Comparative Efficacy of High-Dose Dexamethasone Versus Methylprednisolone in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)-Associated Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: This retrospective (matched paired) clinical trial aimed to compare the efficacy of dexamethasone vs. methylprednisolone at equipotent (high) doses in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). METHODS: A total of 347 patients with moderate and severe COVID-19-associated ARDS were administered either a high (equipotent) dose of dexamethasone (32 mg) or methylprednisolone (180 mg) for a duration of up to 10 days. All participants received the standard of care for critically ill COVID-19 patients. RESULTS: The primary outcomes included length of stay in the ICU, ICU mortality, and discharge from the hospital. Based on the obtained results, a tendency towards more favorable clinical outcomes concerning the length of stay in the ICU (in the group of patients treated with non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIV), p<0.05), ICU mortality, and discharge from the hospital (in the group of patients who were intubated, p<0.05) in patients receiving the high dose of dexamethasone compared to those receiving methylprednisolone was observed. CONCLUSION: It appears that severe cases of COVID-19, especially intubated ones, treated with high doses of dexamethasone have a more favorable clinical outcome than the use of equipotent doses of methylprednisolone. However, larger multicenter studies are needed to validate our observations.

Evaluating the Safety and Efficacy of Naloxegol in Critically Ill Opioid-Induced Constipation Patients.

Background Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) has become more common in the intensive care unit (ICU) due to increased opioid utilization. Traditional laxatives often prove ineffective against OIC, leading to the increased utilization of naloxegol. However, further research is needed to confirm naloxegol's effectiveness and safety in critical care. This study aimed to explore the safety and efficacy of this intervention in critically ill OIC patients. Methods A single-center retrospective study was conducted on 353 patients who received one or more doses of naloxegol from January 1, 2019, to June 30, 2020, for OIC at a tertiary care center. The primary endpoint of this study was to evaluate serious adverse events such as reduced analgesic effect, gastrointestinal perforation, seizure, acute myocardial infarction (AMI), or ventricular arrhythmias using Naranjo Scale in critically ill patients. The secondary goal was to assess the efficacy of naloxegol, measured by the time of the first bowel movement. Results The average duration of naloxegol use was three days, with the first bowel movement occurring at an average of 11.3 hours. Furthermore, 59.8% of individuals had their first bowel movement within 20 hours of receiving naloxegol. There was a low level of causality between naloxegol use and adverse events such as gastrointestinal perforation, seizures, AMI, cardiovascular mortality, stroke, and ventricular arrhythmia. Additionally, reduction in analgesia showed no strong relationship with naloxegol use indicated by the Naranjo Scale assessment. Conclusion Naloxegol showed promising safety and efficacy profiles in treating OIC amongst critically ill patients, though our findings require further validation through prospective studies. This research paves the way for further investigation into naloxegol's role in OIC management, emphasizing the necessity of personalized treatment strategies in critical care settings.