RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: No previous literature has compared methadone with oxycodone for intravenous (IV) opioid weaning. OBJECTIVE: To determine if a weaning strategy using enteral methadone or oxycodone results in faster time to IV opioid discontinuation. METHODS: This was a single-center, retrospective, cohort medical record review of mechanically ventilated adults in an intensive care unit (ICU) who received a continuous IV infusion of fentanyl or hydromorphone for ≥72 hours and an enteral weaning strategy using either methadone or oxycodone from January 1, 2020, through December 31, 2021. Differences between groups were controlled for using Cox proportional hazards models. The primary outcome was time to continuous IV opioid discontinuation from the initiation of enteral opioids. Secondary outcomes included the primary endpoint stratified for COVID-19, duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU and hospital length of stay, and safety measures. RESULTS: Ninety-three patients were included, with 36 (38.7%) patients receiving methadone and 57 (61.3%) receiving oxycodone. Patients weaned using methadone received IV opioids significantly longer before the start of weaning (P = 0.04). However, those on methadone had a significantly faster time to discontinuation of IV opioids than those on oxycodone, mean (standard deviation) 104.7 (79.4) versus 158.3 hours (171.2), P = 0.04, and, at any time, were 1.89 times as likely to be weaned from IV opioids (hazard ratio, HR 1.89, 95% confidence interval, CI 1.16-3.07, P = 0.01). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: This was the first study showing enteral methadone was associated with a shorter duration of IV opioids without differences in secondary outcomes compared with oxycodone. Prospective research is necessary to confirm this finding.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), was first identified in Wuhan, China, in December 2019, with subsequent worldwide spread. The first US cases were identified in January 2020. METHODS: To determine if SARS-CoV-2-reactive antibodies were present in sera prior to the first identified case in the United States on 19 January 2020, residual archived samples from 7389 routine blood donations collected by the American Red Cross from 13 December 2019 to 17 January 2020 from donors resident in 9 states (California, Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, and Wisconsin) were tested at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Specimens reactive by pan-immunoglobulin (pan-Ig) enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) against the full spike protein were tested by IgG and IgM ELISAs, microneutralization test, Ortho total Ig S1 ELISA, and receptor-binding domain/ACE2 blocking activity assay. RESULTS: Of the 7389 samples, 106 were reactive by pan-Ig. Of these 106 specimens, 90 were available for further testing. Eighty-four of 90 had neutralizing activity, 1 had S1 binding activity, and 1 had receptor-binding domain/ACE2 blocking activity >50%, suggesting the presence of anti-SARS-CoV-2-reactive antibodies. Donations with reactivity occurred in all 9 states. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that SARS-CoV-2 may have been introduced into the United States prior to 19 January 2020.