-
Cardio-oncology (London, England) May 2024Despite the growing use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in cancer treatment, data regarding ICI-associated pericardial disease are primarily derived from case...
INTRODUCTION
Despite the growing use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in cancer treatment, data regarding ICI-associated pericardial disease are primarily derived from case reports and case series. ICI related pericardial disease can be difficult to diagnose and is associated with significant morbidity. We conducted a systematic review to further characterize the epidemiology, clinical presentation, and outcomes of this patient population.
METHODS
A search of four databases resulted in 31 studies meeting inclusion criteria. Patients > 18 years old who presented with ICI mediated pericardial disease were included. Intervention was medical + surgical therapy and outcomes were development of cardiac tamponade, morbidity, and mortality.
RESULTS
Thirty- eight patients across 31 cases were included. Patients were majority male (72%) with a median age of 63. Common symptoms included dyspnea (59%) and chest pain (32%), with 41% presenting with cardiac tamponade. Lung cancer (81%) was the most prevalent, and nivolumab (61%) and pembrolizumab (34%) were the most used ICIs. Pericardiocentesis was performed in 68% of patients, and 92% experienced symptom improvement upon ICI cessation. Overall mortality was 16%.
DISCUSSION
This study provides the most comprehensive analysis of ICI-mediated pericardial disease to date. Patients affected were most commonly male with lung cancer treated with either Nivolumab or Pembrolizumab. Diagnosis may be challenging in the setting of occult presentation with normal EKG and physical exam as well as delayed onset from therapy initiation. ICI-associated pericardial disease demonstrates high morbidity and mortality, as evidenced by a majority of patients requiring pericardiocentesis.
PubMed: 38760863
DOI: 10.1186/s40959-024-00234-0 -
BioMed Research International 2024Many COVID-19 patients display adverse symptoms, such as reduced physical ability, poor quality of life, and impaired pulmonary function. Therefore, this systematic...
INTRODUCTION
Many COVID-19 patients display adverse symptoms, such as reduced physical ability, poor quality of life, and impaired pulmonary function. Therefore, this systematic review is aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of physical exercise on various psychophysiological indicators among COVID-19 patients who may be at any stage of their illness (i.e., critically ill, hospitalized, postdischarge, and recovering).
METHODS
A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, and Google Scholar from 2019 to 2021. Twenty-seven studies, which assessed a total of 1525 patients, were included and analysed.
RESULTS
Overall, data revealed significant improvements in the following parameters: physical function, dyspnoea, pulmonary function, quality of life (QOL), lower limb endurance and strength, anxiety, depression, physical activity level, muscle strength, oxygen saturation, fatigue, C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin 6 (IL-6), tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-), lymphocyte, leukocytes, and a fibrin degradation product (D-dimer).
CONCLUSIONS
Physical training turns out to be an effective therapy that minimises the severity of COVID-19 in the intervention group compared to the standard treatment. Therefore, physical training could be incorporated into conventional treatment of COVID-19 patients. More randomized controlled studies with follow-up evaluations are required to evaluate the long-term advantages of physical training. Future research is essential to establish the optimal exercise intensity level and assess the musculoskeletal fitness of recovered COVID-19 patients. This trial is registered with CRD42021283087.
Topics: Humans; Adaptation, Physiological; Anxiety; COVID-19; Exercise; Exercise Therapy; Muscle Strength; Quality of Life; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 38726292
DOI: 10.1155/2024/3325321 -
Life (Basel, Switzerland) Mar 2024The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in an increasing population that is experiencing a wide range of long-lasting symptoms after recovery from the... (Review)
Review
The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has resulted in an increasing population that is experiencing a wide range of long-lasting symptoms after recovery from the acute infection. Long COVID refers to this specific condition and is associated with diverse symptoms, such as fatigue, myalgias, dyspnea, headache, cognitive impairment, neurodegenerative symptoms, anxiety, depression, and a sense of despair. The potential of hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) to improve chronic fatigue, cognitive impairments, and neurological disorders has been established; therefore, the use of HBOT to treat long COVID has also been studied. We conducted a literature search between 1 January 2019 and 30 October 2023, focusing on the clinical efficacy and utility of HBOT for treating long COVID and found ten clinical studies that fit the review topic, including one case report, five one-group pretest-posttest design studies, one safety report from a randomized controlled trial (RCT), and three complete reports of RCTs. Most studies found that HBOT can improve quality of life, fatigue, cognition, neuropsychiatric symptoms, and cardiopulmonary function. Although HBOT has shown some benefits for long COVID symptoms, further rigorous large-scale RCTs are required to establish precise indications, protocols, and post-treatment evaluations.
PubMed: 38672710
DOI: 10.3390/life14040438 -
Respiratory Medicine and Research Jun 2024Exertional dyspnoea, a cardinal symptom in interstitial lung disease (ILD), can be objectively measured during a 6-min walk test (6MWT) using the Borg Dyspnoea Score...
BACKGROUND
Exertional dyspnoea, a cardinal symptom in interstitial lung disease (ILD), can be objectively measured during a 6-min walk test (6MWT) using the Borg Dyspnoea Score (BDS). However, the clinical utility of this measurement is unclear. The purpose of this systematic review was to determine the association between 6MWT BDS and prognosis (mortality and lung transplantation), other 6MWT variables and measures of pulmonary function.
METHODS
MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane and SCOPUS databases were used to identify studies reporting an association between post-6MWT BDS and the relevant outcomes in adults with ILD. Language was limited to English. Study quality was assessed using the Quality in Prognosis Study risk of bias tool. A narrative synthesis for each outcome was performed.
RESULTS
Ten full-text studies (n = 518) were included. Four studies had high overall risk of bias. Two studies (n = 127) reported prognosis and both found that higher 6MWT BDS was associated with increased all-cause mortality. However, the certainty of evidence was very low due to study design and likely publication bias. Higher post-6MWT BDS may be associated with shorter, or no effect on 6MWD; and lower pulmonary function. There was insufficient evidence that BDS correlated with 6MWT oxygen saturation.
CONCLUSIONS
Post-6MWT BDS has a potential role as a predictor of all-cause mortality in ILD, 6MWD and lower pulmonary function. Larger studies designed to confirm these relationships and assess the independent association between the 6MWT BDS and clinical outcomes are required.
Topics: Humans; Lung Diseases, Interstitial; Dyspnea; Walk Test; Prognosis; Female; Male; Severity of Illness Index; Middle Aged; Lung Transplantation
PubMed: 38663251
DOI: 10.1016/j.resmer.2024.101103 -
Frontiers in Microbiology 2024Hemorrhagic fever with renal syndrome (HFRS) is an acute infectious disease comprising five stages: fever, hypotension, oliguria, diuresis (polyuria), and convalescence....
INTRODUCTION
Hemorrhagic fever with renal syndrome (HFRS) is an acute infectious disease comprising five stages: fever, hypotension, oliguria, diuresis (polyuria), and convalescence. Increased vascular permeability, coagulopathy, and renal injury are typical clinical features of HFRS, which has a case fatality rate of 1-15%. Despite this, a comprehensive meta-analyses of the clinical characteristics of patients who died from HFRS is lacking.
METHODS
Eleven Chinese- and English-language research databases were searched, including the China National Knowledge Infrastructure Database, Wanfang Database, SinoMed, VIP Database, PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Proquest, and Ovid, up to October 5, 2023. The search focused on clinical features of patients who died from HFRS. The extracted data were analyzed using STATA 14.0.
RESULTS
A total of 37 articles on 140,295 patients with laboratory-confirmed HFRS were included. Categorizing patients into those who died and those who survived, it was found that patients who died were older and more likely to smoke, have hypertension, and have diabetes. Significant differences were also observed in the clinical manifestations of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, shock, occurrence of overlapping disease courses, cerebral edema, cerebral hemorrhage, toxic encephalopathy, convulsions, arrhythmias, heart failure, dyspnea, acute respiratory distress syndrome, pulmonary infection, liver damage, gastrointestinal bleeding, acute kidney injury, and urine protein levels. Compared to patients who survived, those who died were more likely to demonstrate elevated leukocyte count; decreased platelet count; increased lactate dehydrogenase, alanine aminotransferase, and aspartate aminotransferase levels; prolonged activated partial thromboplastin time and prothrombin time; and low albumin and chloride levels and were more likely to use continuous renal therapy. Interestingly, patients who died received less dialysis and had shorter average length of hospital stay than those who survived.
CONCLUSION
Older patients and those with histories of smoking, hypertension, diabetes, central nervous system damage, heart damage, liver damage, kidney damage, or multiorgan dysfunction were at a high risk of death. The results can be used to assess patients' clinical presentations and assist with prognostication.https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, (CRD42023454553).
PubMed: 38638893
DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2024.1329683 -
BMJ Open Respiratory Research Apr 2024Errors using inhaled delivery systems for COPD are common and it is assumed that these lead to worse clinical outcomes. Previous systematic reviews have included...
BACKGROUND
Errors using inhaled delivery systems for COPD are common and it is assumed that these lead to worse clinical outcomes. Previous systematic reviews have included patients with both asthma and COPD and much of the evidence related to asthma. More studies in COPD have now been published. Through systematic review, the relationship between errors using inhalers and clinical outcomes in COPD, including the importance of specific errors, was assessed.MethodsElectronic databases were searched on 27 October 2023 to identify cohort, case-control or randomised controlled studies, which included patients with COPD, an objective assessment of inhaler errors and data on at least one outcome of interest (forced expiratory volume in 1 s, (FEV), dyspnoea, health status and exacerbations). Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle and Ottawa scales. A narrative synthesis of the results was performed as there was insufficient detail in the publications to allow quantitative synthesis. There was no funding for the review.
RESULTS
19 publications were included (7 cohort and 12 case-control) reporting outcomes on 6487 patients. 15 were considered low quality, and most were confounded by the absence of adherence data. There was weak evidence that lower error rates are associated with better FEV, symptoms and health status and fewer exacerbations. Only one considered the effects of individual errors and found that only some were related to worse outcomes.
CONCLUSION
Evidence about the importance of specific errors using inhalers and outcomes would optimise the education and training of patients with COPD. Prospective studies, including objective monitoring of inhalation technique and adherence, are needed.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42023393120.
Topics: Humans; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Prospective Studies; Asthma; Nebulizers and Vaporizers; Dyspnea
PubMed: 38626929
DOI: 10.1136/bmjresp-2023-002211 -
BMC Palliative Care Apr 2024Breathlessness is a prevalent symptom affecting the quality of life (QOL) of Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) patients. This systematic review explored the...
BACKGROUND
Breathlessness is a prevalent symptom affecting the quality of life (QOL) of Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) patients. This systematic review explored the interventions for controlling breathlessness in ALS patients, emphasizing palliative care (PALC), non-invasive ventilation (NIV), opioids, and non-pharmacological strategies.
METHODS
A comprehensive search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases was conducted. Eligibility criteria encompassed adults with ALS or motor neuron disease experiencing breathlessness. Outcomes included QOL and symptom control. Study designs comprised qualitative studies, cohort studies, and randomized controlled trials.
RESULTS
Eight studies were included, most exhibiting low bias risk, comprising one randomized controlled trial, three cohort studies, two comparative retrospective studies, and two qualitative studies (interviews). Most studies originated from Europe, with one from the United States of America. The participants totaled 3423, with ALS patients constituting 95.6%. PALC consultations significantly improved symptom assessment, advance care planning, and discussions about goals of care. NIV demonstrated efficacy in managing breathlessness, with considerations for device limitations. Opioids were effective, though predominantly studied in non-ALS patients. Non-pharmacological strategies varied in efficacy among patients.
CONCLUSION
The findings underscore the need for individualized approaches in managing breathlessness in ALS. PALC, NIV, opioids, and non-pharmacological strategies each play a role, with unique considerations. Further research, especially ALS-specific self-management studies, is warranted.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis; Quality of Life; Retrospective Studies; Motor Neuron Disease; Noninvasive Ventilation; Dyspnea
PubMed: 38622643
DOI: 10.1186/s12904-024-01429-z -
Seizure Apr 2024Right-sided vagus nerve stimulation (RS-VNS) is indicated when the procedure was deemed not technically feasible or too risky on the indicated left side. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Right-sided vagus nerve stimulation (RS-VNS) is indicated when the procedure was deemed not technically feasible or too risky on the indicated left side.
OBJECTIVE
The present study aims to systematically review the literature on RS-VNS, assessing its effectiveness and safety.
METHODS
A systematic review following PRISMA guidelines was conducted: Pubmed/MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library, Scopus, Embase and Web of science databases were searched from inception to August 13th,2023. Gray literature was searched in two libraries. Eligible studies included all studies reporting, at least, one single case of RS-VNS in patients for the treatment of drug-resistant epilepsy.
RESULTS
Out of 2333 initial results, 415 studies were screened by abstract. Only four were included in the final analysis comprising seven patients with RS-VNS for a drug-resistant epilepsy. One patient experienced nocturnal asymptomatic bradycardia whereas the other six patients did not display any cardiac symptom. RS-VNS was discontinued in one case due to exercise-induced airway disease exacerbation. Decrease of epileptic seizure frequency after RS-VNS ranged from 25 % to 100 % in six cases. In the remaining case, VNS effectiveness was unclear. In one case, RS-VNS was more efficient than left-sided VNS (69 % vs 50 %, respectively) whereas in another case, RS-VNS was less efficient (50 % vs 95 %, respectively).
CONCLUSION
Literature on the present topic is limited. In six out of seven patients, RS-VNS for drug-resistant epilepsy displayed reasonable effectiveness with a low complication rate. Further research, including prospective studies, is necessary to assess safety and effectiveness of RS-VNS for drug-resistant epilepsy patients.
Topics: Humans; Vagus Nerve Stimulation; Drug Resistant Epilepsy
PubMed: 38615369
DOI: 10.1016/j.seizure.2024.02.011 -
Heliyon Apr 2024Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a prevalent respiratory disorder characterized by progressive airflow limitation. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the...
OBJECTIVES
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a prevalent respiratory disorder characterized by progressive airflow limitation. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the effectiveness of respiratory muscle training (RMT) on key pulmonary function parameters, inspiratory muscle strength and quality of life in patients with stable COPD.
METHODS
A comprehensive search was conducted in the databases including PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov, from their inception to June 12, 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the impact of RMT on stable COPD were included for meta-analysis.
RESULTS
In total, 12 RCTs involving 453 participants were included in the meta-analysis. RMT demonstrated a significant increase in maximal inspiratory pressure (PImax, MD, 95% CI: 14.34, 8.17 to 20.51, P < 0.001) but not on maximal expiratory pressure (PEmax). No significant improvement was observed in 6-Min walk test (6MWT), dyspnea, forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV), forced vital capacity ratio (FVC) and quality of life between RMT and control groups. However, subgroup analysis revealed a significant negative effect of RMT alone on FEV/FVC (MD, 95% CI: 2.59, -5.11 to -0.06, P = 0.04). When RMT was combined with other interventions, improvements in FEV1/FVC and FEV1 were found, although not statistically significant.
CONCLUSION
RMT can effectively improve maximal inspiratory pressure in stable COPD patients, but the effect is slight in improving lung function, dyspnea and quality of life. It is recommended to combine with other treatment strategies to comprehensively improve the prognosis of COPD patients.
PubMed: 38576558
DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e28733 -
European Respiratory Review : An... Jan 2024This meta-analysis compares the efficacy and safety of inhaled systemic corticosteroids for COPD exacerbations.Following a pre-registered protocol, we appraised... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
This meta-analysis compares the efficacy and safety of inhaled systemic corticosteroids for COPD exacerbations.Following a pre-registered protocol, we appraised eligible randomised controlled trials (RCTs) according to Cochrane methodology, performed random-effects meta-analyses for all outcomes prioritised in the European Respiratory Society COPD core outcome set and rated the certainty of evidence as per Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology.We included 20 RCTs totalling 2140 participants with moderate or severe exacerbations. All trials were at high risk of methodological bias. Low-certainty evidence did not reveal significant differences between inhaled and systemic corticosteroids for treatment failure rate (relative risk 1.75, 95% CI 0.76-4.02, n=569 participants); breathlessness (mean change: standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.11, 95% CI -0.36-0.15, n=239; post-treatment scores: SMD -0.18, 95% CI -0.41-0.05, n=293); serious adverse events (relative risk 1.47, 95% CI 0.56-3.88, n=246); or any other efficacy outcomes. Moderate-certainty evidence implied a tendency for fewer adverse events with inhaled compared to systemic corticosteroids (relative risk 0.80, 95% CI 0.64-1.0, n=480). Hyperglycaemia and oral fungal infections were observed more frequently with systemic and inhaled corticosteroids, respectively.Limited available evidence suggests potential noninferiority of inhaled to systemic corticosteroids in COPD exacerbations. Appropriately designed and powered RCTs are warranted to confirm these findings.
Topics: Humans; Disease Progression; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Treatment Failure; Dyspnea
PubMed: 38508668
DOI: 10.1183/16000617.0151-2023