There is increasing literature mentioning severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection (COVID-19 infection) causing acute pancreatitis (AP). It is hypothesized that SARS-Cov-2 causes pancreatic injury either by direct cytotoxic effect of the virus on pancreatic cells through the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptors - the main receptors for the virus located on pancreatic cells - or by the cytokine storm that results from COVID-19 infection or a component of both. Many viruses are related to AP including mumps, coxsackievirus, cytomegalovirus (CMV), Epstein-Barr virus (EBV), and as data evolves SARS-CoV-2 virus may be one of them as well. We conducted a systematic literature review to explore the current literature and provide an overview of the evidence of AP in COVID-19 infection. We studied the presence of AP in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection and calculated the time of diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection with respect to the time of diagnosis of AP. We also studied the age, gender, clinical manifestations, time of onset of symptoms, laboratory values, imaging findings, mortality, length of stay, comorbidities, need for Intensive Care Unit (ICU) care, and excluded any other common causes of AP. We included 40 articles comprising 46 patients. All patients had a positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test and all patients had AP as per Atlanta’s criteria. The most common clinical presentation was abdominal pain in 29 (63.0%). Edematous pancreas was the most common Computed Tomography Abdomen Pelvis (CTAP) scan finding in these patients (35 patients). Seventeen (37%) patients required ICU admission and six (13%) patients died. Our study provides an important overview of the available data on AP in COVID-19 patients and concludes that AP is an important complication in COVID-19 infection and should be considered as an important differential in patients with COVID-19 infection who complain of abdominal pain.
Alcohol withdrawal syndrome (AWS) is a complication frequently encountered among patients who are chronic alcohol abusers. It is considered to have a significant impact on the United States healthcare system.It not only has a toll on the healthcare spending but also contributes to significant morbidity and mortality. Benzodiazepines are considered first line in the treatment of AWS. Since patients with alcohol use disorder have downregulated gamma aminobutyric acid (GABA) receptors, this often leads to benzodiazepine resistance. Phenobarbital is also used in the management of alcohol withdrawal syndrome. Here we present a systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of the drug.We conducted an electronic database search for relevant studies published between the inception of the project and November 20, 2022, in three databases, including Medline/PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library. Our study included all original studies with prime focus on the baseline characteristics of patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) for alcohol withdrawal syndrome and management/monitoring protocol implemented for its treatment. The primary outcomes that were the focus of our study consisted of changes in the length of hospital stay, length of ICU stay, and changes in scoring systems (for alcohol withdrawal assessment and monitoring) following the implementation of phenobarbital. The secondary outcomes included complications such as intubation and mortality.Based on our analysis, the mean difference in hospital stay was statistically significant at -2.6 (95% CI, -4.48, -0.72, P=0.007) for phenobarbital compared to the benzodiazepine group. We were unable to comment on the heterogeneity in our meta-analysis due to the standard deviation not being reported in one study. There was no statistically significant difference regarding the length of stay in the intensive care unit compared to the control/comparative arm, with a mean difference of -1.17 (95% CI, -1.17, 0.09, P=0.07), with considerable heterogeneity (I 2 =77%, P=0.002). Our meta-analysis also investigated the risk of intubation between the phenobarbital and the control/comparative group. There was statistically significant difference in the incidence of intubation, relative risk (RR) 0.52 (95% CI, 0.25, 1.08, P=0.08), with considerable heterogeneity (I 2 =80%, P=0.0001).Our study concludes that phenobarbital is an effective tool in the management of AWS in an ICU setting. However, various studies have reported contradictory results, and vital information appears to be lacking. Moreover, there is a lack of uniformity in terms of phenobarbital dosing. Drug administration should be adapted according to the severity of the symptoms. Further studies need to be conducted discussing the safety profile and adverse effects of the drug when it comes to the management of alcohol withdrawal syndrome.
Schwann cell tumors are benign tumors originating from Schwann cells of the peripheral nervous system and are extremely rare in the gastrointestinal system. They usually originate in the colon or rectum but can also occur in the esophagus and small intestine. Their occurrence is rare in GI tract and mainly in the sigmoid colon. Schwann cell tumors have no association with any familial cancer syndromes. We present a 65-year-old female patient who underwent routine colon cancer screening. In addition to open mouth diverticulosis, she was found to have a 3 mm polyp, which was diagnosed as a Schwann cell hamartoma after a biopsy. This study aimed to present this rarely reported case in the literature as an example of a tumor that should be included in the differential diagnosis when considering submucosal colonic lesions. Though the reported reoccurrence rate is low, this case highlights the lack of published guidelines regarding appropriate follow-up surveillance periods.
Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) is the current treatment of choice for good surgical candidates with moderate to severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS). As transcatheter aortic valvular replacement (TAVR) has shown an improved one and two-year all-cause mortality, it has been chosen for moderately symptomatic severe AS patients. The purpose of this review was to perform a clinical comparison of TAVR vs. SAVR and to analyze the Health Index Factor (HIF) that makes TAVR a treatment of choice in asymptomatic AS patients.An extensive literature search of PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases was performed using the keywords "Aortic stenosis", "SAVR", "TAVR", and "Asymptomatic". A total of 45 prospective randomized clinical trials in the English language that were published from the year 2000 onwards were included in the final analysis. It has been found that 59.3% of asymptomatic AS patients are likely to die in the next five years without proactive treatment. Multiple studies have proven that early intervention with aortic valve replacement is superior to conservative treatment in severe asymptomatic AS; however, the choice between SAVR and TAVR is not well established. The NOTION Trial, SURTAVI Trail, and PARTNER 3 study have shown the non-inferiority of TAVR over SAVR, during one-year follow-up for low surgical risk patients. Evolut Low-Risk study and Early TAVR are the only two prospective studies performed to date that have enrolled patients with asymptomatic severe AS. The Evolut Trial demonstrated no difference in all-cause mortality at 30 days (1.3% vs. 4.8%. p=0.23), and 12 days (1.3% vs. 6.5%, p=0.11). Additionally, TAVR also decreases the risk of post-procedural atrial fibrillation, acute kidney injury (AKI), and rehospitalization, and leads to significant improvement in the mean trans-aortic pressure gradient. TAVR also showed marked improvement in the 30-day Quality of Life (QOL) index, where SAVR did not report any significant change in the QOL index. However, the official recommendations of Early TAVR are still awaited. TAVR has consistently shown a statistically non-significant difference in case mortality, risk of stroke, and rehospitalization with moderate to high surgical risk patients whereby recent initial trials have shown significant improvement in the QOL index and hemodynamic index for patients with asymptomatic disease. More extensive studies are required to prove the risk stratifications, long-term outcomes, and clinical characteristics that would make TAVR a preferred intervention in asymptomatic patients.
Endobronchial malignancies with significant airway obstruction can lead to multiple complications including pneumonia, and atelectasis over a period of time. Various intraluminal treatments have proven their value in palliative treatment for advanced malignancies. Nd:YAG (neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet; Nd:Y3Al5O12) laser has established its role as a major palliative intervention due to its minimal side effects and improvement in quality of life by relieving local symptoms.The systematic review was conducted with the goal of elucidating the patient characteristics, pre-treatment parameters, clinical outcomes, and possible complications resulting from the use of the Nd:YAG laser. A thorough literature search for relevant studies was conducted on PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library from the inception of the idea to November 24, 2022. Our study included all original studies including retrospective studies and prospective trials, but excluded case reports, case series with less than 10 patients, and studies with incomplete or irrelevant data. A total of 11 studies were included in the analysis. The primary outcomes focused on the evaluation of pulmonary functional tests, postprocedural stenosis, blood gas parameters after the procedure, and survival outcomes. Improvement in clinical status, improvement in objective scale for dyspnea, and complications were the secondary outcomes.Our study shows that Nd:YAG laser treatment is an effective form of palliative treatment to provide subjective and objective improvement in patients with advanced and inoperable endobronchial malignancies. Due to the heterogeneous study populations in the studies reviewed and the presence of many limitations, more studies are still warranted to reach a definitive conclusion.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.