Despite the level of skill of the operator and the use of ultrasound guidance, central venous catheter (CVC) placement can result in CVC malpositioning, an unintended placement of the catheter tip in an inadequate vessel. CVC malpositioning is not a complication of central line insertion; however, undiagnosed CVC malpositioning can be associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The objectives of this review were to describe factors associated with intravascular malpositioning of CVCs inserted via the neck and chest and to offer ways of preventing, identifying, and correcting such malpositioning. A literature search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and MD Consult was performed in June 2014. By searching for “Central line malposition” and then for “Central venous catheters intravascular malposition,” we found 178 articles written in English. Of those, we found that 39 were relevant to our objectives and included them in our review. According to those articles, intravascular CVC malpositioning is associated with the presence of congenital and acquired anatomical variants, catheter insertion in left thoracic venous system, inappropriate bevel orientation upon needle insertion, and patient’s body habitus variants. Although plain chest radiography is the standard imaging modality for confirming catheter tip location, signs and symptoms of CVC malpositioning even in presence of normal or inconclusive conventional radiography findings should prompt the use of additional diagnostic methods to confirm or rule out CVC malpositioning. With very few exceptions, the recommendation in cases of intravascular CVC malpositioning is to remove and relocate the catheter. Knowing the mechanisms of CVC malpositioning and how to prevent, identify, and correct CVC malpositioning could decrease harm to patients with this condition.

Haloperidol as an adjunctive therapy is superior to placebo for acute gastroparesis symptoms.

No abstract

Oral mucositis is a common and often debilitating complication among cancer patients receiving radiation therapy to the head and neck or chemotherapy agents, or undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Pain and decreased oral function associated with oral mucositis may persist long after the conclusion of therapy. Although most patients respond to conservative management, a subset of patients develops intractable pain with severe consequences. For some, the use of total parenteral nutrition with insertion of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy feeding tubes is the only alternative. Current recommendations to treat mucositis and its related pain include basic oral care, bland oral rinses, topical anesthetics, and systemic analgesics. We believe that chemical neurolysis of the affected areas with methylene blue used as an oral rinse is a noninvasive, efficient, safe, and cost-effective alternative that can provide prolonged analgesia in patients with intractable pain of oral mucositis. The benefits of this therapy are reflected in its improvement of patients' quality of life by enabling oral feeding and controlling pain. We report a series of 5 consecutive patients with intractable oral mucositis-related pain despite conventional treatment with systemic opiates. All 5 patients responded well to the use of 0.05% methylene blue as mouth rinse, demonstrating sustained analgesia over 3 weeks. The treatment was tolerated well, and overall patient satisfaction was very high. We also observed that methylene blue rinse significantly reduced the total opioid requirement, as demonstrated by reductions in the patients' morphine equivalent daily dose scores after its use. Our case series suggests that 0.5% methylene blue oral rinse therapy is an effective and inexpensive modality that can be used safely to palliate intractable oral pain in patients with mucositis associated with cancer treatment. To our knowledge, this is the first report using this therapy to treat pain from oral mucositis.

No abstract