Rhegmatogenous retinal detachment surgery: A review.

Rhegmatogenous retinal detachment (RRD) is a serious surgical condition with significant ocular morbidity if not managed properly. Once untreatable, approaches to the repair of RRD have greatly evolved over the years, leading to outstanding primary surgical success rates. The management of RRD is often a topic of great debate. Scleral buckling, vitrectomy and pneumatic retinopexy have been used successfully for the treatment of RRD. Several factors may affect surgical success and dictate a surgeon's preference for the technique employed. In this review, we provide an overview and supporting literature on the options for RRD repair and their respective preoperative and postoperative considerations in order to guide surgical management.

Risk of death associated with kratom use compared to opioids.

Kratom use appears to be increasing across the United States, increasing attention to deaths in which kratom use was detected. Most such deaths have been ascribed to fentanyl, heroin, benzodiazepines, prescription opioids, cocaine and other causes (e.g., homicide, suicide and various preexisting diseases). Because kratom has certain opioid-like effects (e.g., pain relief), and is used by some people as a substitute for opioids for pain or addiction, kratom has been compared to "narcotic-like opioids" (e.g., morphine) with respect to risk of death despite evidence that its primary alkaloid, mitragynine, carries little of the signature respiratory depressing effects of morphine-like opioids. This commentary summarizes animal toxicology data, surveys and mortality data associated with opioids and kratom to provide a basis for estimating relative mortality risk. Population-level mortality estimates attributed to opioids as compared to kratom, and the per user mortality risks of opioids as compared to kratom are provided. By any of our assessments, it appears that the risk of overdose death is >1000 times greater for opioids than for kratom. The limitations of the mortality risk estimate warrants caution in individuals with unknown factors such as use of other substances and medications, or other preexisting conditions. More research on kratom safety and risks is needed, as is regulation of commercial kratom products to ensure that consumers are informed by FDA labeling and that kratom products are not contaminated or adulterated with other substances.

Kratom Abuse Potential 2021: An Updated Eight Factor Analysis.

Drugs are regulated in the United States (US) by the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) if assessment of their abuse potential, including public health risks, show such control is warranted. An evaluation via the 8 factors of the CSA provides the comprehensive assessment required for permanent listing of new chemical entities and previously uncontrolled substances. Such an assessment was published for two kratom alkaloids in 2018 that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have identified as candidates for CSA listing: mitragynine (MG) and 7-hydroxymitragynine (7-OH-MG) (Henningfield et al., 2018a). That assessment concluded the abuse potential of MG was within the range of many other uncontrolled substances, that there was not evidence of an imminent risk to public health, and that a Schedule I listing (the only option for substances that are not FDA approved for therapeutic use such as kratom) carried public health risks including drug overdoses by people using kratom to abstain from opioids. The purpose of this review is to provide an updated abuse potential assessment reviewing greater than 100 studies published since January 1, 2018. These include studies of abuse potential and physical dependence/withdrawal in animals; in-vitro receptor binding; assessments of potential efficacy treating pain and substance use disorders; pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic studies with safety-related findings; clinical studies of long-term users with various physiological endpoints; and surveys of patterns and reasons for use and associated effects including dependence and withdrawal. Findings from these studies suggest that public health is better served by assuring continued access to kratom products by consumers and researchers. Currently, Kratom alkaloids and derivatives are in development as safer and/or more effective medicines for treating pain, substances use disorders, and mood disorders. Placing kratom in the CSA via scheduling would criminalize consumers and possession, seriously impede research, and can be predicted to have serious adverse public health consequences, including potentially thousands of drug overdose deaths. Therefore, CSA listing is not recommended. Regulation to minimize risks of contaminated, adulterated, and inappropriately marketed products is recommended.

The abuse potential of kratom according the 8 factors of the controlled substances act: implications for regulation and research.

RATIONALE: Consideration by the US Drug Enforcement Administration and Food and Drug Administration of placing kratom into Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) requires its evaluation of abuse potential in the context of public health. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study is to provide a review of kratom abuse potential and its evaluation according to the 8 factors of the CSA. RESULTS: Kratom leaves and extracts have been used for centuries in Southeast Asia and elsewhere to manage pain and other disorders and, by mid-twentieth century, to manage opioid withdrawal. Kratom has some opioid effects but low respiratory depression and abuse potential compared to opioids of abuse. This appears due to its non-opioid-derived and resembling molecular structure recently referred to as biased agonists. By the early 2000s, kratom was increasingly used in the US as a natural remedy to improve mood and quality of life and as substitutes for prescription and illicit opioids for managing pain and opioid withdrawal by people seeking abstinence from opioids. There has been no documented threat to public health that would appear to warrant emergency scheduling of the products and placement in Schedule I of the CSA carries risks of creating serious public health problems. CONCLUSIONS: Although kratom appears to have pharmacological properties that support some level of scheduling, if it was an approved drug, placing it into Schedule I, thus banning it, risks creating public health problems that do not presently exist. Furthermore, appropriate regulation by FDA is vital to ensure appropriate and safe use.

Courts and health care rationing: the case of the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court.

The recognition that access to health care is a constitutional right in Brazil has resulted in a situation in which citizens denied treatments by the public health care system have brought lawsuits against health authorities, claiming that their right to health was violated. This litigation forces the courts to decide between a patient-centred and a population-centred approach to public health - a choice that forces the courts to assess health care rationing decisions. This article analyses the judgments of the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court in right to health cases, arguing that the Court's recent decisions have been contrary to their long-standing stance against rationing. In 2009, the Court organized a public hearing to discuss this topic with civil society and established criteria to determine when rationing would be legal. However, I argue that these criteria for health care rationing do not adequately address the most difficult health care distribution dilemmas. They force the health care system to keep their rationing criteria implicit and make population-centred concerns secondary to individual-centred ones.