Background Recent evaluation of rheumatic heart disease (RHD) mortality demonstrates disproportionate disease burden within the United States. However, there are few contemporary data on US children living with acute rheumatic fever (ARF) and RHD. Methods and Results Twenty‐two US pediatric institutions participated in a 10‐year review (2008–2018) of electronic medical records and echocardiographic databases of children 4 to 17 years diagnosed with ARF/RHD to determine demographics, diagnosis, and management. Geocoding was used to determine a census tract‐based socioeconomic deprivation index. Descriptive statistics of patient characteristics and regression analysis of RHD classification, disease severity, and initial antibiotic prescription according to community deprivation were obtained. Data for 947 cases showed median age at diagnosis of 9 years; 51% and 56% identified as male and non‐White, respectively. Most (89%) had health insurance and were first diagnosed in the United States (82%). Only 13% reported travel to an endemic region before diagnosis. Although 96% of patients were prescribed secondary prophylaxis, only 58% were prescribed intramuscular benzathine penicillin G. Higher deprivation was associated with increasing disease severity (odds ratio, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.08–1.46). Conclusions The majority of recent US cases of ARF and RHD are endemic rather than the result of foreign exposure. Children who live in more deprived communities are at risk for more severe disease. This study demonstrates a need to improve guideline‐based treatment for ARF/RHD with respect to secondary prophylaxis and to increase research efforts to better understand ARF and RHD in the United States.
Objectives: Shock refractory to fluid and catecholamine therapy has significant morbidity and mortality in children. The use of methylene blue to treat refractory shock in children is not well described. We aim to collect and summarize the literature and define physicians’ practice patterns regarding the use of methylene blue to treat shock in children. Design: We conducted a systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane for studies involving the use of methylene blue for catecholamine-refractory shock from database inception to 2019. Collected studies were analyzed qualitatively. To describe practice patterns of methylene blue use, we electronically distributed a survey to U.S.-based pediatric critical care physicians. We assessed physician knowledge and experience with methylene blue. Survey responses were quantitatively and qualitatively evaluated. Setting: Pediatric critical and cardiac care units. Patients or Subjects: Patients less than or equal to 25 years old with refractory shock treated with methylene blue. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: One-thousand two-hundred ninety-three abstracts met search criteria, 139 articles underwent full-text review, and 24 studies were included. Studies investigated refractory shock induced by a variety of etiologies and found that methylene blue was generally safe and increased mean arterial blood pressure. There is overall lack of studies, low number of study patients, and low quality of studies identified. Our survey had a 22.5% response rate, representing 125 institutions. Similar proportions of physicians reported using (40%) or never even considering (43%) methylene blue for shock. The most common reasons for not using methylene blue were unfamiliarity with this drug, its proper dosing, and lack of evidentiary support. Conclusions: Methylene blue appears safe and may benefit children with refractory shock. There is a stark divide in familiarity and practice patterns regarding its use among physicians. Studies to formally assess safety and efficacy of methylene blue in treating pediatric shock are warranted.
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.