Citations

Background Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is associated with frequent recurrences. The role of probiotics in preventing CDI remains unclear despite patients frequently using them. Methods We performed a systematic-review and meta-analysis to evaluate the role of Saccharomyces boulardii, a yeast probiotic, in preventing primary or recurrent CDI in patients on systemic antimicrobial therapy. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science up to December 2021 to identify studies (case-control, cohort, or clinical trial studies) reporting the use of systemic antimicrobials with or without S. boulardii and providing information on primary or recurrent CDI. Pooled odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using a random effects model. Results Eight studies (six randomized control trials and two cohort studies) were included. Six studies with 9,712 patients evaluated primary prevention. The rate of CDI in patients who received S. boulardii was 0.73% (44/5977) compared to 1.09% (41/3735) in the control group. Meta-analysis showed no difference in the risk of CDI among the two groups (odds ratio [OR], 0.71; 95%CI, 0.46–1.10; p = 0.124) with no significant heterogeneity (I2 = 0%). In two studies with 292 patients evaluating secondary prevention, the rate of recurrent CDI was 36.73% (54/147) on S. boulardii compared to 46.20% (67/145) in controls, with no significant difference (p = 0.19). Subgroup analysis of studies using S. boulardii (250 mg twice daily) showed no difference in the CDI risk with or without S. boulardii. No serious adverse events from S. boulardii were noted. Conclusion The use of S. boulardii appears to have no benefit for preventing either primary or recurrent CDI in patients taking systemic antimicrobials.

Background and objectives: The incidence of morbidity and mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus is substantially correlated with cardiovascular disease and chronic kidney disease. The current guidelines recommend the use of renin-angiotensin system blockers, but recent studies probed into the effects of finerenone to mitigate the risk of cardiorenal events. This meta-analysis was performed to demonstrate the effects of finerenone on cardiorenal events, comprising cardiovascular mortality, heart failure, change in estimated glomerular filtration rate, and serum potassium levels. Methods: After screening with our eligibility criteria, 350 articles were identified with an initial literature search on multiple databases, including PubMed, Science Direct, and Cochrane Central. Seven randomized controlled trials with a total of 15 462 patients (n=8487 in the finerenone group; n=6975 in the control group) were included. Results: Patients receiving finerenone were at a reduced risk for cardiovascular mortality [HR: 0.84 (0.74, 0.95)], heart failure [OR: 0.79 (0.68, 0.92)], decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate by 40% [OR: 0.82 (0.74, 0.91)] and by 57% [OR: 0.70 (0.59, 0.82)]; and a higher incidence of moderate hyperkalemia [OR: 2.25 (1.78, 2.84)]. Conclusion: Finerenone, owing to its better mineralocorticoid affinity, and a much lower risk of adverse effects, promises to be a much better alternative than other renin-angiotensin system blockers available for the treatment of chronic kidney disease patients with type 2 diabetes. Further trials should be conducted to provide more definitive evidence to assess the safety and efficacy of finerenone compared to spironolactone and eplerenone.

Introduction D-dimer levels, which originate from the lysis of cross-linked fibrin, are serially measured during coronavirus disease 2019 illness to rule out hypercoagulability as well as a septic marker. Methods This multicenter retrospective study was carried out in two tertiary care hospitals in Karachi, Pakistan. The study included adult patients admitted with a laboratory-confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 infection, with at least one measured d-dimer within 24 h following admission. Discharged patients were compared with the mortality group for survival analysis. Results The study population of 813 patients had 68.5% males, with a median age of 57.0 years and 14.0 days of illness. The largest d-dimer elevation was between 0.51–2.00 mcg/ml (tertile 2) observed in 332 patients (40.8%), followed by 236 patients (29.2%) having values greater than 5.00 mcg/ml (tertile 4). Within 45 days of hospital stay, 230 patients (28.3%) died, with the majority in the ICU (53.9%). On multivariable logistic regression between d-dimer and mortality, the unadjusted (Model 1) had a higher d-dimer category (tertile 3 and tertile 4) associated with a higher risk of death (OR: 2.15; 95% CI: 1.02–4.54, P=0.044) and (OR: 4.74; 95% CI: 2.38–9.46, P<0.001). Adjustment for age, sex, and BMI (Model 2) yields only tertile 4 being significant (OR: 4.27; 95% CI: 2.06–8.86, P<0.001). Conclusion: Higher d-dimer levels were independently associated with a high risk of mortality. The added value of d-dimer in risk stratifying patients for mortality was not affected by invasive ventilation, ICU stays, length of hospital stays, or comorbidities.

AbstractBackground and ObjectivesSince publishing successful clinical trial results of mRNA coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) vaccines in December 2020, multiple reports have arisen about cardiovascular complications following the mRNA vaccination. This study provides an in‐depth account of various cardiovascular adverse events reported after the mRNA vaccines' first or second dose including pericarditis/myopericarditis, myocarditis, hypotension, hypertension, arrhythmia, cardiogenic shock, stroke, myocardial infarction/STEMI, intracranial hemorrhage, thrombosis (deep vein thrombosis, cerebral venous thrombosis, arterial or venous thrombotic events, portal vein thrombosis, coronary thrombosis, microvascular small bowel thrombosis), and pulmonary embolism.MethodsA systematic review of original studies reporting confirmed cardiovascular manifestations post‐mRNA COVID‐19 vaccination was performed. Following the PRISMA guidelines, electronic databases (PubMed, PMC NCBI, and Cochrane Library) were searched until January 2022. Baseline characteristics of patients and disease outcomes were extracted from relevant studies.ResultsA total of 81 articles analyzed confirmed cardiovascular complications post‐COVID‐19 mRNA vaccines in 17,636 individuals and reported 284 deaths with any mRNA vaccine. Of 17,636 cardiovascular events with any mRNA vaccine, 17,192 were observed with the BNT162b2 (Pfizer−BioNTech) vaccine, 444 events with mRNA‐1273 (Moderna). Thrombosis was frequently reported with any mRNA vaccine (n = 13,936), followed by stroke (n = 758), myocarditis (n = 511), myocardial infarction (n = 377), pulmonary embolism (n = 301), and arrhythmia (n = 254). Stratifying the results by vaccine type showed that thrombosis (80.8%) was common in the BNT162b2 cohort, while stroke (39.9%) was common with mRNA‐1273 for any dose. The time between the vaccination dosage and the first symptom onset averaged 5.6 and 4.8 days with the mRNA‐1273 vaccine and BNT162b2, respectively. The mRNA‐1273 cohort reported 56 deaths compared to the 228 with BNT162b2, while the rest were discharged or transferred to the ICU.ConclusionAvailable literature includes more studies with the BNT162b2 vaccine than mRNA‐1273. Future studies must report mortality and adverse cardiovascular events by vaccine types.

Abstract Background Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is the most common nosocomial infection and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Purpose We aimed to identify the burden of CDI in patients undergoing common gastrointestinal (GI) surgical procedures in a national inpatient cohort, as GI surgeries have been thought to be a risk factor for CDI. Method We used the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database from Unites States for the years 2016-2019 for this study. We included adult patients (age ≥ 18), who underwent common GI surgeries (identified using ICD-10 procedure codes), and among them identified patients with diagnosis of CDI. Outcomes assessed included risk of CDI among different surgeries, inpatient mortality, length of stay (LOS) and cost of hospitalization using regression analyses Result(s) From 2016 to 2019, an estimated total of 4,438,778 patients were hospitalized and underwent any of the studied GI surgeries. CDI was reported in 32,180 admissions (0.72%). Median age for CDI was higher than non-CDI patients (66 vs 56, p&lt;0.001). Incidence of CDI was 2.5 times higher in patients admitted emergently compared to elective admissions (1.00% vs 0.40%, p&lt;0.0001). Among all surgeries, the incidence of CDI was the highest for small bowel resection at 2.1% followed by partial esophagectomy at 1.6% and partial colectomy at 1.4%. Logistic regression analysis showed the patients undergoing esophagectomy had the highest risk with adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR) of 2.48, (95% CI 2.01 – 3.07, p&lt;0.0001), followed by pancreatectomy with aOR 2.03 (95% CI 1.91 – 2.16, p&lt;0.0001). Overall, surgical patients with CDI had a significantly higher in-patient mortality compared to non-CDI patients (8.2% vs 1.4%, p&lt;0.0001). Logistic regression analysis showed an increased risk of inpatient mortality with CDI, with aOR 1.36, 95% CI 1.30 – 1.42, p&lt;0.0001. Median LOS for surgical patients with CDI was higher than non-CDI patients (14 days vs 3 days, p&lt;0.0001). The linear regression analysis for length of stay showed that among patients undergoing surgical procedures, CDI was associated with an increased LOS with beta of 8.39 days ± SE 0.04 (95% CI 8.31 – 8.46, p&lt;0.0001). The mean cost of hospitalization for surgical patients with CDI was higher than non-CDI patients ($90,590 vs $31,702, p&lt;0.0001) after adjusting for inflation over the four-year period. The linear regression analysis showed that CDI was associated with an increased cost of hospitalization with a beta of $25,343 ± SE 166 (95% CI 25,017 – 25,670, p&lt;0.0001). Conclusion(s) CDI among GI surgeries leads to increase in inpatient mortality, length of stay and cost of hospitalization. Although the rate of CDI is showing a downwards trend, its impact on these outcome measures makes it an important complication to prevent and promptly treat in these surgical patients. Please acknowledge all funding agencies by checking the applicable boxes below None Disclosure of Interest None Declared

AbstractBackgroundThe menstrual cycle in women is the main indicator of their reproductive health which is affected by the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic. This review aims to summarize the effects of the COVID‐19 infection and the global pandemic on the menstrual health of women.MethodsThe literature search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane library, and Google Scholar using keywords “COVID‐19,” “Menstrual Cycle,” “Menstrual Cycle Irregularities,” “Amenorrhea,” “Polymenorrhea,” and “Dysmenorrhea.” The articles were selected according to the following inclusion criteria: (i) cross‐sectional studies, (ii) cohort studies, (iii) surveys, and (iv) other observational studies observing the effects of SARS‐CoV‐2 infection or COVID‐19 pandemic on menstrual health of women. Exclusion criteria included: case reports, gray literature, and website articles regarding menstrual health.ResultsA total of 30,510 articles were shortlisted after a comprehensive search. Sixteen articles were included out of which 13 studies investigated the effects of the COVID‐19 pandemic on the menstrual cycle while 3 evaluated the possible effects of COVID‐19 infection on the menstrual health of women. Menstrual disorders or irregularities were a more common finding during the pandemic as compared to before (p = 0.008). Women affected by pandemic‐related stress were more prone to changes in the duration of their menses (p = 0.0008), reported heavier bleeding (p = 0.028), and increased incidence of painful periods (p < 0.0001). COVID‐19 infected women also reported changes in their menstrual cycle including irregular menstruation, increased symptoms of premenstrual syndrome, and infrequent menstruation.ConclusionsWomen suffering from COVID‐19 infection or pandemic‐associated stress and anxiety were more likely to experience irregular menstruation, dysmenorrhea, amenorrhea, and other menstrual abnormalities compared to those who were less exposed.