The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently approved the marketing of an electronic cigarette (e-cig) brand called Vuse (RJ Reynolds Vapor Company, US) to help aid in smoking cessation for adult smokers. It was believed that the consumption of traditional cigarettes and their harmful effects would be reduced given the availability of newer e-cigarettes. However, adolescent use of tobacco and nicotine products rather increased with the availability of the same e-cigarettes, and the FDA-approved market boom only worsened this problem. Although the FDA underlines the importance of marketing e-cigarettes as a possible solution for adult traditional smoking, its consequences on adolescents' health raise many concerns, which we narrated in this review article.
Gastrointestinal bleeding accounts for a drastic negative impact on the quality of the patients’ lives as it requires multiple diagnostic and therapeutic interventions to identify the source of the bleeding. Small bowel bleeding is the least common cause of gastrointestinal bleeding. However, it is responsible for the majority of complaints from patients with persisting or recurring bleeding where the primary source of bleeding cannot be identified despite investigation. A somatostatin analog known as octreotide is among the medical treatment modalities currently used to manage small bowel bleeding. This medication helps control symptoms of gastrointestinal bleeding by augmenting platelet aggregation, decreasing splanchnic blood flow, and antagonizing angiogenesis. In this review article, we will highlight the clinical efficacy of octreotide in small bowel bleeding and its subsequent effect on morbidity and mortality.
The study objective was to determine if peri-operative bridging anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation is beneficial or harmful.Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis.Setting: Inpatient or in-hospital setting.Participants: Adults with atrial fibrillation having a CHADS2 score >1 undergoing elective surgical procedure on anticoagulation.Methods: A systemic search of multiple databases (Cochrane, Medline, PubMed) was performed regarding studies conducted on efficacy and safety of perioperative bridging anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation. Studies identified were reviewed by two authors individually before inclusion. The results were then pooled using Review Manager to determine the combined effect. Stroke/systemic embolism was considered as the primary efficacy outcome. Major bleeding was the primary safety outcome. Results:The systematic search revealed 108 potential articles. The full texts of 28 articles were retrieved for assessment of eligibility. After full text review, 25 articles were excluded. Three articles met inclusion criteria. No significant difference in stroke/systemic embolism with bridging anticoagulation was noted (risk ratio, 1.25-95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55-2.85). Bridging was associated with significantly higher risk of major bleeding (risk ratio, 3.29-95% CI, 2.25-4.81). Conclusion:An individualized approach is required when initiating peri-operative bridging anticoagulation. There is certainly a higher risk of bleeding with bridging anticoagulation and no difference in stroke/systemic embolism. However, the results cannot be extrapolated to patients who have valvular atrial fibrillation or CHADS2 score of 5 or greater.
The COVID-19 pandemic has markedly affected the health care of patients in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs), but no systematic study to corroborate this effect has been undertaken. In addition, the survival outcomes of patients with COVID-19 who received invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) have not been well established. We pooled evidence from all available studies and did a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess and compare mortality outcomes between LMICs and high-income countries (HICs). We searched MEDLINE and the University of Michigan Library according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines from December 1, 2019, to July 15, 2021, for case-control studies, cohort studies, and brief reports that discussed mortality ratios and survival outcomes among patients with SARS-CoV-2 who received IMV. We excluded studies and case reports without comparison groups, narrative reviews, and preprints. A random-effects estimate of the arcsine square root transformation (PAS) of each outcome was generated with the DerSimonian-Laird method. Seven eligible studies, consisting of 243,835 patients with COVID-19, were SUMMARY included. We identified a significantly higher mortality rate (i.e., a larger PAS) among the patients receiving IMV in LMICs (PAS, 0.754; 95% CI, 0.569-0.900; P<.001) compared to patients in HICs (PAS, 0.588; 95% CI, 0.263-0.876; P<.001). Considerable heterogeneity was present within the individual subgroups possibly because of the extent of the included studies, which had data from specific countries and states but not from individual hospitals or health care centers. Moreover, the sample population in each study was diverse. Metaregression showed that a higher mortality rate among patients with COVID-19 who received IMV in both HICs (P<.001) and LMICs (P=.04) was associated with chronic pulmonary disease. Our study suggests that chronic pulmonary diseases and poor demographics lead to a worse prognosis among patients with CO-VID-19 who received IMV. Moreover, the survival outcome is worse in LMICs, where health care systems are usually understaffed and poorly financed.
BACKGROUND ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is the result of transmural ischemia of the myocardium and is associated with a high mortality rate. Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) is the recommended first-line treatment strategy for patients with STEMI. The timely delivery of PPCI became extremely challenging for STEMI patients during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, leading to a projected steep rise in mortality. These delays were overcome by the shift from first-line therapy and the development of modern fibrinolytic-based reperfusion. It is unclear whether fibrinolytic-based reperfusion therapy is effective in improving STEMI endpoints. AIM To determine the incidence of fibrinolytic therapy during the COVID-19 pandemic and its effects on STEMI clinical outcomes. METHODS PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were queried from January 2020 up to February 2022 to identify studies investigating the effect of fibrinolytic therapy on the prognostic outcome of STEMI patients during the pandemic. Primary outcomes were the incidence of fibrinolysis and the risk of all-cause mortality. Data were meta-analyzed using the random effects model to derive odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals. Quality assessment was carried out using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. RESULTS Fourteen studies including 50136 STEMI patients ( n = 15142 in the pandemic arm; n = 34994 in the pre-pandemic arm) were included. The mean age was 61 years; 79% were male, 27% had type 2 diabetes, and 47% were smokers. Compared with the pre-pandemic period, there was a significantly increased overall incidence of fibrinolysis during the pandemic period [OR: 1.80 (1.18 to 2.75); I 2 = 78%; P = 0.00; GRADE: Very low]. The incidence of fibrinolysis was not associated with the risk of all-cause mortality in any setting. The countries with a low-and middle-income status reported a higher incidence of fibrinolysis [OR: 5.16 (2.18 to 12.22); I 2 = 81%; P = 0.00; GRADE: Very low] and an increased risk of all-cause mortality in STEMI patients [OR: 1.16 (1.03 to 1.30); I 2 = 0%; P = 0.01; GRADE: Very low]. Meta-regression analysis showed a positive correlation of hyperlipidemia ( P = 0.001) and hypertension ( P < 0.001) with all-cause mortality. CONCLUSION There is an increased incidence of fibrinolysis during the pandemic period, but it has no effect on the risk of all-cause mortality. The low- and middle-income status has a significant impact on the all-cause mortality rate and the incidence of fibrinolysis.
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.