ABSTRACT
There is a lack of evidence on multiple levels for appropriate recognition, management, and outcome results in Type A aortic dissection management in the United Kingdom. A huge amount of retrospective data exists in the literature which provides nonmeaningful prospect to a service that meets the current era. Electronic searches were performed on PubMed and Cochrane databases with no limits placed on dates. Search terms were charted to MeSH terms and combined using Boolean operations, and also used as key words. Papers were selected on the basis of title and abstract. The reference lists of selected papers were reviewed to identify any relevant papers that might be suitable for inclusion in the study. Papers were selected based on providing primary end points of death, rupture, or dissection and/or information regarding aortic aneurysm growth. Papers were not excluded based on patient population age. We demonstrated the lack of evidence for quality outcomes in type A aortic dissection in the United Kingdom. This highlighted the unwarranted variation seen in this entity and the caveats needed to improve structuring of type A aortic dissection from early identification in emergency departments to arrival at destination site for optimum intervention. Emergency services should be restructured to meet the immediate affirmation of diagnosis with gold standard imaging modality available. Management of this dire disease should be instituted at local hospitals prior to transportation and results should be audited regularly to improve quality outcomes. Attempts should be made to create local area networks to improve the efficiencies and outcomes of the service and transfer to centers with concentration of expertise. Recognition of regional networks by the UK Government Care Quality Commission should in part based on cumulative evidence sought after from virtual multidisciplinary teams. Unwarranted variation is an avenue that requires to be addressed to rise with service provision that meets our patients aspiration and be of current evidence in the 21st era.
Subject(s)
Aortic Aneurysm, Thoracic/surgery , Aortic Dissection/surgery , Centralized Hospital Services/organization & administration , Delivery of Health Care, Integrated/organization & administration , State Medicine/organization & administration , Vascular Surgical Procedures , Aortic Dissection/diagnostic imaging , Aortic Dissection/mortality , Aortic Aneurysm, Thoracic/diagnostic imaging , Aortic Aneurysm, Thoracic/mortality , Humans , Quality Improvement/organization & administration , Quality Indicators, Health Care/organization & administration , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome , United Kingdom/epidemiology , Vascular Surgical Procedures/adverse effects , Vascular Surgical Procedures/mortalityABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The emergence of novel psychoactive substances (NPS), particularly synthetic cannabinoid receptor agonists (SCRA), has involved hundreds of potentially harmful chemicals in a highly dynamic international market challenging users', clinicians', and regulators' understanding of what circulating substances are causing harm. We describe a toxicovigilance system for NPS that predicted the UK emergence and identified the clinical toxicity caused by novel indole and indazole carboxylate SCRA. METHODS: To assist early accurate identification, we synthesized 5 examples of commercially unavailable indole and indazole carboxylate SCRA (FUB-NPB-22, 5F-NPB-22, 5F-SDB-005, FUB-PB-22, NM-2201). We analyzed plasma and urine samples from 160 patients presenting to emergency departments with severe toxicity after suspected NPS use during 2015 to 2016 for these and other NPS using data-independent LC-MS/MS. RESULTS: We successfully synthesized 5 carboxylate SCRAs using established synthetic and analytical chemistry methodologies. We identified at least 1 SCRA in samples from 49 patients, including an indole or indazole carboxylate SCRA in 17 (35%), specifically 5F-PB-22 (14%), FUB PB-22 (6%), BB-22 (2%), 5F NPB-22 (20%), FUB NPB-22 (2%), and 5F-SDB-005 (4%). In these 17 patients, there was analytical evidence of other substances in 16. Clinical features included agitation and aggression (82%), reduced consciousness (76%), acidosis (47%), hallucinations and paranoid features (41%), tachycardia (35%), hypertension (29%), raised creatine kinase (24%), and seizures (12%). CONCLUSIONS: This toxicovigilance system predicted the emergence of misuse of indole and indazole carboxylate SCRA, documented associated clinical harms, and notified relevant agencies. Toxicity appears consistent with other SCRA, including mental state disturbances and reduced consciousness.
