In recent years the use of immunomodulating therapy to treat various cancers has been on the rise. Three checkpoint inhibitors have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (ipilimumab, pembrolizumab and nivolumab). The use of these drugs comes with serious adverse events related to excessive immune activation, collectively known as immune-related adverse events (irAEs). We conducted a system-based review of 139 case reports/case series that have described these adverse events between January 2016 and April 2018, found in the PubMed database. There was a broad spectrum of presentations, doses and checkpoint inhibitors used. The most common check point inhibitor observed in our literature review was nivolumab. The most common adverse effects encountered were colitis (14/139), hepatitis (11/139), adrenocorticotropic hormone insufficiency (12/139), hypothyroidism (7/139), type 1 diabetes (22/139), acute kidney injury (16/139) and myocarditis (10/139). The treatment most commonly consisted of cessation of the immune checkpoint inhibitor, initiation of steroids and supportive therapy. This approach provided a complete resolution in a majority of cases; however, there were many that developed long-term adverse events with deaths reported in a few cases. The endocrine system was the mostly commonly affected with the development of type 1 diabetes mellitus or diabetic ketoacidosis being the most frequently reported adverse events. While immunomodulating therapy is a significant advance in the management of various malignancies, it is capable of serious adverse effects. Because the majority of the cases developed pancreatic dysfunction within five cycles of therapy, in addition to the evaluation of other systems, pancreatic function should be closely monitored to minimize adverse impact on patients.

Contrast-induced acute kidney injury is a common iatrogenic complication associated with increased health resource utilization and adverse outcomes, including short- and long-term mortality and accelerated progression of preexisting renal insufficiency. The incidence of contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) has been reported to range from 0% to 24%. This wide range reported by the studies is due to differences in definition, background risk factors, type and dose of contrast medium used, and the frequency of other coexisting potential causes of acute renal failure. CIN is usually transient, with serum creatinine levels peaking at 2-3 days after administration of contrast medium and returning to baseline within 7-10 days after administration. Multiple studies have been conducted using variety of therapeutic interventions in an attempt to prevent CIN. Of these, careful selection of patients, using newer radiocontrast agents, maintenance of hydration status, and avoiding nephrotoxic agents pre- and post-procedure are the most effective interventions to protect against CIN. This review focuses on the basic concepts of CIN and summarizes our recent understanding of its pathophysiology. In addition, this article provides practical recommendations with respect to CIN prevention and management.

Objectives: Despite the benefits of rapid deployment aortic valve prostheses (RDAVR), conventional sutured valves (cAVR) are more commonly used in the treatment for aortic stenosis. Given the paucity of randomized studies, this study aimed to synthesize available data to compare both treatment options. Methods: A systematic search of Pubmed, OVID, and MEDLINE was conducted to retrieve comparative studies for RDAVR versus cAVR in the treatment of aortic stenosis. Out of 1773 returned titles, 35 papers were used in the final analysis, including 1 randomized study, 1 registry study, 6 propensity-matched studies, and 28 observational studies, incorporating a total of 10,381 participants (RDAVR n = 3686; cAVR n = 6310). Results: Random-effects meta-analysis found no difference between the two treatment groups in terms of operative mortality, stroke, or bleeding (p > .05). The RDAVR group had reduced cardiopulmonary bypass (standardized mean difference [SMD]: −1.28, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [−1.35, −1.20], p < .001) and cross-clamp times (SMD: −1.05, 95% CI: [−1.12, −0.98], p < .001). Length of stay in the intensive care unit was also shorter in the RDAVR group (SMD: −0.385, 95% CI: [−0.679, −0.092], p = .010). The risk of pacemaker insertion was higher for RDAVR (odds ratio [OR]: 2.41, 95% CI: [1.92, 3.01], p < .001) as was the risk of paravalvular leak (PVL) at midterm follow-up (OR: 2.52, 95% CI: [1.32, 4.79], p = .005). Effective orifice area and transvalvular gradient were more favorable in RDAVR patients (p > .05).Conclusions: Despite the benefits of RDAVR in terms of reduced operative time and enhanced recovery, the risk of pacemaker insertion and midterm PVL remains a significant cause for concern.

Ileitis and colitis are known complications of capecitabine when used in patients with gastrointestinal cancers. However, to our knowledge, pneumatosis intestinalis (PI) has not previously been reported with this medication. We present a patient with breast cancer, without any metastases to the gastrointestinal tract, who presented with persistent diarrhea 4 weeks after discontinuing adjuvant capecitabine, which was found to be due to PI. As she had no other risk factors or identifiable causes, her PI was attributed to a delayed reaction to capecitabine. This case highlights the need to consider PI earlier in the differential diagnosis in patients with breast cancer who present with unexplained diarrhea after recent discontinuation of capecitabine.