Yarrarapu, Siva Naga S

Background: Acute heart failure affects ~9% of patients with hematological malignancies. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of acute heart failure on in-hospital mortality among patients with hematological malignancies and to identify independent predictors of mortality in this population. Methods: The National Inpatient Sample (2016–2021) was queried for adults (⩾18 years of age) with hematological malignancies and those who experienced in-hospital mortality. Among these, we identified patients who were hospitalized with a diagnosis of acute heart failure. Univariate analysis and multivariate regression were employed to analyze the mortality risk. A p ⩽ 0.05 was considered significant. Results: Among 40,246 patients with hematological malignancies who died in the hospital, the univariate analysis showed a higher in-hospital mortality in the acute heart failure cohort compared to the non-acute heart failure group (8.08% versus 4.52%, p < 0.001). However, after adjusting for sociodemographic factors and comorbidities, acute heart failure was associated with a lower risk of in-hospital mortality (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.84–0.9, p < 0.001). Predictors of mortality in the acute heart failure cohort were age >60 years, hematopoietic stem cell transplant, severe sepsis, arrhythmias, infective endocarditis, bleeding from any source, acute respiratory failure, hepatic dysfunction, metabolic encephalopathy, and invasive ventilation (all p < 0.01). On subgroup analysis, acute myeloid leukemia, chronic myeloid leukemia, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, and multiple myeloma had a higher in-hospital mortality in the acute heart failure cohort compared to the non-acute heart failure group ( p < 0.001). Conclusion: Acute heart failure in patients with hematological malignancies was associated with poor outcomes in the presence of severe sepsis, organ dysfunction, and the need for mechanical ventilation. Close monitoring and a multidisciplinary team approach are recommended to optimize the treatment plan for this population.

The application of cryotherapy in the extraction of airway blood clots has gained increased precedence over Fogarty catheter and biopsy forceps. The cryoprobe, passed through a flexible bronchoscope, adheres and aids in the removal of foreign body through cryoadhesion within minutes. Besides blood clots, this method was found to be extremely efficient in removing different kinds of foreign bodies including food particles like peanuts, pills, and inspissated mucus.

COVID-19 infection in the pediatric population usually leads to a mild illness; however, a rare but serious complication of MIS-C has been seen in children. MIS-C usually presents 2–4 weeks after COVID-19 infection or exposure, and rare reports have been documented in neonates. Vaccinations for COVID-19 have been approved for children aged 6 months and above in the United States, and recent reports suggest significantly low prevalence and risk of complications of Multi-organ Inflammatory Syndrome (MIS-C) in vaccinated children compared to unvaccinated children. Vaccinations for COVID-19 are safe and recommended during pregnancy and prevent severe maternal morbidity and adverse birth outcomes. Evidence from other vaccine-preventable diseases suggests that through passive transplacental antibody transfer, maternal vaccinations are protective against infections in infants during the first 6 months of life. Various studies have demonstrated that maternal COVID-19 vaccination is associated with the presence of anti-spike protein antibodies in infants, persisting even at 6 months of age. Further, completion of a 2-dose primary mRNA COVID-19 vaccination series during pregnancy is associated with reduced risk for COVID-19–associated hospitalization among infants aged 6 months or less. Therefore, it can be hypothesized that maternal COVID-19 vaccination can reduce the risk of and severity of MIS-C in infants. In this article, we review the literature to support this hypothesis.

IMPORTANCE: Aggressive fluid resuscitation remains a cornerstone of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) guidelines, but there is growing controversy regarding the recommended 30 mL/kg IV fluid dosage. It is contended that, in selected patients, this volume confers an increased risk of volume overload without either concomitant benefit or strong evidence in support of the recommended IV fluid dosage. OBJECTIVES: Assessment of practice patterns and their impact on patient outcomes following the surviving sepsis guidelines for fluid resuscitation. DESIGN: Large, multisite retrospective cohort study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The retrospective study included all adult patients who presented to the emergency department at one of 19 different Mayo Clinic sites throughout the Midwest, Southeast, and Southwest from August 2018 to November 2020 with suspected sepsis. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Eight-thousand four-hundred fourteen patients suspected to have sepsis were assessed regarding fluid resuscitation and outcomes among patients receiving 30 mL/kg IV fluid dosing compared with patients who did not. Patient demographics and clinical information were collected via electronic health records. Patients were divided into two cohorts: those who received 0–29.9 mL/kg of IV fluid and those who received 30.0+ mL/kg of IV fluid. Statistical analyses were performed to evaluate the impact of fluid dose on in-hospital death, 30-day mortality, ICU admission after diagnosis, dialysis initiation after diagnosis, ventilator use, vasopressor use, as well as ICU and hospital length of stay. RESULTS: We observed lower in-hospital mortality and 30-day mortality risk in the 30+ mL/kg dosing group. Increased fluid dosage did, however, carry a much greater chance of ICU admission. Most patients (72% after propensity score weighting) in our population received less than 30 mL/kg fluid (based on ideal body weight). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: IV fluid dosing for sepsis resuscitation greater than 30 mL/kg was associated with decreased risk of in-hospital mortality, 30-day mortality, and reduced risk of requiring mechanical ventilation. Our data does ultimately seem to support the SSC recommendation.

Background: Ketamine, a dissociative anesthetic, induces improvement in depressive symptoms by antagonizing glutaminergic NMDA receptors. Ketamine has been used previously in outpatient setting for treatment-resistant depression, but we showcase its utility in depression management at the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Research Question: Can ketamine be used for depression treatment in ICU patients? Study Design and Methods: A retrospective chart review of ICU patients was done at a tertiary center from 2018 to 2021, to assess the ketamine usage. Among the patients reviewed, ketamine was used for depression in 12, and for analgesia & sedation in 2322 patients. Ketamine was administered in doses of 0.5mg/kg & 0.75mg/kg for depression. Each course consisted of 3 doses of ketamine administered over 3 days, and 7 in 12 patients received a single course of ketamine. The rest received 3–4 courses 1 week apart. Results: Ketamine was found to improve mood and affect in most of the patients with depression. 11 in 12 patients had a positive response with better sleep. It has a major advantage over conventional anti-depressants since it takes only a few hours to induce clinical improvement. Patients who were observably withdrawn from care team and family, were administered ketamine. Conclusion: A major drawback of ketamine is that the duration of clinical improvement is short, with the response lasting only up to seven days after a single dose. Hence, all the patients in our study were weaned off ketamine with a supporting antidepressant. Ketamine has been documented to cause cardio-neurotoxicity; however, only one patient had worsening lethargy in our study. To conclude, ketamine has a marked benefit in treating depression in the ICU. Although our study was associated with positive outcomes, there is a need for prospective studies with long-term follow-up assessments.

Introduction In the unprecedented era of COVID-19, ongoing research and evolution of evidence has led to ever-changing guidelines for clinical monitoring and therapeutic options. Formulating treatment protocols requires the understanding and application of the evolving research. Objective The primary objective of this study is to present a systematic evidence-based approach to synthesize the necessary data in order to optimize the management of COVID-19. Methods At Mayo Clinic Florida, we developed a multidisciplinary centralized COVID Treatment Review Panel (TRP) of expert pulmonologists, intensivists, infectious disease specialists, anesthesiologists, hematologists, rheumatologists, and hospitalists that in real-time reviews the latest evidence in peer-reviewed journals, the available clinical trials, and help guide the rapid application of therapeutics or interventions to the patient and the bedside provider. Results/Conclusions The multi-disciplinary team approach of synthesizing clinical data and coordinating care is effective in responding to rapidly evolving and changing evidence. Systematic data collection and evidence-based treatment algorithms enable physicians to rapidly translate the current literature to clinical practice, and improve care and outcomes of patients.

Oesophageal cancer is categorised among the most fatal cancers across the world with a mortality ranking of sixth position. Chemotherapy with FOLFOX—a regimen of fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin—has been approved in the treatment of oesophageal cancer owing to its lower toxicity compared with the previous regimens. We report the first case of a patient with oesophageal cancer metastatic to the hyoid presenting with sudden-onset shortness of breath and anterior neck swelling secondary to treatment with FOLFOX-6. CT was notable for subglottic soft-tissue swelling and cystic necrosis of the hyoid bone tumour, and the patient subsequently required placement of a definitive airway via tracheostomy. This case illustrates the importance of anticipating the need for pre-emptive tracheostomy in patients with hyoid bone tumours receiving treatment with FOLFOX.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors have revolutionised cancer therapy in the past decade. Although they have been indicated to treat a diverse range of malignant neoplasms, they are also associated with various immune-related adverse effects. We report the case of a 74-year-old man with a history of urothelial carcinoma who had atezolizumab-induced myocarditis and myositis resulting in acute hypercapnic respiratory failure, despite the discontinuation of atezolizumab and aggressive treatment with corticosteroids. This case highlights the importance of a multidisciplinary approach for early diagnosis and treatment of immune-related adverse events. Physicians must be aware of the risks associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors and have a basic knowledge regarding their management.