Target Blood Pressure and Combination Therapy: Focus on Angiotensin Receptor Blockers Combination with Either Calcium Channel Blockers or Beta Blockers

BACKGROUND

The target blood pressure has changed many times in the guidelines in past years. However, there is always a question; is it good to lower blood pressure below 120/80 or not? Control of blood pressure in hypertension is very important in reducing hypertension-modified organ damage. So, the guidelines recommend combining more than one antihypertensive drug to reach the target blood pressure goal.

RESULTS

Combination therapy is recommended by guidelines to reach the blood pressure goal. The guidelines recommend many combinations, such as the combination of angiotensin receptor blockers with either calcium channel blockers (CCB) or beta-blocker (BB). Angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) combination with CCB has gained superiority over other antihypertension drug combinations because it reduces blood pressure and decreases the incidence of CV events and organ damage. BB combinations are recommended by guidelines in patients with ischemic events but not all hypertensive patients. Unfortunately, the new generation BB, for example, nebivolol, has a vasodilator effect, making it new hope for BB.

CONCLUSION

Combination therapy is a must in treating the hypertensive patient. The new generation BBs may change the recommendations of guidelines because they have an effect that is similar to CCBs.

A meta-analysis showing the effect of surgical site wound infections and associated risk factors in neonatal surgeries

A meta-analysis was performed to assess the effect of surgical site wound infections and risk factors in neonates undergoing surgery. A systematic literature search up to January 2022 incorporated 17 trials involving 645 neonates who underwent surgery at the beginning of the trial; 198 of them had surgical site wound infections, and 447 were control for neonates. The statistical tools like the dichotomous or continuous method used within a random or fixed-influence model to establish the odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to evaluate the risk factors and influence of surgical site wound infections in neonates undergoing surgery. Surgical site wound infections had significantly higher mortality with OR value 2.03 at 95% CI 1.40-2.95 with P-value <0.001, the longer length of hospital stay (MD, 31.88; 95% CI, 18.17-45.59, P < 0.001), and lower birthweight of neonates (MD, -0.30; 95% CI, -0.53 to -0.07, P = 0.01) compared with neonates with no surgical site wound infections undergoing surgery. However, no remarkable change was observed with surgical site wound infections in the gestational age at birth of neonates (MD, -0.70; 95% CI, -1.46 to 0.05, P = 0.07), and the preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis (OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.57-2.87, P = 0.55) compared with no surgical site wound infections for neonates undergoing surgery. Surgical site wound infections had significantly higher mortality, a longer length of hospital stay, and lower birthweight of neonates. However, they had no statistically significant difference in the gestational age at birth of neonates and the preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis compared with no surgical site wound infections for neonates undergoing surgery. Furthermore, evidence is needed to confirm the outcomes.

Conscious sedation compared to general anesthesia for intracranial mechanical thrombectomy: A meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Endovascular therapy is the standard of care for severe acute ischemic stroke caused by large-vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation, but there is a debate on the optimal anesthetic approach during this therapy. Meta-analyses of observational studies suggest that general anesthesia increases disability and death compared with conscious sedation However, their results are conflicting. This meta-analysis study was performed to assess the relationship between the effects of general anesthesia compared to conscious sedation during endovascular therapy for acute ischemic stroke.

METHODS

Through a systematic literature search up to August 2020, 18 studies included 4,802 subjects at baseline with endovascular therapy for acute ischemic stroke and reported a total of 1,711 subjects using general anesthesia and 1,961 subjects using conscious sedation were found. They recorded relationships between the effects of general anesthesia compared to conscious sedation during endovascular therapy for acute ischemic stroke. Odds ratio (OR) or Mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated between the effect of general anesthesia compared to conscious sedation during endovascular therapy for acute ischemic stroke using the dichotomous or contentious methods with a random or fixed-effect model.

RESULTS

No significant difference were found between general anesthesia and conscious sedation during the endovascular therapy for acute ischemic stroke in functional independence at 90 days (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.44-1.40, p = 40); successful recanalization at 24 hr (OR, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.62-2.41, p = 55); mortality at 90 days (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.83-2.24, p = .22); interventional complication (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.76-2.02, p = .40); symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.41-0.99, p = .05); aspiration pneumonia (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.58-1.58, p = .87); and National Institute of Health Stroke Scale score after 24 hr (MD, 0.38; 95% CI, -1.15-1.91, p = .62); with relative relationship favoring general anesthesia only in decreasing the symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage.

CONCLUSIONS

General anesthesia has no independent relationship compared to conscious sedation during the endovascular therapy for acute ischemic stroke with a relative relationship favoring general anesthesia only in decreasing the symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. This relationship encouraged us to recommend either anesthetic strategy during the endovascular therapy for acute ischemic stroke with no possible fear of higher complication.

Ginseng Consumption Possible Effect on Liver Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Ginseng is associated to the reduction of the risk of liver-cancer and some time is used as adjuvant therapy to treat liver-cancer, but its outcome remains uncertain. Hence, the present study aimed to determine the association between Ginseng consumption and liver-cancer.

METHODS

By a systematic-literature search up to Decamber-2019, 9-studies included 13,766 subjects, 9235 Ginseng consumer. Odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was determined comparing Ginseng consumption and liver-cancer relationship using the dichotomous method with a fixed-effect or random-effect models.

RESULTS

Subjects consuming Ginseng had a significantly lower risk of developing liver-cancer than those not consuming Ginseng (OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.40-0.52, p < 0.001). Also, there was a significant relationship between Ginseng consumption as adjuvant-therapy and disease control rate (OR, 4.47; 95% CI, 2.41-8.28, p < 0.001), Karnofsky Performance Scale (OR, 4.31; 95% CI, 1.80-10.36, p = 0.001), response to chemotherapy rate (OR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.05-3.02, p = 0.03) and decline of leukocyte count (OR, 0.17; 95% CI, 0.07-0.42, p < 0.001). However, there was no significant effect, but relatively favoring Ginseng consumption, between Ginseng consumption as adjuvant-therapy and one year survival rate (OR, 1.48; 95% CI, 0.78-2.81, p = 0.23), two year survival rate (OR, 1.69; 95% CI, 0.87-3.25, p = 0.12) gastrointestinal dysfunction (OR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.17-1.79, p = 0.32), and the hepatic dysfunction (OR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.59-2.22, p = 0.68).

CONCLUSIONS

Ginseng may have an independent relationship with reducing liver-cancer incidence when administrated to healthy subjects as a supplement and with reducing cancer-chemotherapy related outcomes risk when administrated with chemotherapy as adjuvant therapy.

Evaluation of Disposable and Traditional Accessory Devices for Use With a Pressurized Metered-Dose Inhaler

BACKGROUND

The use of accessory devices with pressurized metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs) enhances aerosol delivery and helps overcome any lack of patient coordination when using the pMDI. The use of accessory devices could be influenced by the efficacy, availability, and cost of these devices. The aim of this study was to compare drug delivery with the pMDI alone and with non-antistatic and antistatic accessory devices.

METHODS

The total emitted dose and aerodynamic characterization of salbutamol particles were measured for the pMDI alone and for the pMDI combined with 4 different accessory devices: a homemade spacer, the Dolphin spacer, the DispozABLE paper spacer, and the AeroChamber Plus valved holding chamber. Aerodynamic characterization was analyzed with an Andersen cascade impactor at an inhalation flow of 28.3 L/min, and drug deposition was measured with high-performance liquid chromatography.

RESULTS

The mean ± SD total emitted dose from the pMDI alone, 155.2 ± 20.5 μg, was the greatest of all modalities, and the difference was significant (P < .001). The homemade and Dolphin spacers had the highest mean ± SD deposited amounts of salbutamol remaining on their walls (ie, 124.1 ± 11.1 μg and 131.5 ± 11.8 μg, respectively). The mean ± SD total emitted doses with the AeroChamber Plus valved holding chamber (61.9 ± 8.9 μg) and the DispozABLE paper spacer (76.4 ± 8.6 μg) were significantly higher than the emitted doses with the other devices. The mean ± SD fine-particle doses emitted with the AeroChamber plus valved holding chamber (51.4 ± 4.7 μg) and the DispozABLE paper spacer (39.7 ± 5.6 μg) were significantly higher than those with the other devices. The AeroChamber Plus valved holding chamber had the lowest mass median aerodynamic diameter (MMAD) values, but there were no statistically significant differences in MMAD between any of the combinations of pMDI and accessory device.

CONCLUSIONS

The valved holding chamber and the paper spacer had better aerodynamic characteristics than the other devices tested. We consider the antistatic devices to be the optimum devices for aerosol delivery due to their high efficacy compared to non-antistatic devices.

Impact of Advanced Patient Counseling Using a Training Device and Smartphone Application on Asthma Control

BACKGROUND

Pressurized metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs) are among the most commonly used aerosol delivery devices. Poor lung deposition from a pMDI is often a result of incorrect inhalation technique. The aim of this study was to compare the impact of combining a newly released training device with a smartphone application (advanced counseling) in asthma control to the impact of traditional verbal training.

METHODS

A total of 371 subjects with asthma were divided into 2 groups: advanced counseling (n = 187) and verbal counseling (n = 184). Both groups had 3 visits, each meeting being a month apart. At each visit, lung function (ie, FEV₁, ratio of FEV₁ to forced vital capacity [FEV₁/FVC], and peak expiratory flow) were measured, an asthma control test was given, and subjects were trained in the correct inhalation technique. Inhalation flow through the pMDI was also recorded at each visit because the correct pMDI technique requires an inspiratory flow of < 60 L/min.

RESULTS

In the advanced counseling group, lung function significantly improved after both the first and the second visit (P < .001), whereas in the verbal group, lung function improved significantly only after the second visit (P < .001). Although the inspiratory flow through the pMDI improved significantly in both groups, it was closest to the target range in the advanced counseling group. In addition, more subjects in the advanced counseling group had monthly increases of ≥ 3 points in their asthma control test scores compared to the verbal counseling group.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of a training device with a smartphone application in conjunction with traditional verbal counseling in pMDI technique resulted in significant improvements in asthma control compared to traditional verbal counseling in pMDI technique alone.

Aerosol Delivery Through an Adult High-Flow Nasal Cannula Circuit Using Low-Flow Oxygen

BACKGROUND

There has been a growing trend toward delivering aerosolized medications using high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC). In some cases, patients who do not require high-flow oxygen to maintain adequate oxygenation may benefit from aerosol delivery while receiving low-flow oxygen via HFNC. The objective of this study was to quantify and compare the relative pulmonary and systemic delivery of salbutamol, with 2 different nebulizers, in patients with COPD receiving low-flow oxygen therapy through an HFNC.

METHODS

Subjects were randomized to receive study doses of 5 mg salbutamol nebulized by either a jet nebulizer or a vibrating mesh nebulizer with a T-piece or spacer on days 1, 3, and 5 of admission. Subjects using the large spacer also received 2 puffs (100 μg each) of salbutamol via a pressurized metered-dose-inhaler prior to the nebulizer dose. Urinary salbutamol excretion 30 min post-inhalation and pooled samples of urinary salbutamol excretion up to 24 h post-inhalation were measured. On day 2, ex vivo studies were performed with salbutamol collected on filters placed between the HFNC and nebulizer, with drug eluted from filters and analyzed to determine inhaled dose.

RESULTS

Twelve subjects (6 females), age 51.3 ± 11.2 y, were included. The vibrating mesh nebulizer demonstrated higher urinary salbutamol excretion at 30 min and 24 h post-inhalation compared to a jet nebulizer (P = .001 and P = .02, respectively). No significant difference was found between the T-piece and large-spacer configurations, even though the spacer provided a significantly larger emitted aerosol dose at the opening of the HFNC (P = .002).

CONCLUSIONS

Aerosolized medication could be efficiently combined with low-flow oxygen, via HFNC, in COPD subjects without the need to interrupt the gas supply. The vibrating mesh nebulizer delivered larger doses to subjects compared to the jet nebulizer. However, there was no benefit of using the large spacer with HFNC in low-flow delivery, because the small inner diameter of the HFNC does not allow larger aerosol droplet sizes (preserved by the spacer) to reach the subject.

Effects of Fill Volume and Humidification on Aerosol Delivery During Single-Limb Noninvasive Ventilation

BACKGROUND

The aim of this work was to determine the effect of fill volume and humidification change on aerosol delivery during single-limb noninvasive ventilation (NIV).

METHODS

Four groups were recruited, each consisting of 12 subjects (6 females) with COPD receiving NIV. Groups 1 and 3 received inhaled salbutamol with a vibrating mesh nebulizer, and Groups 2 and 4 received inhaled salbutamol with a jet nebulizer. The in vivo study was carried out on days 1 and 3. In groups 1 and 2, 2 fill-volumes were delivered to each subject; 1 mL 5,000 μg/mL salbutamol respirable solution used as it is or diluted to a total of 2 mL using normal saline. In groups 3 and 4, 1 mL 5,000 μg/mL salbutamol respirable solution diluted to 2 mL total volume using normal saline was delivered to each subject with and without humidification. Unchanged salbutamol in urine at 30 min (USAL0.5) and in pooled urine at 24 h (USAL24) was determined. On day 2, the ex vivo study was carried out on subjects using the same experimental setting with a filter placed proximal to their face mask for collection of total inhaled dose of salbutamol (aerosol emitted).

RESULTS

The vibrating mesh nebulizer delivered higher USAL0.5, USAL24, and aerosol emitted compared to the jet nebulizer at all fill volumes and humidification conditions (P < .001). Increasing fill volume from 1 mL to 2 mL resulted in a significant increase in USAL0.5, USAL24, and aerosol emitted from the jet nebulizer (P < .05) with an insignificant effect on the vibrating mesh nebulizer. A 2-mL fill volume with the jet nebulizer delivered USAL24 and aerosol emitted comparable to those of 1 mL with the vibrating mesh nebulizer with significantly longer nebulization times (P < .001). Humidification had an insignificant effect on aerosol delivery.

CONCLUSIONS

Increasing the fill volume of a jet nebulizer is essential to increase the amount of inhaled medication reaching a subject. In contrast, there is no need to increase fill volumes when using a vibrating mesh nebulizer. There is no need to switch off the humidifier while delivering aerosol through a single-limb NIV circuit.

Performance of Large Spacer Versus Nebulizer T-Piece in Single-Limb Noninvasive Ventilation

BACKGROUND

Predosing patients with COPD with salbutamol by using a pressurized metered-dose-inhaler (pMDI) as a bronchodilator was hypothesized to improve the distribution of the subsequent nebulized dose. This study determined the effect of a pMDI preliminary bronchodilator dose on the aerosol delivered by a mesh nebulizer during single-limb noninvasive ventilation.

METHODS

Twelve subjects with COPD who received noninvasive ventilation were enrolled in a randomized, open-label, urinary pharmacokinetic study. A bi-level ventilator with a dry single-limb circuit and the fixed expiratory port was set in the spontaneous mode, with initial inspiratory and expiratory pressures of 20 and 5 cm H₂O respectively, a 1:3 inspiratory-expiratory ratio, and 15 breaths/min. Salbutamol was administered via a mesh nebulizer with a large spacer or T-piece placed between the fixed-orifice expiratory valve and the oronasal mask. In vivo dosing methods were randomized for days 1, 3, and 5 of the study. On each day, a 1-mL respirable solution that contained 5,000 μg salbutamol was nebulized by using a mesh nebulizer with 3 setting: (1) T-piece, (2) large spacer, and (3) large spacer plus pMDI. Only with the large spacer plus pMDI setting, 2 pMDI doses, which contained 100 μg salbutamol each, were actuated before nebulization. Urine samples were collected at 0.5 h (as an index of pulmonary bioavailability) and pooled up to 24 h after dosing (as an index of systemic absorption). On day 2, ex vivo studies were performed for the 3 setting with salbutamol collected onto filters placed before the mask. The drug was eluted from the filters and analyzed to determine the inhaled dose.

RESULTS

A large spacer plus pMDI showed a trend to deliver a higher fraction (percentage of nominal dose) of both ex vivo filters and 0.5-h urinary salbutamol. The 0.5-h urinary salbutamol excreted with a large spacer plus pMDI (1.99%) was larger than with the T-piece (1.73%) and large spacer (1.78%). This trend did not extend to the 24-h levels, in which bioavailability with the large spacer plus pMDI (49.9%) was lower than with the T-piece (52.8%) and with the large spacer (54.3%). However, no differences were significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The T-piece and large spacer were equally efficient for salbutamol delivery from the mesh nebulizer in patients with COPD and on single-limb noninvasive ventilation. Adding a preliminary bronchodilator dose by pMDI prenebulization showed a trend toward greater pulmonary bioavailability of nebulized salbutamol and may be worth considering to maximize delivery of salbutamol to patients who are severely ill.