The results of this meta-analysis declared the significant role of rhabdomyolysis etiology (traumatic/non-traumatic) in predictive performance of CK. There was a significant correlation between mean CK level and risk of crush-induced AKI. The pooled OR of CK was considerable, but its screening performance characteristics were not desirable.

Context:Caffeine is the most commonly used psychoactive legal drug in the world. Caffeine’s role in controlling pain has received less attention in the past, yet is being increasingly considered. This article briefly reviewed the literature to clarify the role of caffeine as a drug for pain control and attract investigators to this topic.Evidence Acquisition:The data on Caffeine as an adjuvant therapy or as a main component for pain modulation has been narratively reviewed.Results:Caffeine plays an important role in pain modulation through their action on adenosine receptors which are involved in nociception. The use of caffeine as adjuvant treatment was well-established in the literature and caffeine is currently available in some over the counter medications. Studies showed controversial results about the interaction between caffeine and morphine for pain relief in patients with terminal stage cancer. As a main component for pain modulation, Caffeine can be used for hypnic headache and postdural puncture headache.Conclusions:Caffeine has a potential role for pain modulation. Current evidence on caffeine use for migraine and terminal stage cancer is not well-established. Future studies should address the use of caffeine alone for different types of pain with dose escalation and standardization of outcome measurement.

Background: There is a global concern for the susceptibility of patients with cancer to the adverse effects of novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Objectives: Nevertheless, there is a signal of potentially increased vulnerability of patients with cancer to more COVID-19-induced mortality, this notion needs to be further evaluated in various societies with different cancer epidemiology and practice. Methods: In this case-control study, done in Iran, we evaluated the medical records of patients with cancer (Ca+ patients) who infected with COVID-19 and compare them with patients without a medical history of cancer (Ca- patients). Clinical data were collected from 19 February 2020 to 17 May 2020. The extracted data were classified into demographics, underlying medical conditions, clinical manifestations, imaging and laboratory findings, and clinical outcomes. Results: A total of 24 Ca+ patients were compared with 44 Ca- patients in terms of clinical manifestations and outcomes of COVID-19. The Ca- patients significantly developed more dry cough (75.0% vs 29.2%, P = 0.01) and fever (72.7% vs 45.8%, P = 0.02). Findings of the chest CT scan was comparable between groups, except for pleural effusion and lymphadenopathy that exclusively reported in Ca+ patients. (3% and 4%, respectively). At the end of observation, 13 (19.1%) patients died from COVID-19. This rate was significantly higher in Ca+ patients (41.7 vs 6.8%, P = 001). Likewise, Ca+ patients experienced more mechanical ventilation (25.0 vs 4.7%, P = 0.01). However, the rate of ICU admission was comparable between groups (P = 0.29). Conclusions: The patients with cancer had a higher rate of mechanical ventilation and COVID-19-induced mortality.

ObjectivesResearchers have attempted to design various scoring systems to determine the severity and predict the outcome of critically ill patients. The present study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of SOFA score in predicting 1-month outcome of these patients in emergency department.MethodsThe present study is a prospective cross-sectional study of >18 year old non-trauma critically ill patients presented to EDs of 3 hospitals, Tehran, Iran, during October 2014 to October 2015. Baseline characteristics, SOFA score variables, and 1-month outcome of patients were recorded and screening performance characteristics of the score were calculated using STATA 11 software.Results140 patients with the mean age of 68.36 ± 18.62 years (18–95) were included (53.5% male). The most common complaints were decrease in level of consciousness (76.43%) and sepsis (60.0%), were the most frequent final diagnoses. Mean SOFA score of the patients was 7.13 ± 2.36 (minimum 2 and maximum 16). 72 (51.43%) patients died during the following 30 days and 16 (11.43%) patients were affected with multiple organ failure. Area under the ROC curve of SOFA score in predicting mortality of studied patients was 0.73 (95%CI: 0.65–0.81) (Fig. 2). Table 2 depicts screening performance characteristics of this scale in prediction of 1-month mortality in the best cut-off point of ≥7. At this cut-off point, sensitivity and specificity of SOFA in predicting 1-month mortality were 75% and 63.23%, respectively.ConclusionFindings of the present study showed that SOFA scoring system has fair accuracy in predicting 1-month mortality of critically ill patients. However, until a more reliable scoring system is developed, SOFA might be useful for narrative prediction of patient outcome considering its acceptable likelihood ratios.

BackgroundChoosing a proper medication for pain management of patients with acute renal colic has been a challenge for physicians treating these patients.ObjectivesThe present study was performed with the aim of comparing intravenous (IV) ibuprofen and IV ketorolac in pain management of these patients.MethodsIn the present double-blind clinical trial study, patients suspected with renal colic presented to the emergency department were randomly divided into 2 groups receiving IV ibuprofen or IV ketorolac and were compared regarding effectiveness (pain reduction 15, 30, and 60 minutes after injection), treatment success, and possible side effects.ResultsIn total, 240 patients suspected with renal colic with the mean age of 27.38 ± 12.32 years were randomly divided into 2 groups of 120 individuals treated with IV ketorolac or ibuprofen (66.4% male). The two groups were in a similar condition regarding age (P = 0.56), sex (P = 0.78) history of kidney stone (P = 0.40), vital signs (P > 0.05), stone size (P = 0.73), stone location (P = 0.13), and pain severity on admission (P = 0.32). 15, 30, and 60 minutes after drug injection, pain severity in the ketorolac group was significantly higher than the group receiving ibuprofen (P < 0.0001 for all comparisons), yet these differences were not clinically significant. Fifteen minutes after the injection, the rate of treatment success was significantly higher in the group receiving IV ibuprofen (P < 0.0001). After 60 minutes, the number of completely relieved cases reached 37 (30.8%) patients in the ketorolac group and 83 (69.1%) patients in the ibuprofen group. No significant difference was seen in side effects between the two groups (P = 0.35).ConclusionsThe findings of the present study show that ibuprofen is a more rapid acting drug compared to ketorolac in controlling pain caused by renal colic. In addition, its rate of complete relief from pain was twice as much as that of ketorolac. Since the side effects observed for ibuprofen in the present study were very mild, it is suggested to use this drug in treatment and pain control of renal colic patients.