Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Am J Emerg Med ; 60: 88-95, 2022 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2035662

ABSTRACT

This article highlights the most relevant emergency medicine (EM) pharmacotherapy publications indexed in 2021. A modified Delphi approach was utilized for selected journals to identify the most impactful EM pharmacotherapy studies via the GRADE system. After review of journal table of contents GRADE 1A and 1B articles were reviewed by authors. Twenty articles, 2 guidelines, 2 position papers, and 2 meta-analysis were selected for full summary. Articles included in this review highlight acute agitation management, acute appendicitis treatment, sexually transmitted infection updates, optimizing sepsis management and treatment, updates for the ideal thrombolytic agent in acute ischemic stroke and endovascular therapy candidates, indications for tranexamic acid, calicium for out of hospital cardiac arrest, optimial inotrope for cardiogenic shock, awareness during rapid sequence intubation paralysis, comparison of propofol or dexmedetomidine for sedation, treatment of cannabis hyperemsis syndrome, and prophylactic use of diphenhydramine to reduce neuroleptic side effects. Selected articles are summarized to include design, results, limitations, conclusions and impact.


Subject(s)
Antipsychotic Agents , Dexmedetomidine , Emergency Medicine , Ischemic Stroke , Propofol , Tranexamic Acid , Diphenhydramine , Fibrinolytic Agents , Humans
2.
Adv Ther ; 39(1): 178-192, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1813867

ABSTRACT

Since 1955, the only available H1 antihistamines for intravenous administration have been first-generation formulations and, of those, only intravenously administered (IV) diphenhydramine is still approved in the USA. Orally administered cetirizine hydrochloride, a second-generation H1 antihistamine, has been safely used over-the-counter for many years. In 2019, IV cetirizine was approved for the treatment of acute urticaria. In light of this approval, this narrative review discusses the changing landscape of IV antihistamines for the treatment of histamine-mediated conditions. Specifically, IV antihistamines will be discussed as a treatment option for acute urticaria and angioedema, as premedication to prevent infusion reactions related to anticancer agents and other biologics, and as an adjunct treatment for anaphylaxis and other allergic reactions. Before the development of IV cetirizine, randomized controlled trials of IV antihistamines for these indications were lacking. Three randomized controlled trials have been conducted with IV cetirizine versus IV diphenhydramine in the ambulatory care setting. A phase 3 trial of IV cetirizine 10 mg versus IV diphenhydramine 50 mg was conducted in 262 adults who presented to the urgent care/emergency department with acute urticaria requiring antihistamines. For the primary efficacy endpoint, defined as change from baseline in a 2-h patient-rated pruritus score, non-inferiority of IV cetirizine to IV diphenhydramine was demonstrated (score - 1.6 vs - 1.5, respectively; 95% CI - 0.1, 0.3). Compared with IV diphenhydramine, IV cetirizine demonstrated fewer adverse effects including less sedation, a significantly shorter length of stay in the treatment center, and fewer returns to the treatment center at 24 and 48 h. Similar findings were demonstrated in another phase 2 acute urticaria trial and in a phase 2 trial assessing IV cetirizine for pretreatment for infusion reactions in the oncology/immunology setting. IV cetirizine is associated with similar patient outcomes, fewer adverse effects, and increased treatment center efficiency than IV diphenhydramine.


Subject(s)
Cetirizine , Urticaria , Administration, Intravenous , Adult , Cetirizine/adverse effects , Diphenhydramine/adverse effects , Histamine H1 Antagonists/adverse effects , Humans , Urticaria/chemically induced , Urticaria/drug therapy
4.
BMJ Case Rep ; 13(9)2020 Sep 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-760235

ABSTRACT

SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for COVID-19, binds to the ACE2 receptors. ACE2 is thought to counterbalance ACE in the renin-angiotensin system. While presently it is advised that patients should continue to use ACE inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers, questions still remain as to whether adverse effects are potentiated by the virus. Here, we report a case of a 57-year-old man, unknowingly with COVID-19, who presented to the emergency department with tongue swelling, shortness of breath and difficulty in speaking following 4 months taking benazepril, an ACE inhibitor. Finally, we also describe possible pathways that exist for SARS-CoV-2 to interact with the mechanism behind angioedema.


Subject(s)
Angioedema/chemically induced , Angioedema/complications , Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors/adverse effects , Benzazepines/adverse effects , Betacoronavirus , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Angioedema/drug therapy , Anti-Allergic Agents/therapeutic use , COVID-19 , Diagnosis, Differential , Diphenhydramine/therapeutic use , Famotidine/therapeutic use , Histamine H2 Antagonists/therapeutic use , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Tranexamic Acid/therapeutic use
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL