ABSTRACT
Objective: The aim of this study is to compare the adherence to the guidelines in patients presenting with hyponatremia defined as a sodium (Na) level ⩽120 mEq/L, treated with 3% hypertonic saline or normal saline. The comparison included 3% hypertonic saline use, safe serum sodium increases within 24 and 48 h, frequency of hyponatremia-related complications, and length of stay. Methods: This retrospective observational study enrolled 122 patients with serum sodium ⩽120 mEq/L admitted to the Internal Medicine Department, King Abdulaziz Medical City, National Guard-Health Affairs (NGHA), Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, from January 2016 to December 2017. The patients were treated with either 3% hypertonic saline or normal saline. Results: Of the 122 patients, 105 (83.3%) received normal saline, and 17 (13.5%) received hypertonic saline. In the normal saline group, the mean serum sodium increase at 24 h was lower (6.60 ± 4.75) compared to the hypertonic saline group (9.24 ± 5.04). The length of stay was longer in the normal saline group (10.35 ± 13.90) compared to the hypertonic saline group (4.35 ± 3.39). A small proportion (8.7%) of the normal saline group had a serum sodium increase >12 mg/dL at 24 h compared to 29.4% for the hypertonic saline group, and the difference was statistically significant (p value = 0.013). Almost one-third of the sample (36%) presented with complications, the majority (77.3%, n = 34) had a serum sodium of ⩽115 mg/dL, and 22.7% (n = 10) with a serum sodium of 116-120 mg/dL (p value = 0.041). Conclusion: Despite the strong recommendation for 3% hypertonic saline use in severe hyponatremia, many practitioners still use normal saline, even in patients with serum sodium ⩽120 mEq/L. Normal saline showed some efficacy in managing hyponatremia in asymptomatic cases; however, severe cases may have a delayed correction, hyponatremia-related complications, and an extended length of stay.
ABSTRACT
Low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs) are considered the standard of care for the treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) associated with cancer. We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with cancer. We systematically searched Medline for potential randomized-control clinical trials (RCTs) and post-hoc analyses. For each study, data on recurrent VTE, major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding (CRNMB), and major bleeding (MB) were extracted. Initially, a total of 1395 citations were identified. Eight studies met our eligibility criteria. The utilization of DOACs in patients with cancer showed a statistically significant reduction in the risk of VTE recurrence compared to LMWH or warfarin (RR = 0.64; 95% CI 0.46-0.88). Similar rates of major or CRNMB were observed between DOACs and LMWH or warfarin (RR = 1.00; 95% CI 0.75-1.33). There was no significant difference in the rate of MB between DOACs and LMWH or warfarin (RR = 1.31; 95% CI 0.71-2.44). Our results suggest that DOACs might reduce the incidence of VTE recurrence in patients with cancer without putting them at high risk for MB/CRNMB or MB. Our findings were mainly driven by the results of the Hokusai VTE Cancer trial. Given the level of investigated evidence, our findings should be interpreted with caution since the majority of the data were originated from sub-group analyses of large (RCTs). Future studies that are adequately powered are warranted to assess efficacy and safety data of DOACs for the treatment of VTE in patients with different types of cancer.
