No abstract

Chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) occurs when pulmonary emboli fail to resolve with anticoagulation. For patients with inoperable or residual CTEPH, riociguat is currently the only therapy approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration. However, some patients with CTEPH may require therapy beyond riociguat, such as intravenous prostacyclins, which can present significant administration challenges in patients with complex comorbid conditions. We describe a 42-year-old man with T12 paraplegia complicated by CTEPH (functional class IV with substantial right ventricular dysfunction) and severe pressure ulcers. In order to facilitate goals of care (hospital discharge to a skilled nursing facility where parenteral prostanoids could not be administered), he underwent rapid transition from intravenous treprostinil to oral selexipag in the form of a cross-taper over 6 days. The patient required readmission due to worsening symptoms and was transitioned back to intravenous treprostinil; he tolerated conversion to oral treprostinil for approximately 4 months, but it was subsequently discontinued due to nausea and modified goals of care. The patient underwent transition to hospice care 3 months later and eventually died from clinical deterioration. To our knowledge, this is the first report to describe transition from intravenous treprostinil to selexipag as well as conversion from parenteral treprostinil to oral treprostinil in a patient with CTEPH and illustrates the approaches to and potential issues with prostanoid transitions. Additional observations are necessary to better understand the relative roles of selexipag and oral treprostinil regarding comparative efficacy and tolerability.

Disclaimer In an effort to expedite the publication of articles, AJHP is posting manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time. Purpose Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are widely prescribed medications. Various adverse clinical effects of PPIs have been reported in the literature, particularly over the past decade. The purpose of this article is to review published data primarily describing adverse effects associated with PPI use and to help clinicians determine which patients may still benefit from therapy despite safety concerns. Summary Associations between PPIs and the following have been described: bone fracture, acute and chronic kidney disease, gastrointestinal infections, deficiencies in vitamin B12 and magnesium, and coronavirus disease 2019 and respiratory infections. For inclusion in this review, studies must have evaluated potential adverse events associated with PPIs as a primary or secondary objective. Increased risks of bone fracture, acute and chronic kidney disease, gastrointestinal infections, and magnesium deficiency were consistently reported, albeit mostly in studies involving low-quality data (case-control and/or observational studies) and subject to bias. In the only pertinent randomized controlled trial to date, chronic pantoprazole use was associated with a greater risk of enteric infections relative to placebo use; there was no significant between-group difference in any other adverse event evaluated. PPIs continue to be recommended by the American College of Gastroenterology as a first-line treatment for management of gastroesophageal reflux disease and in the acute period following upper gastrointestinal and ulcer bleeding. Conclusion Higher-quality data is needed to better understand PPI-associated risks of the adverse effects listed above. Until then, clinicians may consider greater vigilance with PPI use; however, the data does not demonstrate a need for wide adoption of de-escalation strategies solely out of safety concerns.

Controversy exists regarding the use of dose capping of weight-based unfractionated heparin (UFH) infusions in obese and morbidly obese patients. The primary objective of this study was to compare time to first therapeutic activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) in hospitalized patients receiving UFH for acute venous thromboembolism (VTE) among three body mass index (BMI) cohorts: non-obese (< 30 kg/m2), obese (30–39.9 kg/m2), and morbidly obese (⩾ 40 kg/m2). In this single-center, retrospective cohort study, patients were included if they ⩾ 18 years of age, had a documented VTE, and were on an infusion of UFH for at least 24 hours. Weight-based UFH doses were calculated using actual body weight. A total of 423 patients met the inclusion criteria, with 230 (54.4%), 146 (34.5%), and 47 (11.1%) patients in the non-obese, obese, and morbidly obese cohorts, respectively. Median times to therapeutic aPTT were 16.4, 16.6, and 17.1 hours in each cohort. Within 24 hours, the cumulative incidence rates for therapeutic aPTT were 70.7% for the non-obese group, 69.9% for the obese group, and 61.7% for the morbidly obese group (obese vs non-obese: HR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.82–1.26, p = 0.88; morbidly obese vs non-obese: HR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.62–1.21, p = 0.41). There was no significant difference in major bleeding events between BMI groups (obese vs non-obese, p = 0.91; morbidly obese vs non-obese, p = 0.98). Based on our study, heparin dosing based on actual body weight without a dose cap is safe and effective.