No abstract

Context: The safety and efficacy of several repurposed drugs, including hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine, with or without azithromycin, were presumed to be miraculous in treating patients with COVID-19. However, as it later transpired, these therapeutic agents seem to be associated with critical adverse cardiac events. Objectives: Given the skepticism around the advantages and disadvantages of the aforementioned treatment strategies, the present study aimed to investigate the clinical efficacy and cardiac toxicity of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without azithromycin in the setting of COVID-19 infection. Method: This was an umbrella review conducted on patients with COVID-19 who received hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without azithromycin from January 2020 to November 2020. We systematically searched PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, ProQuest, Web of Science, and Embase databases. Results: Three studies (systematic review and meta-analysis) were analyzed to evaluate the arrhythmogenic potential of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without azithromycin in patients with COVID-19 and identify the clinical efficacy of such a combination. Conclusions: We found no benefit for patients with COVID-19 who received hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine alone or in combination with azithromycin. Moreover, it is noteworthy that these medications, particularly when considering co-administration, could result in both statistically and clinically elevated risks of notorious arrhythmias, such as TdP.

No abstract

Objective: Determining the exact underlying etiology of loss of consciousness (LOC) can become a real challenge for physicians due to the broadness of differential diagnoses. The current study aimed to assess the accuracy of a commercially available strip for urine drug screening, in patients presenting with LOC. Methods: One hundred fifty patients with LOC were enrolled in the current cross-sectional study. The diagnostic accuracy of a multidrug urinary strip rapid test was evaluated in comparison to blood analysis as the reference test, and the screening performance characteristics of the rapid test for each substance were estimated. Results: The average age of patients was 46.21±18.59 years (72.67% male). The most frequent false positive results of the test were related to Benzodiazepine (21.5%), Methamphetamine (7.5%), and Tramadol (5.4%), respectively. The screening performance characteristics of the test tape were the best in detection of Amitriptyline with 100.0% (95% CI: 30.99 – 100.0) sensitivity, Cocaine with 100.0% (95% CI: 5.46 – 100.0) sensitivity, and Methadone with 91.54% (95% CI: 81.88 – 96.51) sensitivity, respectively. Conclusion: The current study reveals that employing a urinary strip test for detecting drug intoxication in the setting of emergency department can lead to significant false positive and negative results. Accordingly, relying on a urine drug screen to determine the underlying etiology of LOC should be done with caution.

No abstract