Insuffisance musculaire et faiblesse acquise en réanimation

La faiblesse acquise en réanimation est une conséquence bien décrite tant de la pathologie critique que de la prise en charge de réanimation. Dans cette revue narrative nous abordons les aspects musculaires pouvant être à l’origine d’une parésie chez les patients de soins critiques. Le développement d’une insuffisance musculaire apparaît plurifactoriel. Ainsi, on met en évidence une agression directe du tissu musculaire au cours du sepsis, de processus inflammatoires systémiques et d’hypoxémie soutenue, qui sont autant de causes d’admission et de prise en charge en soins critiques. L’immobilité forcée par la lourdeur des soins techniques en médecine intensive et réanimation est, en association avec un déséquilibre nutritionnel, un facteur important du développement de l’insuffisance musculaire. La rééducation la plus précoce, suivant des protocoles gradués adaptés à la progression de chaque patient, est à ce jour la stratégie de prévention d’incapacités fonctionnelles à court et moyen termes la plus éprouvée.

Assessment of the upper limb of the tetraplegic patient

The aim of our study is to describe the assessment of the upper limb in tetraplegic patients to follow his (her) neurological progression and to define the medical or surgical treatment program. We selected upper limb assessment tools and scales for tetraplegic patients described in the medical literature through a PubMed search over the last four decades. For each method, we present the implementation rules and its metrological properties, including its validity in French. We selected five clinical scales for functional evaluation of grasping, as well as four scales for evaluating the overall function of these patients. Finally, we identified three complementary precision assessment tools. The AIS (ASIA Impairment Scale) classification describes the level and the severity of the spinal cord lesion. The Giens classification is more practical for describing the upper limb in middle and low tetraplegia. Impairments can be assessed with most common generic scales and nonspecific measurement devices: range of motion, strength, sensory loss, spasticity, joint pain. Measurement of pinch and grip strength is widely used and easy to perform. The Capabilities of Upper Extremity (CUE) and the Jebsen Taylor Test are the best validated and usable scales. At a general functional level, the Spinal Cord Independence Measure (SCIM) is the most relevant scale in these patients. Motor nerve blocks, electromyography, movement analysis and echography are promising additional methods. Assessment of the upper limb of tetraplegic patients relies both on generic and specific assessment tools and scales.

Part of pain labelled neuropathic in rheumatic disease might be rather nociplastic

Pain in rheumatic diseases is primarily due to mechanical or inflammatory mechanism, but neuropathic pain (NP) component is also occurring in many conditions and is probably underdiagnosed. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of prevalence, pathophysiological and currently available treatment of NP in rheumatic diseases. When associated with clinical evaluation assessing neurological clinical signs and neuroanatomical distribution, Douleur Neuropathique 4 Questions, painDETECT, Leeds assessment of neuropathic symptoms and signs and Neuropathic Pain Questionnaire can detect NP component. Inflammatory or connective diseases, osteoarthritis, back pain or persistent pain after surgery are aetiologies that all may have a neuropathic component. Unlike nociceptive pain, NP does not respond to usual analgesics such as paracetamol and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Entrapment neuropathy, peripheral neuropathy or small-fibre neuropathy are different aetiologies that can lead to NP. A part of the pain labelled neuropathic is rather nociplastic, secondary to a central sensitisation mechanism. Identifying the right component of pain (nociceptive vs neuropathic or nociplastic) could help to better manage pain in rheumatic diseases with pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments.

Impact of medical care, including use of anti-infective agents, on prognosis of COVID-19 hospitalized patients over time

•

Patients with COVID-19 pneumonia are at risk of transfer to the intensive care unit or death

•

We observed a decrease of ICU admission over time during the epidemic

•

Better management of oxygen therapy and possibly use of anti-infective agents explained those results

Introduction

The effect of anti-infective agents in COVID-19 is unclear. The impact of changes in practice on prognosis over time has not been evaluated.

Methods

Single center, retrospective study in adults hospitalized in a medicine ward for COVID-19 from March 5^th to April 25^th 2020. Patient characteristics were compared between two periods (before/after March 19^th) considering French guidelines. The aim of the study was to evaluate how medical care impacted unfavorable outcome, namely admission to intensive care unit (ICU) and/or death.

Results

A total of 132 patients were admitted: mean age 59.0±16.3 years; mean C-reactive protein (CRP) level 84.0±71.1 mg/L; 46% had a lymphocyte count <1000/mm³. Prescribed anti-infective agents were lopinavir-ritonavir (n=12), azithromycin (AZI) (n=28) and AZI combined with hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) (n=52). There was a significant decrease in ICU admission, from 43% to 12%, between the two periods (P<0.0001). Delays until transfer to ICU were similar between periods (P=0.86). Pulmonary computerized tomography (CT)-scans were performed significantly more often with time (from 50% to 90%, P<0.0001), and oxygen-dependency (53% vs 80%, P=0.001) and prescription of AZI±HCQ (from 25% to 76%, P<0.0001) were also greater over time. Multivariate analyses showed a reduction of unfavorable outcome in patients receiving AZI±HCQ (hazard ratio [HR]=0.45, 95% confidence interval [CI: 0.21-0.97], P=0.04), particularly among an identified category of individuals (lymphocyte ≥1000/mm³ or CRP ≥100 mg/L).

Conclusion

The present study showed a significant decrease in admission to ICU over time, which was probably related to multiple factors, including a better indication of pulmonary CT-scan, oxygen therapy, and a suitable prescription of anti-infective agents.

[Drug management of cancer-related peripheral neuropathic pain: A systematic review of the literature]

The objective of the present systematic literature review was to provide an update on medical treatment of neuropathic pain in cancer patients. The number of cancer patients is steadily increasing. Pain is frequent in cancer patients. Few studies have focused on medical treatment of pain, and especially of neuropathic pain, in current or former cancer patients. The present systematic review of all studies published between December 2012 and August 2018 was intended to estimate the scale of this lack. In all, 27 articles were identified on a systematic PubMed search and from the authors' personal knowledge, confirming that scant data have been published. The heterogeneity of cancer patients, of cancer, and of pain go some way toward explaining this scarcity. Guidelines, founded mainly on results from non-cancer patients, recommend tricyclic antidepressants and antiepileptic drugs; local treatments have the advantage of good systemic tolerance. Larger-scale studies taking account of the etiology of neuropathic pain, its characteristics (strictly neuropathic or mixed) and patient characteristics (awaiting treatment, under treatment, recent or non-recent survivor, or in terminal phase) along the care pathway are needed to improve knowledge. The results of the present literature analysis can help future research.