Objectives Patients with alcohol use disorder (AUD) and liver cirrhosis benefit from stopping alcohol intake. Baclofen has been trialled for AUD in cirrhosis and appears to be effective. However, in patients without cirrhosis acamprosate is safer and more efficacious. Acamprosate is rarely used in cirrhosis due to safety concerns: the only published report was for 24 h in a controlled setting. Our centre uses both medications off-label in cirrhotic patients. We performed an audit to pragmatically compare the safety of acamprosate to baclofen in these patients. Methods The electronic records of patients prescribed acamprosate or baclofen between 01/04/17 and 31/03/20 were retrospectively reviewed. Adverse events and abstinence at last follow-up were compared by Student's t-test, Mann-Whitney U or chi-square test. Confounding variables were evaluated by logistic regression. Results In total 48 cirrhotic patients taking acamprosate (median 84 days, range 2-524); 44 baclofen (247 days, 8-910) met inclusion criteria. At baseline, 41% had Childs-Pugh B or C cirrhosis. More patients taking baclofen had an unplanned hospital admission or attendance (23 vs 13; P = 0.013) and the mean number per patient was higher (1.6 vs 0.6; P = 0.032). Subgroup analysis revealed increased admissions in actively drinking patients prescribed baclofen to achieve abstinence (mean 2.4 vs 0.6; P = 0.020); acamprosate use was associated with a reduced chance of admission or attendance (OR, 0.284; 0.095-0.854; P = 0.025) independent of treatment length. No difference in efficacy was observed. Conclusions In patients with cirrhosis, acamprosate was associated with fewer unplanned admissions than baclofen, hence may be safer despite historical concerns.
Patients with strong clinical features of COVID-19 with negative real time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) SARS-CoV-2 testing are not currently included in official statistics. The scale, characteristics and clinical relevance of this group are not well described. We performed a retrospective cohort study in two large London hospitals to characterize the demographic, clinical, and hospitalization outcome characteristics of swab-negative clinical COVID-19 patients. We found 1 in 5 patients with a negative swab and clinical suspicion of COVID-19 received a clinical diagnosis of COVID-19 within clinical documentation, discharge summary or death certificate. We compared this group to a similar swab positive cohort and found similar demographic composition, symptomology and laboratory findings. Swab-negative clinical COVID-19 patients had better outcomes, with shorter length of hospital stay, reduced need for > 60% supplementary oxygen and reduced mortality. Patients with strong clinical features of COVID-19 that are swab-negative are a common clinical challenge. Health systems must recognize and plan for the management of swab-negative patients in their COVID-19 clinical management, infection control policies and epidemiological assessments.
Patients with strong clinical features of COVID-19 with negative real time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) SARS-CoV-2 testing are not currently included in official statistics. The scale, characteristics and clinical relevance of this group are thus unknown. We performed a retrospective cohort study in two large London hospitals to characterize the demographic, clinical, and hospitalization outcome characteristics of swab-negative clinical COVID-19 patients. We found 1 in 5 patients with a negative swab and clinical suspicion of COVID-19 received a clinical diagnosis of COVID-19 within clinical documentation, discharge summary or death certificate. We compared this group to a similar swab positive cohort and found similar demographic composition, symptomology and laboratory findings. Swab-negative clinical COVID-19 patients had better outcomes, with shorter length of hospital stay, reduced need for >60% supplementary oxygen and reduced mortality. Patients with strong clinical features of COVID-19 that are swab-negative are a common clinical challenge. Health systems must recognize and plan for the management of swab-negative patients in their COVID-19 clinical management, infection control policies and epidemiological assessments.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.