scholarly journals Comparison of Efficacy and Safety between Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotic Monotherapy and Combination of Long-Acting Injectable and Oral Antipsychotics in Patients with Schizophrenia

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Thanompong Sathienluckana ◽  
Pornyupa Tiangpattanawong ◽  
Karnpreena Chaiyasukthananoan ◽  
Pannapat Jittayanan ◽  
Hathaipat Sawetwangsing ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Monotherapy Group ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Drug Reactions ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Oral Antipsychotic ◽  
Long Acting

Background. Long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics are used as a monotherapy in patients with schizophrenia. However, the combination of LAI and oral antipsychotics is commonly used in clinical practice, despite there being very limited studies investigating the efficacy and safety of this combination compared with LAI antipsychotic monotherapy. Objective. To study the efficacy and safety of LAI antipsychotic monotherapy compared with the combination of LAI and oral antipsychotics in patients with schizophrenia. Methods. This study was a retrospective cohort study, which classified eligible patients into two groups: the LAI antipsychotic monotherapy group and the combination of LAI and oral antipsychotic group. The primary outcome was hospitalization between groups. The duration of the study was 2 years. Results. In total, 86 patients completed the study and were analysed (LAI antipsychotic monotherapy group: n = 25 ; combination of LAI and oral antipsychotic group: n = 61 ). There was no significant difference in hospitalization between the two groups ( P = 1.000 ). For other outcomes, there were also no significant differences in both all-cause discontinuation ( P = 0.667 ) and adverse drug reactions ( P = 0.732 ) between the two groups. Conclusion. The efficacy and safety of LAI antipsychotic monotherapy appeared similar to the combination of LAI and oral antipsychotics in patients with schizophrenia. Therefore, the combination of LAI and oral antipsychotics, which is commonly used in clinical practice, may not be necessary.

scholarly journals Clonidine for the Treatment of Agitation After Dexmedetomidine Discontinuation in Pediatric Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (8) ◽  
pp. 821-827
Author(s):  
Thao L. Nguyen ◽  
Weng Man Lam ◽  
Hillary Orr ◽  
Brian Gulbis ◽  
Riza Mauricio ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Retrospective Cohort Study ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Pediatric Patients ◽  
Group Versus ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Scoring Tool ◽  
Dexmedetomidine Infusion

OBJECTIVE Dexmedetomidine has become a widely used drug in PICUs for sedation. We aim to determine the effects of clonidine on pediatric patients after dexmedetomidine use. METHODS This was a retrospective cohort study that evaluated all pediatric patients admitted to a tertiary PICU who received dexmedetomidine infusion for >48 hours. Outcomes in patients exposed to clonidine (CLON) were compared with those of patients who were not exposed (NoCLON). RESULTS A total of 216 patients were included in this study (43 CLON and 173 NoCLON). The primary outcome, agitation, was less in the CLON cohort (9.3%) than in the NoCLON cohort (9.3% versus 29.5%, respectively; p < 0.01). Hospital LOS was longer in the CLON group (59 versus 20 days, p < 0.01), as was PICU LOS (37.4 versus 11.1 days, p < 0.01). There was no significant difference in the occurrence of increased heart rate or blood pressure between the 2 cohorts. Patients exposed to concurrent midazolam and opioid infusions had higher incidence of agitation when they did not receive clonidine (CLON 8% versus NoCLON 37%, OR 0.15; 95% CI, 0.05–0.51; p < 0.01). In contrast, there was no difference in the incidence of agitation for the CLON group versus the NoCLON group when dexmedetomidine was administered alone (25% versus 19%, OR 1.4; p = 0.99). CONCLUSIONS Our study confirms the importance and effectiveness of clonidine to treat agitation after dexmedetomidine discontinuation. A validated withdrawal scoring tool can help better define dexmedetomidine withdrawal in pediatric patients.

scholarly journals The use of methylprednisolone in COVID-19 patients: A propensity score matched retrospective cohort study

PLoS ONE ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (12) ◽  
pp. e0244128
Author(s):  
Xiang You ◽  
Chao-hui Wu ◽  
Ya-nan Fu ◽  
Zonglin He ◽  
Pin-fang Huang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Nucleic Acid ◽  
Propensity Score ◽  
Retrospective Cohort Study ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Nasopharyngeal Swab ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Negative Results ◽  
Significant Difference

Purpose To evaluate the efficacy and safety of methylprednisolone in treating the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. Methods A retrospective cohort study was conducted, and all COVID-19 patients were recruited who were admitted to the Yichang Third People’s Hospital from February 1st to March 31st, 2020. One-to-one propensity score matching (PSM) was used for minimizing confounding effects. The primary outcome was hospital mortality, with the secondary outcomes being the time needed for a positive SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test to turn negative and the length of hospital stay. Results Totaling 367 patients with COVID-19 hospitalized at the Yichang Third People’s Hospital were identified, of whom 276 were mild or stable COVID-19, and 67 were serious or critically ill. Among them, 255 patients were treated using methylprednisolone, and 188 did not receive any corticosteroid-related treatment. After PSM, no statistically significant difference was found in the baseline characteristics between the two groups. Regarding the outcomes, there also were no statistically significant difference between the two groups. Patients without the use of methylprednisolone were more quickly to obtain negative results of their nasopharyngeal swab tests of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid after treatment, compared to those receiving methylprednisolone. Conclusion Methylprednisolone could not improve the prognosis of patients with COVID-19, and the efficacy and safety of the use of methylprednisolone in patients with COVID-19 still remain uncertain, thus the use of corticosteroids clinically in patients with COVID-19 should be with cautions.

scholarly journals Intravenous Immunoglobulin-based Adjuvant Therapy for Severe COVID-19: a Single-center Retrospective Cohort Study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiao Hou ◽  
Li Tian ◽  
Lei Zhou ◽  
Xinhua Jia ◽  
Li Kong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mechanical Ventilation ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Adjuvant Therapy ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Confounding Factors ◽  
Single Center ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Objective Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a major challenge facing the world. Certain guidelines recommend intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) for adjuvant treatment of COVID-19. However, there is a lack of clinical evidence to support the use of IVIG.Methods This single-center retrospective cohort study included all adult patients with laboratory-confirmed severe COVID-19 in the Respiratory and Critical Care Unit of Dabie Mountain Regional Medical Center, China. Patient information, including demographic data, laboratory indicators, the use of glucocorticoids and IVIG, hospital mortality, the application of mechanical ventilation, and the length of hospital stay was collected. The primary outcome was the composite end point, including death and the use of mechanical ventilation. The secondary outcome was the length of hospital stay.Results Of the 285 patients with confirmed COVID-19, 113 severely ill patients were included in this study. Compared with the non-IVIG group, more patients in the IVIG group reached the composite end point [12 (25.5%) vs 5 (7.6%), P=0.008]. However, there was no statistically significant difference in the primary outcome between the two groups (P=0.167) after adjusting for confounding factors. Patients in the IVIG group had a longer hospital stay [23.0 (19.0-31.0) vs 16.0 (13.8-22.0), P<0.001]. After adjusting for confounding factors, there was still a statistically significant difference between the two groups (P=0.041).Conclusion Adjuvant therapy with IVIG did not improve the in-hospital mortality rate or the need for mechanical ventilation in patients with severe COVID-19. In contrast, the application of IVIG was related to a longer hospital stay.

Are neonatal outcomes of triplet pregnancies different from those of singletons according to gestational age?

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Georgios Mitsiakos ◽  
Dimitra Gialamprinou ◽  
Ilias Chatziioannidis ◽  
Abraham Pouliakis ◽  
Christos Georgios Kontovazainitis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Gestational Age ◽  
Retrospective Cohort Study ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Neonatal Morbidity ◽  
Neonatal Outcomes ◽  
Multiple Pregnancies ◽  
Extreme Prematurity ◽  
Significant Difference

ABSTRACT Objectives Multiple pregnancies sustain the high pace of extreme prematurity. Little evidence is available about triplet gestation given the evolution in their management during the last decades. The aim of the study was to compare the neonatal outcomes of triplets with those of matched singletons in a cohort study. Methods An observational retrospective cohort study of triplets and matched singletons born between 2004 and 2017 matched by gestational age was conducted. Additionally, the investigation performed in regard to data from the overall Greek population of interest. The primary outcome was mortality or severe neonatal morbidity based on pregnancy type. Results A total of 237 triplets of 24–36 weeks’ gestation and 482 matched singletons were included. No differences in the primary outcome between triplets and singletons were found. Rates of severe neonatal morbidities did not differ significantly between triplets and singletons. A threshold of 1000 gr for birthweight and 28 weeks’ gestation for gestational age determined survival on triplets [OR: 0.08 (95% CI: 0.02–0.40, p=0.0020) and OR: 0.13 (95% CI: 0.03–0.57, p=0.0020) for gestational age and birthweight respectively]. In Greece stillbirths in triplets was 8 times higher than that of singletons (OR: 8.5, 95% CI: 6.9–10.5). From 3,375 triplets, 94 were stillborn, whereas in singletons, 4,659 out of 1,388,273. In our center 5 times more triplets than the expected average in Greece were delivered with no significant difference in stillbirths’ rates. Conclusions No significant differences were identified in mortality or major neonatal morbidities between triplets and matched singletons highlighting the significance of prematurity and birthweight for these outcomes.

Nonunion Rates in Hind- and Midfoot Arthrodesis in Current, Ex-, and Nonsmokers

2020 ◽  
pp. 107110072097126
Author(s):  
Jack Allport ◽  
Jayasree Ramaskandhan ◽  
Malik S. Siddique
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factor ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Relative Risk ◽  
Retrospective Cohort Study ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Smoking Status ◽  
Time Frame ◽  
Modifiable Risk Factor ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Significant Difference

Background: Nonunion rates in hind or midfoot arthrodesis have been reported as high as 41%. The most notable and readily modifiable risk factor that has been identified is smoking. In 2018, 14.4% of the UK population were active smokers. We examined the effect of smoking status on union rates for a large cohort of patients undergoing hind- or midfoot arthrodesis. Methods: In total, 381 consecutive primary joint arthrodeses were identified from a single surgeon’s logbook (analysis performed on a per joint basis, with a triple fusion reported as 3 separate joints). Patients were divided based on self-reported smoking status. Primary outcome was clinical union. Delayed union, infection, and the need for ultrasound bone stimulation were secondary outcomes. Results: Smoking prevalence was 14.0%, and 32.2% were ex-smokers. Groups were comparable for sex, diabetes, and body mass index. Smokers were younger and had fewer comorbidities. Nonunion rates were higher in smokers (relative risk, 5.81; 95% CI, 2.54-13.29; P < .001) with no statistically significant difference between ex-smokers and nonsmokers. Smokers had higher rates of infection ( P = .05) and bone stimulator use ( P < .001). Among smokers, there was a trend toward slower union with heavier smoking ( P = .004). Conclusion: This large retrospective cohort study confirmed previous evidence that smoking has a considerable negative effect on union in arthrodesis. The 5.81 relative risk in a modifiable risk factor is extremely high. Arthrodesis surgery should be undertaken with extreme caution in smokers. Our study shows that after cessation of smoking, the risk returns to normal, but we were unable to quantify the time frame. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective cohort study.

scholarly journals 387. Markers for Mortality in COVID-19 Patients with Atrial Fibrillation or Flutter

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S262-S262
Author(s):  
Kok Hoe Chan ◽  
Bhavik Patel ◽  
Iyad Farouji ◽  
Addi Suleiman ◽  
Jihad Slim
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Logistic Regression ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Retrospective Cohort Study ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Prognostic Markers ◽  
Univariate Analysis ◽  
Laboratory Data ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
New Onset

Abstract Background Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection can lead to many different cardiovascular complications, we were interested in studying prognostic markers in patients with atrial fibrillation/flutter (A. Fib/Flutter). Methods A retrospective cohort study of patients with confirmed COVID-19 and either with existing or new onset A. Fib/Flutter who were admitted to our hospital between March 15 and May 20, 2020. Demographic, outcome and laboratory data were extracted from the electronic medical record and compared between survivors and non-survivors. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were employed to identify the prognostic markers associated with mortality in patients with A. Fib/Flutter Results The total number of confirmed COVID-19 patients during the study period was 350; 37 of them had existing or new onset A. Fib/Flutter. Twenty one (57%) expired, and 16 (43%) were discharged alive. The median age was 72 years old, ranged from 19 to 100 years old. Comorbidities were present in 33 (89%) patients, with hypertension (82%) being the most common, followed by diabetes (46%) and coronary artery disease (30%). New onset of atrial fibrillation was identified in 23 patients (70%), of whom 13 (57%) expired; 29 patients (78%) presented with atrial fibrillation with rapid ventricular response, and 2 patients (5%) with atrial flutter. Mechanical ventilation was required for 8 patients, of whom 6 expired. In univariate analysis, we found a significant difference in baseline ferritin (p=0.04), LDH (p=0.02), neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) (p=0.05), neutrophil-monocyte ratio (NMR) (p=0.03) and platelet (p=0.015) between survivors and non-survivors. With multivariable logistic regression analysis, the only value that had an odds of survival was a low NLR (odds ratio 0.74; 95% confidence interval 0.53–0.93). Conclusion This retrospective cohort study of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 demonstrated an association of increase NLR as risk factors for death in COVID-19 patients with A. Fib/Flutter. A high NLR has been associated with increased incidence, severity and risk for stroke in atrial fibrillation patients but to our knowledge, we are first to demonstrate the utilization in mortality predictions in COVID-19 patients with A. Fib/Flutter. Disclosures Jihad Slim, MD, Abbvie (Speaker’s Bureau)Gilead (Speaker’s Bureau)Jansen (Speaker’s Bureau)Merck (Speaker’s Bureau)ViiV (Speaker’s Bureau)

scholarly journals The change of coagulation profile in two-staged arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection patients: a retrospective cohort study

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hao Li ◽  
Rui Li ◽  
L. L. Li ◽  
Wei Chai ◽  
Chi Xu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Periprosthetic Joint Infection ◽  
Retrospective Cohort Study ◽  
Persistent Infection ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Joint Infection ◽  
Diagnostic Study ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Coagulation Profile ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Aims Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a serious complication of total joint arthroplasty. We performed a retrospective cohort study to evaluate (1) the change of coagulation profile in two-staged arthroplasty patients and (2) the relationship between coagulation profile and the outcomes of reimplantation. Method Between January 2011 and December 2018, a total of 202 PJI patients who were operated on with two-staged arthroplasty were included in this study initially. This study continued for 2 years and the corresponding medical records were scrutinized to establish the diagnosis of PJI based on the 2014 MSIS criteria. The coagulation profile was recorded at two designed points, (1) preresection and (2) preimplantation. The difference of coagulation profile between preresection and preimplantation was evaluated. Receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC) were used to evaluate the diagnostic efficiency of the coagulation profile and change of coagulation profile for predicting persistent infection before reimplantation. Results The levels of APTT, INR, platelet count, PT, TT, and plasma fibrinogen before spacer implantation were significantly higher than before reimplantation. No significant difference was detected in the levels of D-dimer, ACT, and AT3 between the two groups. The AUC of the combined coagulation profile and the change of combined coagulation profile for predicting persistent infection before reimplantation was 0.667 (95% CI 0.511, 0.823) and 0.667 (95% CI 0.526, 0.808), respectively. Conclusion The coagulation profile before preresection is different from before preimplantation in two-staged arthroplasty and the coagulation markers may play a role in predicting infection eradication before reimplantation when two-stage arthroplasty is performed. Level of evidence Level III, diagnostic study.

The effects of propofol on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation oxygenator exchange

2021 ◽  
pp. 039139882110160
Author(s):  
Kelsey L Browder ◽  
Ayesha Ather ◽  
Komal A Pandya
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation ◽  
Cumulative Dose ◽  
Retrospective Cohort Study ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Ecmo Support ◽  
Single Center ◽  
Membrane Oxygenation ◽  
Vv Ecmo

The objective of this study was to determine if propofol administration to veno-venous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) patients was associated with more incidents of oxygenator failure when compared to patients who did not receive propofol. This was a single center, retrospective cohort study. The primary outcome of the study is oxygenator exchanges per ECMO day in patients who received propofol versus those who did not receive propofol. Patients were 18 years or older on VV-ECMO support between January 1, 2015 and January 31, 2018. Patients were excluded if they required ECMO support for less than 48 h or greater than 21 days. There were five patients in the propofol arm that required oxygenator exchanges and seven patients in the control arm. The total number of oxygenator exchanges per ECMO day was not significantly different between groups ( p = 0.50). When comparing those who required an oxygenator exchange and those who did not, there was no difference in the cumulative dose of propofol received per ECMO hour (0.64 mg/kg/h vs 0.96 mg/kg/h; p = 0.16). Propofol use in patients on VV-ECMO does not appear to increase the number of oxygenator exchanges.

scholarly journals Community-acquired bacteraemia in COVID-19 in comparison to influenza A and influenza B: a retrospective cohort study

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Julinha M. Thelen ◽  
A. G. ( Noud) Buenen ◽  
Marjan van Apeldoorn ◽  
Heiman F. Wertheim ◽  
Mirjam H. A. Hermans ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Blood Culture ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Retrospective Cohort Study ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Influenza A ◽  
Blood Cultures ◽  
Influenza B ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Abstract Background During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in the Netherlands it was noticed that very few blood cultures from COVID-19 patients turned positive with clinically relevant bacteria. This was particularly evident in comparison to the number of positive blood cultures during previous seasonal epidemics of influenza. This observation raised questions about the occurrence and causative microorganisms of bacteraemia in COVID-19 patients, especially in the perspective of the widely reported overuse of antibiotics and the rising rate of antibiotic resistance. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study on blood culture results in influenza A, influenza B and COVID-19 patients presenting to two hospitals in the Netherlands. Our main outcome consisted of the percentage of positive blood cultures. The percentage of clinically relevant blood cultures, isolated bacteria and 30-day all-cause mortality served as our secondary outcomes. Results A total of 1331 viral episodes were analysed in 1324 patients. There was no statistically significant difference (p = 0.47) in overall occurrence of blood culture positivity in COVID-19 patients (9.0, 95% CI 6.8–11.1) in comparison to influenza A (11.4, 95% CI 7.9–14.8) and influenza B patients (10.4, 95% CI 7.1–13.7,). After correcting for the high rate of contamination, the occurrence of clinically relevant bacteraemia in COVID-19 patients amounted to 1.0% (95% CI 0.3–1.8), which was statistically significantly lower (p = 0.04) compared to influenza A patients (4.0, 95% CI 1.9–6.1) and influenza B patients (3.0, 95% CI 1.2–4.9). The most frequently identified bacterial isolates in COVID-19 patients were Escherichia coli (n = 2) and Streptococcus pneumoniae (n = 2). The overall 30-day all-cause mortality for COVID-19 patients was 28.3% (95% CI 24.9–31.7), which was statistically significantly higher (p = <.001) when compared to patients with influenza A (7.1, 95% CI 4.3–9.9) and patients with influenza B (6.4, 95% CI 3.8–9.1). Conclusions We report a very low occurrence of community-acquired bacteraemia amongst COVID-19 patients in comparison to influenza patients. These results reinforce current clinical guidelines on antibiotic management in COVID-19, which only advise utilization of antibiotics when a bacterial co-infection is suspected.

The Change of Coagulation Profile in Two-staged Arthroplasty for Periprosthetic Joint Infection Patients：A Retrospective Cohort Study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hao Li ◽  
Rui Li ◽  
Liangliang Li ◽  
Chi Xu ◽  
Wei Chai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Periprosthetic Joint Infection ◽  
Retrospective Cohort Study ◽  
Persistent Infection ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Joint Infection ◽  
Diagnostic Study ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Coagulation Profile ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Aims：Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) a serious complication of total joint arthroplasty. We performed a retrospective cohort study to evaluate 1) the change of coagulation profile in two-staged arthroplasty patients 2) the relationship between coagulation profile and the outcomes of reimplantation. Method: Between 2011 January and 2018 December, a total of 202 PJI patients who were performed with two-staged arthroplasty were included in this study initially. They were followed up at least 2 years and corresponding medical records were scrutinized to establish the diagnosis of PJI based on the 2014 MSIS criteria. The coagulation profile was recorded at two designed points 1) preresection and 2) preimplantation. Then, the difference of coagulation profile between preresection and preimplantation was evaluated. Besides, receiver operating characteristic curves (ROC) were used to evaluate the diagnostic efficiency of coagulation profile and the change of coagulation profile for predicting persistent infection before reimplantation. Results: The levels of APTT, INR, platelet count, PT, TT and plasma fibrinogen before spacer implantation were significantly higher than that before reimplantation. No significant difference was detected in the levels of D-dimer, ACT, AT3 between the two groups. The AUC of the combined coagulation profile and the change of combined coagulation profile for predicting persistent infection before reimplantation was 0.667 (95%CI:(0.511,0.823) and 0.667 (95%CI: (0.526,0.808)), respectively.Conclusion: The coagulation profile before preresection is different from that before preimplantation in two-staged arthroplasty and the coagulation markers may play a role in predicting infection eradication before reimplantation when two-stage arthroplasty is performed. Level of Evidence: level III, diagnostic study

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document