-
Journal of Clinical Hypertension... Aug 2023Studies have shown that angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) are superior in primary and secondary prevention for cardiac mortality and morbidity to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Studies have shown that angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) are superior in primary and secondary prevention for cardiac mortality and morbidity to angiotensin receptor blocker (ARBs). One of the common side effects from ACEI is dry cough. The aims of this systematic review, and network meta-analysis are to rank the risk of cough induced by different ACEIs and between ACEI and placebo, ARB or calcium channel blockers (CCB). We performed a systematic review, and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to rank the risk of cough induced by each ACEI and between ACEI and placebo, ARB or CCB. A total of 135 RCTs with 45,420 patients treated with eleven ACEIs were included in the analyses. The pooled estimated relative risk (RR) between ACEI and placebo was 2.21 (95% CI: 2.05-2.39). ACEI had more incidences of cough than ARB (RR 3.2; 95% CI: 2.91, 3.51), and pooled estimated of RR between ACEI and CCB was 5.30 (95% CI: 4.32-6.50) Moexipril ranked as number one for inducing cough (SUCRA 80.4%) and spirapril ranked the least (SUCRA 12.3%). The order for the rest of the ACEIs are as follows: ramipril (SUCRA 76.4%), fosinopril (SUCRA 72.5%), lisinopril (SUCRA 64.7%), benazepril (SUCRA 58.6%), quinapril (SUCRA 56.5%), perindopril (SUCRA 54.1%), enalapril (SUCRA 49.7%), trandolapril (SUCRA 44.6%) and, captopril (SUCRA 13.7%). All ACEI has the similar risk of developing a cough. ACEI should be avoided in patients who have risk of developing cough, and an ARB or CCB is an alternative based on the patient's comorbidity.
Topics: Humans; Antihypertensive Agents; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Network Meta-Analysis; Cough; Hypertension; Calcium Channel Blockers
PubMed: 37417783
DOI: 10.1111/jch.14695 -
BMC Ophthalmology Jul 2023Dry eye disease (DED) is caused by a persistently unstable tear film leading to ocular discomfort and is treated mainly with tear supplementation. There is emerging... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Dry eye disease (DED) is caused by a persistently unstable tear film leading to ocular discomfort and is treated mainly with tear supplementation. There is emerging evidence that nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR) agonists (e.g., varenicline and simpinicline) nasal sprays are effective for DED. Our systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of varenicline nasal spray (VNS) for DED treatment.
METHODS
The Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases were searched. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the efficacy of VNS versus placebo were included. The efficacy endpoint was the mean change in the anesthetized Schirmer test score (STS), a measure of basal tear production, from baseline. The safety endpoints were serious adverse events (SAEs) and adverse events (AEs). The standardized mean difference (SMD) was used for continuous outcomes, while the risk ratio (RR) was used to demonstrate dichotomous variables. The certainty of the evidence was rated utilizing the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. The risk of bias assessment was conducted using the Revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials.
RESULTS
Three RCTs (n = 1063) met the eligibility criteria. All RCTs had a low risk of bias. The meta-analysis found a statistically significant increase in the mean STS change from baseline on day 28. The pooled analysis found no significant difference between VNS and placebo in the frequency of SAEs and ocular AEs. However, VNS had a significant effect on developing nasal cavity-related AEs.
CONCLUSION
VNS caused a highly significant improvement regarding the efficacy endpoint but caused an increased frequency of some nasal cavity-related AEs (i.e., cough and throat irritation). However, it caused neither SAEs nor ocular AEs. Included studies had a low risk of bias.
Topics: Humans; Nasal Sprays; Varenicline; Dry Eye Syndromes
PubMed: 37452334
DOI: 10.1186/s12886-023-03069-y -
Cell Journal Feb 2024Exposure to phosgene, a colourless poisonous gas, can lead to various health issues including eye irritation, a dry and burning throat, vomiting, coughing, the...
Exposure to phosgene, a colourless poisonous gas, can lead to various health issues including eye irritation, a dry and burning throat, vomiting, coughing, the production of foamy sputum, difficulty in breathing, and chest pain. This systematic review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the clinical manifestations and treatment of phosgene toxicity by systematically analyzing available literature. The search was carried out on various scientific online databases to include related studies based on inclusion and exclusion criteria with the use of PRISMA guidelines. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). Thirteen articles were included in this study after the screening process. Inhalation was found to be the primary health problem of phosgene exposure with respiratory symptoms such as coughing and dyspnea. Chest pain and pulmonary oedema were also observed in some cases. Furthermore, pulmonary crackle was the most common reported physical examination. Beyond respiratory tract health issues, other organs involvements such as cardiac, skin, eye, and renal were also reported in some studies. The symptoms can occur within minutes to hours after exposure, and the severity of symptoms depends on the amount of inhaled phosgene. The findings showed that bronchodilators can alleviate symptoms of bronchoconstriction caused by phosgene. Oxygen therapy is essential for restoring oxygen levels and improving respiratory function in cases of hypoxemia. In severe cases, endotracheal intubation and invasive mechanical ventilation are used for artificial respiration, along with the removal of tracheal secretions and pulmonary oedema fluid through suctioning as crucial components of supportive therapy.
PubMed: 38459726
DOI: 10.22074/cellj.2024.2011864.1405 -
Chemotherapy 2024Acute eosinophilic pneumonia (AEP) is a rare respiratory condition caused by eosinophil accumulation in the pulmonary tissue that can be related to drug administration....
INTRODUCTION
Acute eosinophilic pneumonia (AEP) is a rare respiratory condition caused by eosinophil accumulation in the pulmonary tissue that can be related to drug administration. Daptomycin, an antibiotic active against gram-positive bacteria, is one of the leading causes of AEP among drugs. In order to raise awareness of this rare syndrome, in our work we have described a case of an 82-year-old male with Enterococcus faecalis endocarditis treated with daptomycin, who developed a daptomycin-induced AEP. We have performed a systematic review of the literature for all similar reported cases.
METHODS
The systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. To conduct the analysis, the terms "daptomycin AND eosinoph* AND pneum*" were entered into the databases Medline, CINAHL, and Embase on April 13, 2023. We considered all relevant records documenting AEP after daptomycin use. No restrictions in terms of year or language were made. A formal appraisal of observational studies was performed by Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. All results and data were reported by means of tables.
RESULTS
Our search identified 93 relevant records, published between 2007 and 2023. A total of 120 patients were considered. Patients who experienced AEP were mostly males (n = 88, 73.3%) with a mean age of 68.28 years (SD 11.54). Daptomycin was most frequently prescribed for osteoarticular infections (n = 75, 62.5%) and to treat gram-positive cocci infections. The most frequently isolated pathogen was methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Daptomycin was mostly used with off-label indications (n = 89, 74%). Symptoms of AEP were usually reported after a mean of 21.75 days of treatment (range 3-84) and typically included fever, dyspnea, dry cough, and acute respiratory failure. Reported treatment strategies invariably included daptomycin withdrawal, respiratory support, and corticosteroid treatment. One hundred and sixteen patients fully recovered. A fatal outcome was described in 4 patients. Suggestive symptoms and imaging raised suspicion for AEP, confirmed with bronchoalveolar lavage in 57.5% of the cases.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
Daptomycin-induced AEP is a rare but potentially fatal complication, mostly reported after long treatment with daptomycin. Clinicians should be aware of this syndrome, as it could be initially misdiagnosed for an acute infectious respiratory syndrome, resulting in a delay in its diagnosis and treatment. Furthermore, since the risk of developing AEP is increased by longer drug exposure, caution should be used when discussing the use of daptomycin in longer treatment regimens.
Topics: Daptomycin; Humans; Male; Aged, 80 and over; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Pulmonary Eosinophilia; Enterococcus faecalis; Aged; Gram-Positive Bacterial Infections; Endocarditis, Bacterial
PubMed: 37963447
DOI: 10.1159/000535190 -
BMC Infectious Diseases Aug 2023In 2019, the Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) virus was identified, also defined as novel coronavirus or severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. The Corona VIrus...
In 2019, the Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) virus was identified, also defined as novel coronavirus or severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. The Corona VIrus Disease (COVID-19) pandemic generated several changes in society in 2020 as a result of its rapid spread in humans. The main symptoms are high fever (≥ 37.8 °C), dry cough, dyspnea, upper respiratory symptoms, myalgia, fatigue and diarrhea in the most uncommon cases. Considering the emergency situation caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and the effects attributed to it, rehabilitation professionals have a fundamental role in the functional recovery of patients, independence and improvement of quality of life. This is a systematic review of the literature, with the aim of discussing the main findings on physical therapy management in functional changes in post-COVID-19 patients. Pubmed, Scielo, Sciencedirect, BVS and PEDro databases were used. The terms MESH/DECs used for the searches were: Rehabilitation, Physical Therapy Modalities, Covid-19, Post-acute Syndromes COVID-19 and Physical Fitness, the keywords were also used: rehabilitation, physiotherapy, Covid-19, post- acute syndrome COVID-19 and functional capacity. To cross the terms, Boolean operators (AND and OR) were used. Randomized trials, recommendations, quasi-randomized or prospective controlled trials, reports, guidelines, and field updates were included. As for the selected population, studies were included in individuals of both sexes, with no age restriction, that evaluated physiotherapeutic interventions in patients who had COVID-19. Literature reviews, case studies, conferences, abstracts of articles published in conference proceedings and letters to the editor were excluded from the research. To measure methodological quality, the PEDro scale was used.Searches for articles were performed restricting the period of publication between the years 2019 to 2022. The electronic search strategy identified a total of 364 records from the selected databases. After screening for duplicates, 14 articles were excluded, followed by screening by titles and abstracts, another 298 articles were excluded, of these 47 potentially relevant records were submitted to full text review and of these 5 randomized clinical trials were included in this review. In view of the findings of this study, it can be concluded that physical therapy rehabilitation should continue after hospital discharge, with the aim of improving physical performance and activities of daily living (ADL) in post-COVID-19 patients.
Topics: Female; Male; Humans; Patient Discharge; COVID-19; Activities of Daily Living; Pandemics; Prospective Studies; Quality of Life; SARS-CoV-2; Virus Diseases; Hospitals
PubMed: 37587411
DOI: 10.1186/s12879-023-08313-w