizes for reducing headache intensity were observed for pericranial, occipital/auriculotemporal, and occipital nerve blocks, Cohen d = 1.56, 1.64 and 1.02, respectively. Large effect sizes for reducing headache intensity also were observed for a transcutaneous supraorbital nerve stimulator device (Cefaly) (Cohen d = 1.02), acupuncture (Cohen d = 1.09), and intravenous migraine cocktails (Cohen d = 0.91-1.34). CONCLUSION: Targeted headache therapies to abort pediatric primary headaches as part of a novel headache clinic model may be beneficial for short-term management.

In vitro anticancer activity of fluphenazine, perphenazine and prochlorperazine. A review.

Drug repositioning is an approach that could accelerate the clinical use of compounds in different diseases. The goal is to take advantage of the fact that approved drugs have been tested on humans and detailed information is available on their pharmacology, toxicity and formulation. It can significantly reduce the costs and time needed to implement necessary therapies on the market. In recent years, phenothiazines are being tested for cancer, viral, bacterial, fungal and other diseases. Most research focuses on chlorpromazine as a model drug in this class, but other drugs such as fluphenazine, perphenazine and prochlorperazine have been proven to inhibit the viability of different cancer cell lines. In this study, we performed an extensive literature search to find and summarize all papers on the chosen phenothiazines and their potential in treating different types of cancerin vitro for further animal/clinical trials. Fluphenazine, perphenazine and prochlorperazine possess anticancer activity towards different types of human cancer. The antitumor activity is mainly mediated by an effect of the drugs on the cell cycle, proliferation or apoptosis. Possible molecular targets of phenothiazine derivatives are the drug's efflux pumps (ABCB1 and P-glycoprotein) and two parallel pathways (AKT and Wnt) regulated by the D2 receptor antagonists. The drugs have the potential to reduce the viability of human cancer cell lines, fragment the DNA, stimulate apoptosis, inhibit cell migration and invasiveness as well as impair the production of reactive oxygen species. In addition, due to the sedative and antiemetic properties antipsychotics can be used as an adjuvant for the treatment of chemotherapy side effects.

MAGraine: Magnesium compared to conventional therapy for treatment of migraines.

Due to the healthcare burden associated with migraines, prompt and effective treatment is vital to improve patient outcomes and ED workflow. This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind trial. Adults who presented to the ED with a diagnosis of migraine from August of 2019 to March of 2020 were included. Pregnant patients, or with renal impairment were excluded. Patients were randomized to receive intravenous magnesium, prochlorperazine, or metoclopramide. The primary outcome was change in pain from baseline on a numeric rating scale (NRS) evaluated at 30 min after initiation of infusion of study drug. Secondary outcomes included NRS at 60 and 120 min, ED length of stay, necessity for rescue analgesia, and adverse effects. A total of 157 patients were analyzed in this study. Sixty-one patients received magnesium, 52 received prochlorperazine, and 44 received metoclopramide. Most patients were white females, and the median age was 36 years. Hypertension and migraines were the most common comorbidities, with a third of the patients reporting an aura. There was a median decrease in NRS at 30 min of three points across all three treatment arms. The median decrease in NRS (IQR) at 60 min was -4 (2-6) in the magnesium group, -3 (2-5) in the metoclopramide group, and -4.5 (2-7) in the prochlorperazine group (p = 0.27). There were no statistically significant differences in ED length of stay, rescue analgesia, or adverse effects. Reported adverse effects were dizziness, anxiety, and akathisia. No significant difference was observed in NRS at 30 min between magnesium, metoclopramide and prochlorperazine.

Antiviral activity of chlorpromazine, fluphenazine, perphenazine, prochlorperazine, and thioridazine towards RNA-viruses. A review.

In 2020 the whole world focused on antivirus drugs towards SARS-CoV-2. Most of the researchers focused on drugs used in other viral infections or malaria. We have not seen such mobilization towards one topic in this century. The whole situation makes clear that progress needs to be made in antiviral drug development. The first step to do it is to characterize the potential antiviral activity of new or already existed drugs on the market. Phenothiazines are antipsychotic agents used previously as antiseptics, anthelminthics, and antimalarials. Up to date, they are tested for a number of other disorders including the broad spectrum of viruses. The goal of this paper was to summarize the current literature on activity toward RNA-viruses of such drugs like chlorpromazine, fluphenazine, perphenazine, prochlorperazine, and thioridazine. We identified 49 papers, where the use of the phenothiazines for 23 viruses from different families were tested. Chlorpromazine, fluphenazine, perphenazine, prochlorperazine, and thioridazine possess anti-viral activity towards different types of viruses. These drugs inhibit clathrin-dependent endocytosis, cell-cell fusion, infection, replication of the virus, decrease viral invasion as well as suppress entry into the host cells. Additionally, since the drugs display activity at nontoxic concentrations they have therapeutic potential for some viruses, still, further research on animal and human subjects are needed in this field to verify cell base research.

I-FiBH trial: intravenous fluids in benign headaches-a randomised, single-blinded clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Many emergency physicians use an intravenous fluid bolus as part of a 'cocktail' of therapies for patients with headache, but it is unclear if this is beneficial. The objective of this study was to determine if an intravenous fluid bolus helps reduce pain or improve other outcomes in patients who present to the ED with a benign headache. METHODS: This was a randomised, single-blinded, clinical trial performed on patients aged 10-65 years old with benign headaches who presented to a single ED in Las Vegas, Nevada, from May 2017 to February 2019. All patients received prochlorperazine and diphenhydramine, and they were randomised to also receive either 20 mL/kg up to 1000 mL of normal saline (the fluid bolus group) or 5 mL of normal saline (the control group). The primary outcome was the difference between groups in mean pain reduction 60 min after the initiation of treatment. Secondarily, we compared groups with regards to pain reduction at 30 min, nausea scores, the use of rescue medications and disposition. RESULTS: We screened 67 patients for enrolment, and 58 consented. Of those, 35 were randomised to the fluid bolus group and 23 to the control group. The mean pain score dropped by 48.3 mm over 60 min in the fluid bolus group, compared with 48.7 mm in the control group. The between groups difference of 0.4 mm (95% CI -16.5 to 17.3) was not statistically significant (p=0.96). Additionally, no statistically significant difference was found between groups for any secondary outcome. CONCLUSION: Though our study lacked statistical power to detect small but clinically significant differences, ED patients who received an intravenous fluid bolus for their headache had similar improvements in pain and other outcomes compared with those who did not. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03185130.

Intravenous Migraine Treatment in Children and Adolescents.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Pediatric migraine is a common, chronic, and disabling neurological disorder in children and adolescents. Outpatient management is not always effective, and intravenous migraine management may be necessary for headache treatment in the pediatric emergency department. Most current treatment is based on retrospective evidence and there is a lack of well-designed randomized double-blinded controlled pediatric studies. Intravenous drug treatment agents including intravenous fluids, prochlorperazine, diphenhydramine, metoclopramide, dexamethasone, magnesium, valproate and propofol, and dihydroergotamine are reviewed in this paper. RECENT FINDINGS: Nineteen studies were reviewed including one prospective randomized double-blind; one single-blinded randomized; one prospective; and one open-label, randomized clinical trial. Most studies were retrospective and the quality of the studies was limited. No definite conclusions can be drawn from the studies, but appropriate prospective trials between major pediatric headache institutions will move pediatric intravenous migraine management forward.