-
Emergency Medicine Australasia : EMA Apr 2020Vasopressor medications have traditionally been administered via central venous catheters (CVCs), primarily due to concerns of peripheral extravasation of...
OBJECTIVE
Vasopressor medications have traditionally been administered via central venous catheters (CVCs), primarily due to concerns of peripheral extravasation of vasoconstrictive medications. Recent studies have suggested that vasopressor administration via peripheral intravenous catheters (PiVCs) may be a feasible and safe alternative. This systematic review evaluates the safety of delivering vasopressor medications via PiVCs.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review to assess the frequency of complications associated with the delivery of vasopressors via PiVCs. A literature search for prospective and retrospective studies of vasopressor infusions in adults was performed. We included studies of continuous infusions of vasopressor medications (noradrenaline, adrenaline, metaraminol, phenylephrine, dopamine and vasopressin) delivered via a PiVCs that included at least 20 patients. Data on patient factors, cannulation approach, monitoring protocols, vasopressor dosing and dilutions and adverse events were collected and summarised.
RESULTS
Seven studies were identified that fulfilled the inclusion criteria, including 1382 patients. No study fulfilled all of the validity criteria. Noradrenaline was the most commonly administered agent (n = 702 episodes of administration), followed by phenylephrine (n = 546), dopamine (n = 108), metaraminol (n = 74) and vasopressin and adrenaline (<5 patients). Mean duration of infusion was 22 h (95% confidence interval [CI] 8-36 h). Extravasation occurred in 3.4% (95% CI 2.5-4.7%) of patients. There were no reported episodes of tissue necrosis or limb ischaemia. All extravasation events were successfully managed conservatively or with vasodilatory medications.
CONCLUSIONS
Reports of the administration of vasopressors via PiVCs, when given for a limited duration, under close observation, suggest that extravasation is uncommon and is unlikely to lead to major complications.
Topics: Adult; Catheterization, Peripheral; Humans; Hypotension; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Vasoconstrictor Agents
PubMed: 31698544
DOI: 10.1111/1742-6723.13406 -
Phlebology Aug 2020Medical compression therapy is used for non-invasive treatment of venous and lymphatic diseases. Medical compression therapy-associated adverse events and...
OBJECTIVES
Medical compression therapy is used for non-invasive treatment of venous and lymphatic diseases. Medical compression therapy-associated adverse events and contraindications have been reported, although some contraindications are theoretically based. This consensus statement provides recommendations on medical compression therapy risks and contraindications.
METHODS
A systematic literature search of medical compression therapy publications reporting adverse events up until November 2017 was performed. A consensus panel comprising 15 international experts critically reviewed the publications and formulated the recommendations.
RESULTS
Sixty-two publications reporting medical compression therapy adverse events were identified. The consensus panel issued 21 recommendations on medical compression therapy contraindications and adverse event risk mitigation, in addition to reviewing medical compression therapy use in borderline indications. The most frequently reported non-severe medical compression therapy-associated adverse events included skin irritation, discomfort and pain. Very rare but severe adverse events, including soft tissue and nerve injury, were also identified.
CONCLUSION
This consensus statement summarises published medical compression therapy-associated adverse events and contraindications, and provides guidance on medical compression therapy. Severe medical compression therapy-associated adverse events are very rarely encountered if compression is used correctly and contraindications are considered.
Topics: Compression Bandages; Consensus; Contraindications; Humans; Lymphatic Diseases
PubMed: 32122269
DOI: 10.1177/0268355520909066 -
Annals of Medicine Dec 2023The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the postoperative clinical outcomes of elderly patients who underwent the direct anterior approach (DAA) versus those... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Direct anterior approach versus posterolateral approach for total hip arthroplasty in the treatment of femoral neck fractures in elderly patients: a meta-analysis and systematic review.
OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the postoperative clinical outcomes of elderly patients who underwent the direct anterior approach (DAA) versus those who received posterolateral approach (PLA) for total hip arthroplasty (THA) in the treatment of femoral neck fractures.
METHODS
An electronic search was conducted in databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and CNKI from their inception to January 2022. We calculated the odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to assess the effect of DAA compared to PLA for the management of total hip arthroplasty (THA) in elderly patients using the dichotomous or continuous method with a random or fixed-effect model.
RESULTS
15 studies involving 1284 patients were included; 640 patients receiving DAA and 644 patients receiving PLA. DAA had a longer surgery duration than PLA [WMD = 9.41, 95% CI (4.64, 14.19), =95.5%]; The amount of postoperative drainage [WMD= -3.88, 95% CI (-5.59, -2.17), =98.3%], length of incision [WMD= -3.88, 95% CI (-5.59, -2.17), =98.3%], blood loss [WMD= -3.88, 95% CI (-5.59, -2.17), =98.3%], hospitalization time [WMD= -3.88, 95% CI (-5.59, -2.17), =98.3%], and postoperative bedtime [WMD = -5.56,95% CI (-7.11, -4.01), =99.0%], were similar between the two groups ( < 0.05). The HHS at 1 month, 12 months postoperatively [WMD = 7.58, 95%CI (5.70,9.46), =89.5%; WMD= 2.56, 95%CI 0.11,5.00, =93.2%] and the incidence of LFCN in patients were higher in the DAA group (OR = 2.91, 95% CI 1.26 to 6.71, =0.0%), while fewer patients in the DAA group suffered from postoperative dislocation than in the PLA group (OR = 0.26, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.60, =0.0%). No significant difference was observed in HHS at 1 week, 3 months, and 6 months postoperatively, VAS postoperatively at each time point, acetabular anteversion angle, acetabular abduction angle, wound infection, deep vein thrombosis, and intraoperative fracture ( > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
DAA offers a quicker functional recovery and is less invasive with an earlier return to daily activities in older THA patients than PLA. However, DAA was found to be associated with a high incidence of lateral femoral cutaneous nerve injury and a low incidence of postoperative dislocation.Key messagesThe present study aims to evaluate the clinical outcomes in elderly patients receiving DAA versus PLA for THA in the treatment of femoral neck fractures by mate-analysis.DAA offers a quicker functional recovery and is less invasive with an earlier return to daily activities in older THA patients. No significant difference was observed between the colchicine and comparators in terms of the need for HHS at 1 week, 3 months, and 6 months postoperatively, VAS postoperatively, acetabular anteversion angle, acetabular abduction angle, and complications (wound infection, deep vein thrombosis, and intraoperative fracture).
Topics: Aged; Humans; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Femoral Neck Fractures; Treatment Outcome; Venous Thrombosis
PubMed: 37000019
DOI: 10.1080/07853890.2023.2193424 -
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders May 2023Interventions provided after hip fracture surgery have been shown to reduce mortality and improve functional outcomes. While some systematic studies have evaluated the...
BACKGROUND
Interventions provided after hip fracture surgery have been shown to reduce mortality and improve functional outcomes. While some systematic studies have evaluated the efficacy of post-surgery interventions, there lacks a systematically rigorous examination of all the post-surgery interventions which allows healthcare providers to easily identify post-operative interventions most pertinent to patient's recovery.
OBJECTIVES
We aim to provide an overview of the available evidence on post-surgery interventions provided in the acute, subacute and community settings to improve outcomes for patients with hip fractures.
METHODS
We performed a systematic literature review guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA). We included articles that were (1) randomized controlled trials (RCTs), (2) involved post-surgery interventions that were conducted in the acute, subacute or community settings and (3) conducted among older patients above 65 years old with any type of non-pathological hip fracture that was surgically treated, and who were able to walk without assistance prior to the fracture. We excluded (1) non-English language articles, (2) abstract-only publications, (3) articles with only surgical interventions, (4) articles with interventions that commenced pre-surgery or immediately upon completion of surgery or blood transfusion, (5) animal studies. Due to the large number of RCTs identified, we only included "good quality" RCTs with Jadad score ≥ 3 for data extraction and synthesis.
RESULTS
Our literature search has identified 109 good quality RCTs on post-surgery interventions for patients with fragility hip fractures. Among the 109 RCTs, 63% of the identified RCTs (n = 69) were related to rehabilitation or medication/nutrition supplementation, with the remaining RCTs focusing on osteoporosis management, optimization of clinical management, prevention of venous thromboembolism, fall prevention, multidisciplinary approaches, discharge support, management of post-operative anemia as well as group learning and motivational interviewing. For the interventions conducted in inpatient and outpatient settings investigating medication/nutrition supplementation, all reported improvement in outcomes (ranging from reduced postoperative complications, reduced length of hospital stay, improved functional recovery, reduced mortality rate, improved bone mineral density and reduced falls), except for a study investigating anabolic steroids. RCTs involving post-discharge osteoporosis care management generally reported improved osteoporosis management except for a RCT investigating multidisciplinary post-fracture clinic led by geriatrician with physiotherapist and occupational therapist. The trials investigating group learning and motivational interviewing also reported positive outcome respectively. The other interventions yielded mixed results. The interventions in this review had minor or no side effects reported.
CONCLUSIONS
The identified RCTs regarding post-surgery interventions were heterogeneous in terms of type of interventions, settings and outcome measures. Combining interventions across inpatient and outpatient settings may be able to achieve better outcomes such as improved physical function recovery and improved nutritional status recovery. For example, nutritional supplementation could be made available for patients who have undergone hip fracture surgery in the inpatient settings, followed by post-discharge outpatient osteoporosis care management. The findings from this review can aid in clinical practice by allowing formulation of thematic program with combination of interventions as part of bundled care to improve outcome for patients who have undergone hip fracture surgery.
Topics: Humans; Bone Density; Hip Fractures; Osteoporosis; Postoperative Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37231406
DOI: 10.1186/s12891-023-06512-9 -
European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery... Oct 2023There are several approaches to THA, and each has their respective advantages and disadvantages. Previous meta-analysis included non-randomised studies that introduce... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
There are several approaches to THA, and each has their respective advantages and disadvantages. Previous meta-analysis included non-randomised studies that introduce further heterogeneity and bias to the evidence presented. This meta-analysis aims to present level I evidence by comparing functional outcomes, peri-operative parameters and complications of direct anterior approach (DAA) versus posterior approach (PA) or lateral approach (LA) in THA.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
A comprehensive multi-database search (PubMed, OVID Medline, EMBASE) was conducted from date of database inception to 1st December 2020. Data from randomised controlled trials comparing outcomes of DAA versus PA or LA in THA were extracted and analysed.
RESULTS
Twenty-four studies comprising 2010 patients were included in this meta-analysis. DAA has a longer operative time (MD = 17.38 min, 95%CI: 12.28, 22.47 min, P < 0.001) but a shorter length of stay compared to PA (MD = - 0.33 days, 95%CI: - 0.55, - 0.11 days, P = 0.003). There was no difference in operative time or length of stay when comparing DAA versus LA. DAA also had significantly better HHS than PA at 6 weeks (MD = 8.00, 95%CI: 5.85, 10.15, P < 0.001) and LA at 12 weeks (MD = 2.23, 95%CI: 0.31, 4.15, P = 0.02). There was no significant difference in risk of neurapraxia for DAA versus LA or in risk of dislocations, periprosthetic fractures or VTE between DAA and PA or DAA and LA.
CONCLUSION
The DAA has better early functional outcomes with shorter mean length of stay but was associated with a longer operative time than PA. There was no difference in risk of dislocations, neurapraxias, periprosthetic fractures or VTE between approaches. Based on our results, choice of THA approach should ultimately be guided by surgeon experience, surgeon preference and patient factors.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE I
Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
Topics: Humans; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Periprosthetic Fractures; Venous Thromboembolism; Treatment Outcome; Joint Dislocations
PubMed: 37010580
DOI: 10.1007/s00590-023-03528-8 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2019Hospital-acquired infection is a frequent adverse event in patient care; it can lead to longer stays in the intensive care unit (ICU), additional medical complications,...
BACKGROUND
Hospital-acquired infection is a frequent adverse event in patient care; it can lead to longer stays in the intensive care unit (ICU), additional medical complications, permanent disability or death. Whilst all hospital-based patients are susceptible to infections, prevalence is particularly high in the ICU, where people who are critically ill have suppressed immunity and are subject to increased invasive monitoring. People who are mechanically-ventilated are at infection risk due to tracheostomy and reintubation and use of multiple central venous catheters, where lines and tubes may act as vectors for the transmission of bacteria and may increase bloodstream infections and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). Chlorhexidine is a low-cost product, widely used as a disinfectant and antiseptic, which may be used to bathe people who are critically ill with the aim of killing bacteria and reducing the spread of hospital-acquired infections.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of chlorhexidine bathing on the number of hospital-acquired infections in people who are critically ill.
SEARCH METHODS
In December 2018 we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trial registries for ongoing and unpublished studies, and checked reference lists of relevant included studies as well as reviews, meta-analyses and health technology reports to identify additional studies. There were no restrictions with respect to language, date of publication or study setting.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared chlorhexidine bathing with soap-and-water bathing of patients in the ICU.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data and undertook risk of bias and GRADE assessment of the certainty of the evidence .
MAIN RESULTS
We included eight studies in this review. Four RCTs included a total of 1537 individually randomised participants, and four cluster-randomised cross-over studies included 23 randomised ICUs with 22,935 participants. We identified one study awaiting classification, for which we were unable to assess eligibility.The studies compared bathing using 2% chlorhexidine-impregnated washcloths or dilute solutions of 4% chlorhexidine versus soap-and-water bathing or bathing with non-antimicrobial washcloths.Eight studies reported data for participants who had a hospital-acquired infection during the ICU stay. We are uncertain whether using chlorhexidine for bathing of critically ill people reduces the rate of hospital-acquired infection, because the certainty of the evidence is very low (rate difference 1.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.12 to 3.29; 21,924 participants). Six studies reported mortality (in hospital, in the ICU, and at 48 hours). We cannot be sure whether using chlorhexidine for bathing of critically-ill people reduces mortality, because the certainty of the evidence is very low (odds ratio 0.87, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.99; 15,798 participants). Six studies reported length of stay in the ICU. We noted that individual studies found no evidence of a difference in length of stay; we did not conduct meta-analysis because data were skewed. It is not clear whether using chlorhexidine for bathing of critically ill people reduced length of stay in the ICU, because the certainty of the evidence is very low. Seven studies reported skin reactions as an adverse event, and five of these reported skin reactions which were thought to be attributable to the bathing solution. Data in these studies were reported inconsistently and we were unable to conduct meta-analysis; we cannot tell whether using chlorhexidine for bathing of critically ill people reduced adverse events, because the certainty of the evidence is very low.We used the GRADE approach to downgrade the certainty of the evidence of each outcome to very low. For all outcomes, we downgraded evidence because of study limitations (most studies had a high risk of performance bias, and we noted high risks of other bias in some studies). We downgraded evidence due to indirectness, because some participants in studies may have had hospital-acquired infections before recruitment. We noted that one small study had a large influence on the effect for hospital-acquired infections, and we assessed decisions made in analysis of some cluster-randomised cross-over studies on the effect for hospital-acquired infections and for mortality; we downgraded the evidence for these outcomes due to inconsistency. We also downgraded the evidence on length of stay in the ICU, because of imprecision. Data for adverse events were limited by few events and so we downgraded for imprecision.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Due to the very low-certainty evidence available, it is not clear whether bathing with chlorhexidine reduces hospital-acquired infections, mortality, or length of stay in the ICU, or whether the use of chlorhexidine results in more skin reactions.
Topics: Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Baths; Central Venous Catheters; Chlorhexidine; Critical Illness; Cross Infection; Humans; Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sepsis
PubMed: 31476022
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012248.pub2 -
Thrombosis Research Dec 2022Evidence of micro- and macro-thrombi in the arteries and veins of critically ill COVID-19 patients and in autopsies highlight the occurrence of COVID-19-associated... (Review)
Review
Evidence of micro- and macro-thrombi in the arteries and veins of critically ill COVID-19 patients and in autopsies highlight the occurrence of COVID-19-associated coagulopathy (CAC). Clinical findings of critically ill COVID-19 patients point to various mechanisms for CAC; however, the definitive underlying cause is unclear. Multiple factors may contribute to the prothrombotic state in patients with COVID-19. Aberrant expression of tissue factor (TF), an initiator of the extrinsic coagulation pathway, leads to thrombotic complications during injury, inflammation, and infections. Clinical evidence suggests that TF-dependent coagulation activation likely plays a role in CAC. Multiple factors could trigger abnormal TF expression and coagulation activation in patients with severe COVID-19 infection. Proinflammatory cytokines that are highly elevated in COVID-19 (IL-1β, IL-6 and TNF-α) are known induce TF expression on leukocytes (e.g. monocytes, macrophages) and non-immune cells (e.g. endothelium, epithelium) in other conditions. Antiphospholipid antibodies, TF-positive extracellular vesicles, pattern recognition receptor (PRR) pathways and complement activation are all candidate factors that could trigger TF-dependent procoagulant activity. In addition, coagulation factors, such as thrombin, may further potentiate the induction of TF via protease-activated receptors on cells. In this systematic review, with other viral infections, we discuss potential mechanisms and cell-type-specific expressions of TF during SARS-CoV-2 infection and its role in the development of CAC.
Topics: Humans; Thromboplastin; COVID-19; Critical Illness; SARS-CoV-2; Blood Coagulation Disorders; Thrombosis
PubMed: 36265412
DOI: 10.1016/j.thromres.2022.09.025 -
European Review For Medical and... Jun 2022The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), also known as COVID-19, a viral outbreak that started in December 2019, eventually lead to a worldwide...
OBJECTIVE
The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), also known as COVID-19, a viral outbreak that started in December 2019, eventually lead to a worldwide pandemic. COVID-19 usually presents with flu-like symptoms, such as headaches, dry cough, fever, fatigue, myalgia, shortness of breath, diarrhea and loss of smell or taste. However, it can also have major effects on the cardiovascular system. Based on the available relevant literature, we aimed to elaborate the possible mechanisms influencing cardiovascular damage, myocardial injury and thromboembolic disease process in particular.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
After considering our inclusion and exclusion criteria, the systematic review included 8 studies in total.
RESULTS
In general, underlying cardiovascular diseases were associated with poorer clinical outcomes. This may be due to immunological dysregulation. The disease outcomes were also positively correlated with the severity of the disease, especially with myocardial injury. Thus, cardiac biomarkers, such as Troponin T, CK-MB and myoglobin could be utilized in prediction algorithms for deciphering the clinical outcome in COVID-19 patients.
CONCLUSIONS
Venous thromboembolisms were commonly encountered complications despite the administration of thromboprophylaxis, and they mostly presented as pulmonary embolisms, warranting the need for relevant investigations in hemodynamically unstable patients. However, more studies need to be conducted to better understand the mechanisms at play and the ensuing complications, to better treat COVID-19 patients.
Topics: Anticoagulants; COVID-19; Humans; SARS-CoV-2; Troponin T; Venous Thromboembolism
PubMed: 35776052
DOI: 10.26355/eurrev_202206_29090 -
BMC Medicine Dec 2023Short-stay joint replacement programmes are used in many countries but there has been little scrutiny of safety outcomes in the literature. We aimed to systematically... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Short-stay joint replacement programmes are used in many countries but there has been little scrutiny of safety outcomes in the literature. We aimed to systematically review evidence on the safety of short-stay programmes versus usual care for total hip (THR) and knee replacement (KR), and optimal patient selection.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-experimental studies including a comparator group reporting on 14 safety outcomes (hospital readmissions, reoperations, blood loss, emergency department visits, infection, mortality, neurovascular injury, other complications, periprosthetic fractures, postoperative falls, venous thromboembolism, wound complications, dislocation, stiffness) within 90 days postoperatively in adults ≥ 18 years undergoing primary THR or KR were included. Secondary outcomes were associations between patient demographics or clinical characteristics and patient outcomes. Four databases were searched between January 2000 and May 2023. Risk of bias and certainty of the evidence were assessed.
RESULTS
Forty-nine studies were included. Based upon low certainty RCT evidence, short-stay programmes may not reduce readmission (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.12-7.43); blood transfusion requirements (OR 1.75, 95% CI 0.27-11.36); neurovascular injury (OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.01-7.92); other complications (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.26-1.53); or stiffness (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.53-2.05). For registry studies, there was no difference in readmission, infection, neurovascular injury, other complications, venous thromboembolism, or wound complications but there were reductions in mortality and dislocations. For interrupted time series studies, there was no difference in readmissions, reoperations, blood loss volume, emergency department visits, infection, mortality, or neurovascular injury; reduced odds of blood transfusion and other complications, but increased odds of periprosthetic fracture. For other observational studies, there was an increased risk of readmission, no difference in blood loss volume, infection, other complications, or wound complications, reduced odds of requiring blood transfusion, reduced mortality, and reduced venous thromboembolism. One study examined an outcome relevant to optimal patient selection; it reported comparable blood loss for short-stay male and female participants (p = 0.814).
CONCLUSIONS
There is low certainty evidence that short-stay programmes for THR and KR may have non-inferior 90-day safety outcomes. There is little evidence on factors informing optimal patient selection; this remains an important knowledge gap.
Topics: Male; Adult; Female; Humans; Venous Thromboembolism; Patient Selection; Hemorrhage; Interrupted Time Series Analysis
PubMed: 38129857
DOI: 10.1186/s12916-023-03219-5