-
Journal of Anesthesia Oct 2023Patients with mastocytosis have an increased risk of anaphylaxis during surgical procedures with general anesthesia. Therefore, we reviewed the anesthesia course of a... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Patients with mastocytosis have an increased risk of anaphylaxis during surgical procedures with general anesthesia. Therefore, we reviewed the anesthesia course of a large cohort of patients with mastocytosis.
METHODS
We retrospectively reviewed adult and pediatric patients with mastocytosis who underwent surgical procedures with general anesthesia at Mayo Clinic from January 1, 2000, through June 30, 2021. We also included any procedures with general anesthesia that occurred during the 3-year period preceding mastocytosis diagnosis and designated the patients who underwent these procedures as having an unknown diagnosis at the time of their surgical procedure. We analyzed whether patients received chronic antimediator treatment for mastocytosis and/or prophylactic medications before the procedures. We also determined whether medications indicative of mastocytosis-related adverse events were intraoperatively administered.
RESULTS
We identified 113 patients who underwent 219 procedures during the study period; 25 procedures were performed before mastocytosis diagnosis. Of 194 procedures in patients with known mastocytosis, patients received chronic antimediator therapy and/or perioperative prophylactic medications for 178 (91.8%) procedures. Among these procedures, 10 were potentially complicated by mast cell activation, which was inferred from administration of inhaled albuterol (n = 3) or intravenous diphenhydramine (n = 8). In addition, there was only one case of intraoperative anaphylaxis which occurred in a patient who underwent anesthesia before mastocytosis diagnosis and therefore did not receive prophylaxis.
CONCLUSION
Intraoperative anaphylaxis can be the first presenting sign of mastocytosis. Patients with mastocytosis who received chronic antimediator therapy and/or preoperative prophylactic medications had an uneventful surgical course.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Child; Anaphylaxis; Retrospective Studies; Mastocytosis; Anesthesia, General; Albuterol
PubMed: 37466804
DOI: 10.1007/s00540-023-03228-x -
Qatar Medical Journal 2023Anaphylaxis is a fatal condition that can be easily managed if discovered early. Only a few examples of anaphylaxis-like reactions caused by heparin have been...
Anaphylaxis is a fatal condition that can be easily managed if discovered early. Only a few examples of anaphylaxis-like reactions caused by heparin have been documented, and immediate-type hypersensitivity reactions to heparin are extremely uncommon. We report a case of a 53-yearold gentleman known to have an End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) on Hemodialysis for two years, who went to the dialysis facility in his usual state of health. After two hours of dialysis, a new lock of taurolidine/heparin was installed; one minute later, the patient started to vomit and became restless, blood pressure dropped to 60/47 mmHg, and urticarial hives and a reddish rash developed on his skin, covering his trunk and limbs. He was immediately given three doses of epinephrine intramuscularly, which he did not respond to. Therefore, an epinephrine infusion was started. IV hydrocortisone and diphenhydramine were given for symptomatic relief. The patient was shifted to the emergency department, where he became vitally stable and returned to baseline. Heparininduced anaphylaxis was assumed based on the quick response to the above medications. This case can be added to the growing literature regarding this rare reaction, and more studies should be done to understand the nature of the reaction better. We recommend that the healthcare team becomes vigilant of heparin as a possible cause of anaphylaxis.
PubMed: 38025316
DOI: 10.5339/qmj.2023.sqac.17 -
Frontiers in Endocrinology 2024Diabetic Nephropathy (DN) is one of the microvascular complications of diabetes. The potential targets of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors for the...
Network pharmacology combined with Mendelian randomization analysis to identify the key targets of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors in the treatment of diabetic nephropathy.
BACKGROUND
Diabetic Nephropathy (DN) is one of the microvascular complications of diabetes. The potential targets of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors for the treatment of DN need to be explored.
METHODS
The GSE96804 and GSE1009 datasets, 729 RAAS inhibitors-related targets and 6,039 DN-related genes were derived from the public database and overlapped with the differentially expressed genes (DN vs. normal) in GSE96804 to obtain the candidate targets. Next, key targets were screened via the Mendelian randomization analysis and expression analysis. The diagnostic nomogram was constructed and assessed in GSE96804. Additionally, enrichment analysis was conducted and a 'core active ingredient-key target-disease pathway' network was established. Finally, molecular docking was performed.
RESULTS
In total, 60 candidate targets were derived, in which and were screened as the key targets and had a causal association with DN as the protective factors ( < 0.05, OR < 1). Further, a nomogram exhibited pretty prediction efficiency. It is indicated that Benadryl hydrochloride might play a role in the DN by affecting the pathways of 'cytokine cytokine receptor interaction', etc. targeting the . Moreover, might be involved in 'ECM receptor interaction', etc. for the effect of NSAID, captopril, chlordiazepoxide on DN. Molecular docking analysis showed a good binding ability of benadryl hydrochloride and , NSAID and . , , and are causally associated with acute kidney injury.
CONCLUSION
and were identified as key targets for RAAS inhibitors in the treatment of DN, which might provide some clinical significance in helping to diagnose and treat DN. Among the targets of RAAS inhibitors, PTGS2, ITGA4 and ANPEP have a causal relationship with acute kidney injury, which is worthy of further clinical research.
Topics: Humans; Diabetic Nephropathies; Renin-Angiotensin System; Molecular Docking Simulation; Mendelian Randomization Analysis; Network Pharmacology; Cyclooxygenase 2; Acute Kidney Injury; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Diphenhydramine; Diabetes Mellitus
PubMed: 38332893
DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2024.1354950 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2022Motion sickness is a syndrome that occurs as a result of passive body movement in response to actual motion, or the illusion of motion when exposed to virtual and moving... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Motion sickness is a syndrome that occurs as a result of passive body movement in response to actual motion, or the illusion of motion when exposed to virtual and moving visual environments. The most common symptoms are nausea and vomiting. Antihistamines have been used in the management of motion sickness for decades, however studies have shown conflicting results regarding their efficacy.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness of antihistamines in the prevention and treatment of motion sickness in adults and children.
SEARCH METHODS
The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials; Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 7 December 2021.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in susceptible adults and children in whom motion sickness was induced under natural conditions such as air, sea and land transportation. We also included studies in which motion sickness was induced under experimental conditions (analysed separately). Antihistamines were included regardless of class, route or dosage and compared to no treatment, placebo or any other pharmacological or non-pharmacological interventions.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were 1) the proportion of susceptible participants who did not experience any motion sickness symptoms; 2) the proportion of susceptible participants who experienced a reduction or resolution of existing symptoms. Secondary outcomes were 1) physiological measures (heart rate, core temperature and gastric tachyarrhythmia (electrogastrography)) and 2) adverse effects (sedation, impaired cognition, blurred vision). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.
MAIN RESULTS
We included nine RCTs (658 participants). Studies were conducted across seven countries, with an overall age range of 16 to 55 years. Motion sickness was induced naturally in six studies and experimentally in four studies (rotating chair). All the naturally induced studies only evaluated first-generation antihistamines (cinnarizine and dimenhydrinate). Risk of bias across the studies varied, with mostly low risk for random sequence generation and allocation concealment, and mostly high risk for selective reporting. Only the experimentally induced studies measured physiological parameters and only the naturally induced studies evaluated adverse effects. There were no studies that clearly assessed the paediatric population. Antihistamines versus placebo or no treatment Antihistamines are probably more effective than placebo at preventing motion sickness symptoms under natural conditions (symptoms prevented: 25% placebo; 40% antihistamines) (risk ratio (RR) 1.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.23 to 2.66; 3 studies; 240 participants) (moderate-certainty). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of antihistamines on preventing motion sickness under experimental conditions (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.32, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.83; 2 studies; 62 participants) (very low-certainty). No studies reported results on the resolution of existing motion sickness symptoms. Antihistamines may result in little or no difference in gastric tachyarrhythmia under experimental conditions (mean difference (MD) -2.2, 95% CI -11.71 to 7.31; 1 study; 42 participants) (low-certainty). No studies reported results for any other physiological measures. When compared to placebo, antihistamines may be more likely to cause sedation (sedation: 44% placebo; 66% antihistamines) (RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.12 to 2.02; 2 studies; 190 participants) (low-certainty); they may result in little or no difference in blurred vision (blurred vision: 12.5% placebo; 14% antihistamines) (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.53 to 2.48; 2 studies; 190 participants) (low-certainty); and they may result in little or no difference in terms of impaired cognition (impaired cognition: 33% placebo; 29% antihistamines) (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.38; 2 studies; 190 participants) (low-certainty). Antihistamines versus scopolamine The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of antihistamines on preventing motion sickness under natural conditions when compared to scopolamine (symptoms prevented: 81% scopolamine; 71% antihistamines) (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.16; 2 studies; 71 participants) (very low-certainty). No studies were performed under experimental conditions. No studies reported results on the resolution of existing motion sickness symptoms. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of antihistamines on heart rate under natural conditions (narrative report, 1 study; 20 participants; "No difference in pulse frequency"; very low-certainty). No studies reported results for any other physiological measures. When compared to scopolamine, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of antihistamines on sedation (sedation: 21% scopolamine; 30% antihistamines) (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.07 to 9.25; 2 studies; 90 participants) (very low-certainty) and on blurred vision (narrative report: not a significant difference; 1 study; 51 participants; very low-certainty). No studies evaluated impaired cognition. Antihistamines versus antiemetics Antihistamines may result in little or no difference in the prevention of motion sickness under experimental conditions (MD -0.20, 95% CI -10.91 to 10.51; 1 study; 42 participants) (low-certainty). The evidence is of low certainty due to imprecision as the sample size is small and the confidence interval crosses the line of no effect. No studies assessed the effects of antihistamines versus antiemetics under natural conditions. No studies reported results on the resolution of existing motion sickness symptoms. Antihistamines may result in little or no difference in gastric tachyarrhythmia (MD 4.56, 95% CI -3.49 to 12.61; 1 study; 42 participants) (low-certainty). No studies reported results for any other physiological measures. No studies evaluated sedation, impaired cognition or blurred vision. One study reported physiological data for this outcome, evaluating gastric tachyarrhythmia specifically. Antihistamines may result in little or no difference in gastric tachyarrhythmia (MD 4.56, 95% CI -3.49 to 12.61; 1 study; 42 participants; low-certainty evidence). This evidence is of low certainty due to imprecision as the sample size is small and the confidence interval crosses the line of no effect. Antihistamines versus acupuncture The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of antihistamines on the prevention of motion sickness under experimental conditions when compared to acupuncture (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.57; 1 study; 100 participants) (very low-certainty). This study did not assess the prevention of motion sickness under natural conditions, nor the resolution of existing motion sickness symptoms. There was no study performed under natural conditions. Physiological measures and adverse effects were not reported.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is probably a reduction in the risk of developing motion sickness symptoms under naturally occurring conditions of motion when using first-generation antihistamines, in motion sickness-susceptible adults, compared to placebo. Antihistamines may be more likely to cause sedation when compared to placebo. No studies evaluated the treatment of existing motion sickness, and there are few data on the effect of antihistamines in children. The evidence for all other outcomes and comparisons (versus scopolamine, antiemetics and acupuncture) was of low or very low certainty and we are therefore uncertain about these effects of antihistamines.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Antiemetics; Child; Cinnarizine; Dimenhydrinate; Histamine Antagonists; Humans; Middle Aged; Motion Sickness; Scopolamine Derivatives; Young Adult
PubMed: 36250781
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012715.pub2 -
Seminars in Neurology Feb 2020Treatment of vestibular migraine currently lacks a firm scientific basis, as high quality randomized controlled trials are not available. Therefore, recommendations are... (Review)
Review
Treatment of vestibular migraine currently lacks a firm scientific basis, as high quality randomized controlled trials are not available. Therefore, recommendations are largely borrowed from the migraine sphere. The first therapeutic step is explanation and reassurance. Many patients do not need pharmacological treatment, as attacks may be infrequent and tolerable. Acute attacks can be ameliorated in some patients with antiemetic drugs such as diphenhydramine, meclizine, and metoclopramide. Frequent attacks may warrant pharmacological prophylaxis with metoprolol, amitriptyline, topiramate, valproic acid, or flunarizine. Nonpharmacological measures including regular exercise, relaxation techniques, stress management, and biofeedback may be similarly effective and can be combined with a pharmacological approach. Limited data indicate that the prognosis appears to be less favorable for vestibular migraine than for migraine headaches.
Topics: Humans; Migraine Disorders; Prognosis; Vertigo
PubMed: 31887753
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-3402067 -
Cureus Nov 2022Management of psychiatric disorders in high-risk cardiac patients often requires difficult decision making when it comes to acceptable medication side effects. We...
Management of psychiatric disorders in high-risk cardiac patients often requires difficult decision making when it comes to acceptable medication side effects. We present the case report of a 28-year-old female with a history of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), major depressive disorder (MDD), intravenous heroin use disorder, and prior tricuspid valve replacement who presented to the hospital with signs and symptoms of sepsis. She was found to have corrected QT interval (QTc) prolongation and infective endocarditis with blood cultures positive for . Due to QTc prolongation, her home medication of citalopram was discontinued in favor of escitalopram. Within 24 hours of administration, the patient experienced angioedema with periorbital swelling, lip swelling, and urticaria of the face and arms which was resolved with intravenous (IV) diphenhydramine. In this case report, we present what we believe to be the first recorded case of escitalopram-induced angioedema in a patient without a past medical history of hereditary angioedema (HAE), and how pharmacogenomic testing influenced antidepressant medication selection.
PubMed: 36540519
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.31600 -
Immunotherapy Nov 2023Abrocitinib is an oral small molecule which selectively inhibits JAK1, modulating multiple cytokine pathways involved in atopic dermatitis. Both abrocitinib 200 mg and... (Review)
Review
Abrocitinib is an oral small molecule which selectively inhibits JAK1, modulating multiple cytokine pathways involved in atopic dermatitis. Both abrocitinib 200 mg and 100 mg reached efficacy results comparable to dupilumab and superior to placebo. Abrocitinib 200 mg was superior to dupilumab in some trials, consistently providing a faster response and itch relief from week 2 to 26. Continuous abrocitinib 200 mg is the most effective at controlling this disease, but with an induction-maintenance approach with abrocitinib 200 mg followed by 100 mg, over 55% of patients did not flare for 40 weeks. Abrocitinib common adverse effects are nonserious. A self-limited dose-related decrease in platelet counts was consistently observed, without clinical repercussion. Abrocitinib demonstrated high efficacy and a favorable safety profile.
Topics: Humans; Dermatitis, Atopic; Sulfonamides; Cytokines; Diphenhydramine; Treatment Outcome; Double-Blind Method
PubMed: 37667972
DOI: 10.2217/imt-2023-0057