Archive for October, 2008

Could it be…SCABIES?

 3-year-old boy (http://cme.medscape.com/viewarticle/582674_2) presents to his pediatrician with a history of worsening erythema and pruritus on the thenar aspect of his right hand. Examination of the hand reveals a few grouped, blanchable, erythematous papules. His history is significant for a vacation in which the family had stayed in multiple hotels.

1

A skin scraping was performed and examined under microscopy. The scraping demonstrated mites, ova, and scybala (fecal debris) consistent with a diagnosis of scabies. Scabies is a parasitic infestation of the skin caused by the arthropod Sarcoptes scabiei var. hominis, a very small parasite measuring 0.3 to 0.9 mm in size. Variants of the scabies mite that affect other animals (such as dogs, cats, pigs, etc.) are unable to reproduce in humans, but they can cause a transient dermatitis. Scabies was well known to the Greeks and Romans. The word scabies is derived from the Latin word “scabere,” which means to scratch. The Italian biologist Giovanni Cosimo Bonomo described the mite and linked it to the disease in the 17th century; however, it wasn’t until the 19th century that the skeptical scientific community finally accepted that scabies was caused by the mite Sarcoptes scabiei.[1,2]

In the 21st century, scabies continues to be a worldwide health problem. Its prevalence is higher in developing countries, where overcrowding and poverty lead to an increase in transmission. Scabies is transmitted by prolonged skin-to-skin contact with an infected person. Children (especially those of poor or underserved communities), sexually active individuals, and institutionalized patients are all at increased risk for acquiring the disease, because these groups have an increased chance of human contact. Scabies is also considered a sexually transmitted disease. It is infrequently acquired through the use of infested clothes, bed linen, and towels. A scabies infestation occurs when an impregnated female parasite enters the skin, tunnels into the stratum corneum, and excavates burrows to live and deposit its eggs. The larvae hatch and begin to move 3-10 days later. The female mite can sometimes be observed at the end of the burrow. Male mites usually roam on the surface of the skin, but female mites may also surface occasionally (especially at night), at which time they can be washed or scratched off.[1,2,3]

Intense pruritus is a classic symptom of scabies, and it is usually more severe at night. Symptoms are caused by a delayed type IV hypersensitivity reaction to the mites, ova, and scybala (feces) under the skin. The symptoms occur 4-6 weeks after the initial infection. Antibodies may form against the parasite causing this reaction; therefore, previously sensitized patients may have symptoms within hours of reinfection.[1,2]

Scabies can mimic numerous skin conditions, such as insect bites, atopic and contact dermatitis, and herpetic dermatitis (among others). Not uncommonly, scabies is misdiagnosed as one of these other skin conditions, allowing transmission to continue to occur until the correct diagnosis is established. Scabies can be diagnosed by visualizing the burrows or “tracks” left by the female mite as she moves through the stratus corneum of the skin. Initially, these burrows may appear as short, zigzagging, and hardly noticeable scratchlike marks with a slightly shiny hue, and they may be connected to an erythematous papule. This papule harbors the female mite and feces. As a result of the intense pruritus associated with scabies, the burrows may be difficult to differentiate from the scratch marks produced by the patient. Adult patients may show lesions between their fingers or on their wrists, axillae, areolae, elbows, knees, genitals, and buttocks. Alternately, children may have any part of their skin affected. The diagnosis can be confirmed by finding the mite, ova, or fecal debris of a lesion scraping under microscopy. The skin scraping is obtained by scraping infested primary lesions, such as vesicles or burrows, and placing the scraping on a glass slide; multiple scrapings may be necessary to positively make the diagnosis. In rare cases, skin biopsies may be obtained to both positively identify the mite or characteristic histopathology and to rule out other dermatoses.[1]

Related to scratching, patients with scabies may also become superinfected with Streptococcus pyogenes and Staphylococcus aureus. The complication of superinfection can lead to specific infections, such as impetigo, cellulitis, acute poststreptococcal glomerulonephritis, rheumatic fever, and even sepsis. Immunosuppressed patients may present with a severe form of scabies known as crusted scabies or Norwegian scabies. This is a widespread hyperkeratotic rash, with thick scaling and crusting and, at times, minimal to no pruritus. During this type of infection, up to millions of mites may survive for up to 1 week. In nonimmunocompromised hosts, an average of 5-15 mites cause infestation and survive for only 2-3 days. Crusted scabies appears to be the result of a high number of infiltrating CD8+ T lymphocytes in the dermis, with minimal helper T lymphocytes (CD4+), which is the opposite to that of a normal immune reaction to scabies. This detail may account for the body’s inability to mount an appropriate immune response against the scabies mites.[1,2]

The cornerstone of medical treatment for scabies consists of administering a scabicidal agent in combination with an antipruritic agent. An antimicrobial agent may be added if the lesions have become infected with bacteria. Topical scabicidal agents include permethrin 5%, lindane, malathion, sulfur in petrolatum (usually 6%), crotamiton, and benzyl benzoate. Of these agents, permethrin is the most commonly used in the United States, and it is recommended as a first-line therapy by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Permethrin is applied from chin to toes and for a period of 10-12 hours, after which it should be washed off. The treatment is repeated in 1 week. Hypersensitivity reactions to permethrin have been documented, and there seems to be minimal systemic toxicity caused by minimal skin absorption. Permethrin is the recommended drug of choice for infants (age >2 mo), children, and pregnant (Class B) and nursing mothers. Antihistamines and topical antibiotics may be used as well to decrease pruritus and treat any skin infection. Ivermectin, an oral scabicide, is used in the United States for refractory patients or patients who cannot tolerate topical treatments (although it is not yet approved by the US Food and Drug Administration [FDA]). Preventing scabies reinfestation in family members and close contacts to the affected person is paramount; therefore, all household members should be treated regardless of their symptoms (or lack thereof). In addition, all clothing and linen that may have been in contact with the affected person should be washed in hot water and machine-dried. This process should be repeated 1 week later. Carpets and upholstered furniture should be vacuumed, and the vacuum bags should be disposed of. Patients should be reexamined 2 weeks after treatment to ascertain the treatment effectiveness.[1]

In this patient, treatment with topical permethrin 5% cured the infestation; however, he developed an allergic reaction to the permethrin cream that manifested as widespread pruritic, papular, 1-mm lesions on his knees and elbows. His condition responded to a 1-week course of oral antihistamines (diphenhydramine hydrochloride) and topical zinc oxide lotion. Although they were asymptomatic, all household contacts were treated along with the family members who had been on vacation with the patient.

References

  1. Binder WD, Sciammarella J. Scabies. eMedicine [serial Online]. Last updated: June 2006. Available at: http://www.emedicine.com/emerg/TOPIC517.HTM
  2. Walton SF, Holt DC, Currie BJ, Kemp DJ. Scabies: new future for a neglected disease. Adv Parasitol. 2004;57:309-76. Abstract
  3. Clucas DB, Carville KS. Disease burden and health-care clinic attendances for young children in remote aboriginal communities of northern Australia. Bull World Health Organ. 2008;86:275-81. Abstract

 

MIs Caused bt Infective Endocarditis

Acute Myocardial Infarction Caused by Coronary Embolism from Infective Endocarditis
Published online: 24 October 2008
Czarina J. Roxas, Anthony J. Weekes
DOI: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2007.12.041
Journal of Emergency Medicine

http://www.jem-journal.com/article/S0736-4679%2808%2900458-7/abstract

Abstract 

Background: Identifying an acute myocardial infarction caused by a non-atherosclerotic process can have consequences on the short- and long-term management of the disease.

Case Reports: In the first case reported, a 39-year-old woman with a history of hypertension, diabetes, end-stage renal disease, deep vein thrombosis, and a recent hospitalization for staphylococcal bacteremia presented to the Emergency Department (ED) with acute onset of chest pain and shortness of breath. Her electrocardiogram (ECG) showed findings of an ST-segement elevation lateral wall acute myocardial infarction (AMI). The patient’s condition worsened in the ED, and thrombolytic therapy was initiated. The patient subsequently had a coronary catheterization that illustrated an irregular mitral valve and abrupt occlusions in the left anterior descending artery, suggestive of coronary embolism from a mitral valve source. This patient was later treated with intravenous antibiotics and mitral valve replacement. In the second case reported, a 56-year-old man with a history of hypertension, diabetes, and end-stage renal disease presented to the ED with shortness of breath, fever, and chest pain. His ECG was significant for ST-segment elevation in the lateral leads, suggestive of an AMI. This patient had a history of positive blood cultures in a previous admission as well as an echocardiogram revealing an aortic valve vegetation. Given the high suspicion for an infective endocarditis causing an embolic event that in turn led to the myocardial infarction, thrombolytics were withheld in the ED and the patient was transported for coronary catheterization. The coronary angiogram demonstrated abrupt cutoffs at the distal left anterior descending artery and distal left posterior descending artery suggestive of an embolic occlusion of these vessels. He was subsequently treated with intravenous antibiotics and aortic valve replacement.

Conclusions: These two cases illustrate the importance of broadening our differential in the causes of AMI. In these cases, the recognition of an embolic event from infective endocarditis as the cause of the acute coronary syndrome allowed physicians to direct their interventions to optimize the appropriate care for each patient.

 

Who cares, except the Taiwanese?

Unplanned Emergency Department Revisits within 72 Hours to a Secondary Teaching Referral Hospital in Taiwan

Published online: 24 October 2008

Chiu-Lung Wu, Fa-Tsai Wang, Yao-Chiu Chiang, Yuan-Fa Chiu, Teong-Giap Lin, Lian-Fong Fu, Tsung-Lung Tsai
DOI: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2008.03.039
Journal of Emergency Medicine, The, http://www.jem-journal.com/article/S0736-4679%2808%2900455-1/abstract

Infectious Disease & US

Identification of Subcutaneous Myiasis Using Bedside Emergency Physician Performed Ultrasound (http://www.jem-journal.com/article/S0736-4679%2808%2900232-1/abstract)
Elissa Schechter, Jeffrey Lazar, M. Eric Nix, William K. Mallon, Christopher L. Moore
The Journal of Emergency Medicine – 24 October 2008 (10.1016/j.jemermed.2007.11.095)

Abstract 

Background: Subcutaneous myiasis, a maggot infiltration of human tissue, is common in tropical countries. However, physicians in the United States may be unlikely to consider this etiology of dermatologic abnormalities even when a travel history suggests the diagnosis should be included in the differential.

Case Report: We report the case of a patient who returned from Sierra Leone with an infestation of a maggot of Cordylobia anthropophaga (tumbu fly) that was diagnosed and appropriately treated based on ultrasound findings.

Conclusion: As international travel increases, clinicians should maintain a high level of suspicion for tumbu fly infestation in returned travelers from endemic areas. The increasing use of ultrasound in the Emergency Department for evaluation of skin and soft tissue infections may aid the physician in making the diagnosis of subcutaneous myiasis.

Subcutaneous Emphysema and Pneumomediastinum

Massive Subcutaneous Emphysema and Pneumomediastineum after Finger Subtotal Amputation with Barotrauma (http://www.jem-journal.com/article/S0736-4679%2808%2900465-4/abstract)
Fatih Parmaksızoglu, Ali S. Koprulu, Mehmet B. Unal
The Journal of Emergency Medicine – 27 October 2008 (10.1016/j.jemermed.2008.03.043)

Abstract 

Background: Advancement of pressurized air through subcutaneous tissue after barotraumas involving skin laceration has been documented in the literature. The type and anatomic location of injury, amount of pressure, and time elapsed all play a role in determining the destination of the air advancing through tissues. Objectives: To report a case demonstrating the vascular system as the anatomic pathway for subcutaneous pressurized air resulting from an industrial accident.

Case Report: We present the case of a 28-year-old laborer wounded by an air valve blast. An enormous accumulation of air was released through a subtotal fingertip amputation. The clinical appearance of massive subcutaneous emphysema around the upper extremity, neck, and chest suggested chest trauma to the clinicians, despite the absence of signs of respiratory distress. X-ray studies revealed pneumomediastinum. After confirmation that the respiratory system was undamaged, microsurgical repair of the injured finger was performed. Resolution of subcutaneous emphysema and pneumomediastinum was complete at the end of follow-up. Conclusion: Compressed air injuries constitute a well-known form of industrial accident. Although most result in localized subcutaneous emphysema, the risk of pneumomediastinum should not be overlooked due to the anatomic structure of the vascular system. The clinician should consider the pressure of compressed air, and must be alert for potential complications.

Imaging Suspected Hip Fractures

Imaging choices in occult hip fracture
Published online: 29 October 2008
Jesse Cannon, Salvatore Silvestri, Mark Munro
DOI: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2007.12.039
Journal of Emergency Medicine (http://www.jem-journal.com/article/S0736-4679%2808%2900219-9/abstract)

Abstract 

Background: Hip fracture is a common injury, with an incidence rate of > 250,000 per year in the United States. Diagnosis is particularly important due to the high dependence on the integrity of the hip in the daily life of most people. Objectives: In this article we review the literature focused on hip fracture detection and discuss advantages and limitations of each major imaging modality. Discussion: Plain radiographs are usually sufficient for diagnosis as they are at least 90% sensitive for hip fracture. However, in the 3–4% of Emergency Department (ED) patients having hip X-ray studies who harbor an occult hip fracture, the Emergency Physician must choose among several methods, each with intrinsic limitations, for further evaluation. These methods include computed tomography, scintigraphy, and magnetic resonance imaging. Conclusion: We present an evidence-based algorithm for the evaluation of a patient suspected to have an occult hip fracture in the ED. Also outlined are future directions for research to distinguish more effective techniques for identifying occult hip fractures.

FDA: Toviaz Approved

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
October 31, 2008

Media Inquiries:
Rita Chappelle, 240-753-8603
Consumer Inquiries:
888-INFO-FDA

FDA Approves Toviaz, a New Drug to Treat

Overactive Bladder

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved a new drug to help patients suffering from overactive bladder (OAB). Toviaz (fesoterodine fumarate) works by relaxing the smooth muscle tissue of the bladder, thus reducing the urinary frequency, urge to urinate, and sudden urinary incontinence (leakage of urine), that are characteristic symptoms of OAB.

“Patients who suffer from overactive bladder face quality of life issues that can hamper their ability to enjoy life to its fullest,” said George Benson, M.D., deputy director, Division of Reproductive and Urologic Products at the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. “This new drug will provide an additional treatment option to help them manage problems with an overactive bladder.”

Toviaz will be available by prescription only, as an extended release tablet in either 4 mg or 8 mg dosage strengths. It is to be administered once daily. The recommended starting dose is 4 mg, which can be increased to 8 mg if needed, based upon individual response and tolerability. Toviaz is only approved for adults.

The safety and effectiveness of Toviaz were studied in two, 12-week, randomized controlled studies of the 4 mg and 8 mg doses. For the combined studies, a total of 554 patients received placebo, 554 patients received Toviaz 4 mg daily, and 566 patients received the drug 8 mg daily. The majority of patients were female with a mean age of 58 years. Toviaz is not approved for pediatric use.

In each of those two studies, the product showed a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in decreasing the number of times patients needed to urinate per day, as well as the number of urine leaking episodes they experienced per day, as compared to placebo.

Common side effects associated with Toviaz included dry mouth and constipation. Less frequently reported side effects included dry eyes and trouble emptying the bladder.

Toviaz is not recommended in doses above 4 mg in those patients with severe reduction in kidney function or in those patients taking medications, such as ketoconazole, that block the metabolism of the drug. It should not be used in patients who suffer from urinary or gastric retention or in patients with uncontrolled, narrow-angle glaucoma. It should also not be used in patients with severe liver impairment. The product should be used with caution in patients who suffer from decreased gastrointestinal motility, such as those with severe constipation.

Health care professionals and consumers may report serious adverse events (side effects) or product quality problems with the use of this product to the FDA’s MedWatch Adverse Event Reporting program either online, by regular mail, fax or phone.

Online: www.fda.gov/MedWatch/report.htm
Regular Mail: use postage-paid FDA form 3500 available at: www.fda.gov/MedWatch/getforms.htm and mail to MedWatch,
5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20852-9787
Fax: (800) FDA-0178
Phone: (800) FDA-1088

Toviaz is manufactured by Schwarz Pharma of Zwickau, Germany and is distributed by Pfizer Inc. of New York, N.Y.

Peramivir

CIDRAP News, 10/31/08 (http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/cidrap/content/influenza/general/news/oct3108peramivir.html)

“BioCryst Pharmaceuticals Inc. reported encouraging results this week in two phase 2 trials of its injectable antiviral drug, peramivir, a potential new treatment for influenza.

Peramivir is a neuraminidase inhibitor, like the licensed antivirals oseltamivir (Tamiflu), which is taken orally, and zanamivir (Relenza), inhaled as a powder.

In one study, a single intravenous (IV) dose of peramivir in outpatients ill with flu reduced the duration of their symptoms by about 22 hours compared with a placebo group, a statistically significant difference, according to BioCryst, based in Birmingham, Ala.

In the other trial, hospital patients who were seriously ill with flu were treated for 5 days with either IV peramivir or oseltamivir, with similar results in both groups, including no deaths and a median of 4.0 days to hospital discharge, the company said…”

What the FDA Commish says about BPA

FDA, 10/31/08: 

Welcome to Andy’s Take.

FDA’s Science Board recently addressed a report from its subcommittee evaluating the scientific data on bisphenol A – or BPA. When I spoke with you in August about BPA, I mentioned that as a science-based regulatory agency we need the best science to make good public health decisions. And part of that process is seeking input from experts outside the agency. In this case the experts on the subcommittee presented a perspective that someone described as a “stinging rebuke” of FDA.

My Take is that this report presenting a contrary point of view is exactly what FDA needed to hear. Rather than a rebuke of our position, the report was a strong affirmation of our process—a process to identify information that will better inform our regulatory decision making. FDA asked for this report, asked for this critical analysis, and we will continue to do so. Input such as this as well as information from a variety of sources like analyses conducted by other regulatory agencies will be incorporated into our regulatory decision-making.

Regulatory decisions regarding the safety and effectiveness of a product must always be based on comprehensive knowledge of that product. This knowledge is derived from a rigorous and disciplined analysis of information about that product that is based in turn on accumulation of scientific data. That is why we say that FDA is a science-based regulatory agency.

But science is always evolving, and in fact that evolution has become so rapid that we now describe it as a revolution in science. The Agency seeks the new data coming from that revolution. But these new scientific data must be assembled into information and converted to knowledge upon which our regulatory decisions are based. We cannot short-circuit or avoid this process of rigorous analysis, critical assessment, and stringent validation. Only then will we have the strong scientific foundation upon which to make an enduring regulatory decision to approve a product, change a drug label or issue a call for change in or removal of a product.

At the end of the day, the FDA is not simply engaged in scientific analysis – it is commissioned by law to make regulatory decisions that will protect and promote the health of hundreds of millions of people. We are grateful to the members of the Science Board and the subcommittee for their unselfish efforts in contributing to this process.

Together we will always strive to learn more in order to do more to assure the safety and the effectiveness of the products that affect your health.

I hope you will check back here next week for Andy’s Take.

Andy

Andrew C. von Eschenbach, M.D.
Commissioner of Food and Drugs

Hospital Surge Model – AHRQ


The AHRQ Hospital Surge Model estimates the hospital resources needed to treat casualties arising from biological (anthrax, smallpox, pandemic flu), chemical (chlorine, sulfur mustard, or sarin), nuclear (1 KT or 10 KT explosion), or radiological (dispersion device or point source) attacks. When you run the Hospital Surge Model, you select one of the above scenarios and specify the number of casualties you want to assume need to be treated in your hospital(s). The casualties are treated, as necessary, in the Emergency Department (ED), in the ICU, or on the floor. The hospital provides a standard level of care to all casualties.
http://hospitalsurgemodel.ahrq.gov/

OMNI Postings of 10/31/08

On this date in 1517, Martin Luther posted his 95 Theses on the west door of the Wittenberg Cathedral.  At the same time, Giuseppe Mazzaboli, owner of The Swinging Neapolitan Diner, posted his new “Buy-1-Pizza-Get-1-Free” advertisement on the east door of the Wittenberg Cathedral.  Guess which one got more “hits?”
But I digress…
1)  You might be called to see or to transport a patient (at 3AM) with status epilepticus who is on propofol (Diprivan) therapy.  In the study, 39 patients (average age 54) were admitted to the intensive care unit with RSE. Thirty-two received propofol for a median of 63 hours and a median peak infusion rate of 67 micrograms per kilogram per minute. The other seven patients received other drugs, such as midazolam and pentobarbital.  In the propofol group, three patients had sudden unexplained cardiac arrest, resulting in two deaths. There were no deaths in the other group.
2)  This leads me into something called the Propofol Infusion Syndrome.  OK, how many of you know what the hell that is?  In the above study, thirty percent of patients in the propofol group experienced propofol infusion syndrome (PRIS).  The clinical features of propofol infusion syndrome (PRIS) are acute refractory bradycardia leading to asystole, in the presence of one or more of the following: metabolic acidosis (base deficit > 10 mmol.l−1), rhabdomyolysis, hyperlipidemia, and enlarged or fatty liver.  The second link is a full text article.
3)  There’s a hospital in NYC that is using both Eastern and Western medicine.  It’s a year-long experiment at Beth Israel Hospital to see whether yoga, meditation and aromatherapy can enhance regimens of chemotherapy and radiation.  The initiator is Donna Karan, the boutique clothes designer.  So, if you get cured, you get a whole-new wardrobe.
4)  Where did the word “helicopter” come from?  Does “pterydactyl” give you a clue?
5)  RA in women is on the rise.  From 1995-2005, the incidence of RA among women increased to 54 per 100,000, compared to 36 per 100,000 in the previous 10 years. The incidence of RA among men remained at about 29 per 100,000.
6)  This abstract from the Archives of Internal Medicine presents some interesting stats.  The estimated number of patient visits for treated diabetes increased from 25 million  in 1994 to 36 million  by 2007 and the mean number of diabetes medications per treated patient increased from 1.14  in 1994 to 1.63  in 2007.  Drug costs?  The mean cost per prescription was $56 in 2001 and $76 in 2007. The aggregate drug expenditures was $6.7 billion in 2001 and $12.5 billion in 2007.  
7)  This abstract illustrates that the elderly are significantly at risk for infective endocarditis (IE).  What elderly people are at risk?  Elderly patients reported more frequently a hospitalization or an invasive procedure before IE onset. Diabetes mellitus and genitourinary and gastrointestinal cancer were the major predisposing conditions. Keep this in mind when seeing an older patient who has unexplained fever.
Happy Halloween,
Paul R.

3.5 Hours

In the wall Street Journal (10/30) Health Blog, Jacob Goldstein asked “how long is too long?” when it comes to the willingness of patients to happily ride out the emergency department (ED) wait.

Researchers at Michigan’s William Beaumont Hospital posed the same question, “and got a pretty clear answer: Three and a half hours.” After looking “at more than 2,000 patient-satisfaction surveys from the first part of 2007,” the investigators discovered that “patients whose stays in the” ED “lasted up to three and a half hours had satisfaction scores in the 83rd percentile as compared with patients at comparable” EDs “around the country.”

For patients “who spent between three and a half and four hours,” however, “satisfaction plunged to the 49th percentile,” while spending more than four hours waiting pushed that score into “the 24th percentile.”

        Yet, according to a second Health Blog posted by Goldstein in Wall Street Journal (10/30), the researchers found that telling patients that “the wait is a little longer than it’s really likely to be” may ironically cause “patients [to] feel better about their trip through the” trauma ward. The researchers “calculated the mean time it took to get through the” ED “for a given test or procedure — then added 20 percent when they told patients what to expect.”

Through “a standard patient satisfaction survey,” the team discovered that “all nine variables related to wait times improved after the” ED “adopted this policy,” according to data presented during a meeting of “the American College of Emergency Physicians meeting.” Asked if the practice was ethical, lead investigator Russell Rae, M.D., said that by “providing people with the exact mean time, half of the time we’d be underestimating how long it’s going to take.” Now, “there are signs up on the” ED “walls that tell patients how long they can expect to wait for various procedures,” some “20 percent above the mean.”

Fever & Strokes

Source:  http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/582842?src=rss

Stroke. 2008;39:3029-3035
Published online before print August 21, 2008, doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.108.521583                                                                     (Full Text:  http://stroke.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/full/39/11/3029)

TITLE:  Impact of Fever on Outcome in Patients With Stroke and Neurologic Injury:  A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis

ABSTRACT

Background and Purpose— Many studies associate fever with poor outcome in patients with neurological injury, but this relationship is blurred by divergence in populations and outcome measures. We sought to incorporate all recent scholarship addressing fever in brain-injured patients into a comprehensive meta-analysis to evaluate disparate clinical findings.

Methods— We conducted a Medline search for articles since January 1, 1995 (in English with abstracts, in humans) and hand searches of references in bibliographies and review articles. Search terms covered stroke, neurological injury, thermoregulation, fever, and cooling. A total of 1139 citations were identified; we retained 39 studies with 67 tested hypotheses contrasting outcomes of fever/higher body temperature and normothermia/lower body temperature in patients with neurological injury covering 14431 subjects. A separate meta-analysis was performed for each of 7 outcome measures. Significance was evaluated with Zc developed from probability values or t values. Correlational effect size, r(es), was calculated for each study and used to derive Cohen’s d unbiased combined effect size and relative risk.

Results— Fever or higher body temperature was significantly associated with worse outcome in every measure studied. Relative risk of worse outcome with fever was: mortality, 1.5; Glasgow Outcome Scale, 1.3; Barthel Index, 1.9; modified Rankin Scale, 2.2; Canadian Stroke Scale, 1.4; intensive care length of stay, 2.8; and hospital length of stay, 3.2.

Conclusions— In the pooled analyses covering 14431 patients with stroke and other brain injuries, fever is consistently associated with worse outcomes across multiple outcome measures.
 

Some FDA Experts Are Against Drug Pre-Emption

NY Times, 10/29/08 (http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/washington/AP-FDA-Drug-Suits.html?sq=+%22Food%20and%20Drug%20Administration%22&st=nyt&scp=3&pagewanted=print)

Top scientists and career employees at the Food and Drug Administration opposed agency regulations that weaken consumers’ ability to sue drug makers, congressional investigators said Wednesday.

At issue is language in a drug labeling rule from 2006 that effectively limits when people can sue in state court over injury claims involving medications. The FDA contends federal regulations prevail when there is a conflict with state law. This concept is called pre-emption.

Internal agency documents showed that career officials opposed this approach, according to a report released by Rep. Henry Waxman, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. In the past, the agency had viewed private suits as an additional layer of protection against unsafe drugs, the report said.

”Much of the argument for why we are proposing to invoke pre-emption seems to be based on a false assumption that the FDA approved labeling is fully accurate and up-to-date in a real time basis,” the report quoted Dr. John Jenkins, who oversees FDA’s new drug reviews, as saying. ”We know that such an assumption is false.”

Patients injured by drugs have won suits against drug manufacturers for failing to warn against certain dangers.

In a case to be argued before the Supreme Court on Monday, a Vermont woman sued Wyeth after she lost her right arm below the elbow following a high-volume injection of the drug Phenergan. The injection accidentally punctured an artery, prompting gangrene to set in. Diana Levine argued that the company had a duty to warn consumers that such injections could have devastating consequences. The state courts agreed, awarding her nearly $7 million.

Wyeth appealed, saying it was protected from such suits. It argued a state court cannot overrule the FDA’s judgment on label warnings.

FDA scientists had weighed the risks and benefits of Phenergan, used to treat nausea and allergies, when it approved the prescribing literature, or label, as a guide for doctors. The FDA was aware of risks associated with injecting some forms of Phenergan, but the label did not specifically warn about the technique used with Levine.

The FDA said in its 2006 rule and in a 2008 rule that state suits could encourage drug makers to propose unnecessary labeling. Such labeling could result in scientifically unsubstantiated warnings and less use of beneficial treatments.

Waxman’s staff obtained documents rejecting that warning. Jane Axelrad, an associate director for policy at the agency, wrote: ”We rarely find ourselves in situations where sponsors want to disclose more risk information than we think is necessary,” she said. ”To the contrary, we usually find ourselves dealing with situations where sponsors want to minimize the risk information.”

The report said the FDA has yet to provide a complete set of documents that would show communications between the White House and the agency, but some documents suggested the agency and the White House would not go forward with a rule on labeling until the pre-emption changes were included.

Blood-Getting and -Giving Guidelines

Wall Street Journal, 10/29/08 :  “Amid rising blood costs and mounting safety concerns about transfusions, hospitals are adopting stricter measures to manage their blood supplies. A growing number of hospitals are developing guidelines for when transfusions are necessary.”

Moreover, “institutions also are increasingly checking patients for anemia before surgery and treating them with iron or red-blood-cell-boosting drugs to cut down on transfusions in the operating room.” Meanwhile, notes Landro, “patients are feeling the impact.” For example, some hospitals “are recycling patients’ own blood by collecting it in the operating room for immediate re-infusion during or after surgery. And in intensive-care units, nurses are sharply reducing the amount of blood they draw daily from patients for testing.” At the same time, Landro adds, “tighter screening for infectious disease and other potential complications have reduced the donor pool to about 37 percent.”