Outpatient versus inpatient management of preterm prelabor rupture of membranes: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: To compare neonatal, obstetrical, and maternal outcomes associated with outpatient versus inpatient management of pregnancies with preterm prelabor rupture of membranes (PPROM). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Database and Central Register from January 1, 1990 to July 31, 2023 identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies comparing outpatient with inpatient management for pregnant persons diagnosed with PPROM before 37 weeks' gestation. No language restriction was applied. We applied a random effects model for meta-analysis. Trustworthiness was assessed using recently published guidance and Risk of bias using the RoB 2.0 tool for RCTs and ROBINS-I tool for cohort studies. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence (COE). Outcomes of interest included perinatal mortality, neonatal morbidities, latency and gestational age at delivery, and maternal morbidities. RCTs and cohort studies were analyzed separately. This study was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviewsr: CRD42022295275. RESULTS: From 2825 records, two RCTs and 10 cohort studies involving 1876 patients were included in the review and meta-analysis. Outpatient management protocols varied but generally included brief initial hospitalization, strict eligibility criteria, and surveillance with laboratory and ultrasound investigations. Outpatient management showed lower rates of neonatal respiratory distress syndrome (cohort: RR 0.63 [0.52-0.77, very low COE]), longer latency to delivery (RCT: MD 7.43 days [1.14-13.72 days, moderate COE], cohort: MD 8.78 days [2.29-15.26 days, low COE]), higher gestational age at birth (cohort: MD 7.70 days [2.02-13.38 days, low COE]), lower rates of Apgar scores <7 at 5 min of life (cohort: RR 0.66 [0.50-0.89, very low COE]), and lower rates of histological chorioamnionitis (cohort: RR 0.74 [0.62-0.89, low COE]) without increased risks of adverse neonatal, obstetrical, or maternal outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Meta-analysis of data from RCTs and cohort studies with very low-to-moderate certainty of evidence indicates that further high-quality research is needed to evaluate the safety and potential benefits of outpatient management for selected PPROM cases, given the moderate-to-high risk of bias in the included studies.

Acute diverticulitis: beyond the diagnosis: predictive role of CT in assessing risk of recurrence and clinical implications in non-operative management of acute diverticulitis.

PURPOSE: The aim of the study is to identify CT findings that are predictive of recurrence of acute uncomplicated colonic diverticulitis, to better risk-stratify these patients for whom guidelines recommend a conservative outpatient treatment and to determine the appropriate management with an improvement of health costs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Over the past year, 33 patients enrolled in an outpatient integrated care pathway (PDTA) for uncomplicated acute diverticulitis with 1-year follow-up period, without recurrence, and 33 patients referred to Emergency Department for a recurrent acute diverticulitis were included. Images of admission CT were reviewed by two radiologists and the imaging features were analyzed and compared with Chi-square and Student t tests. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression models were employed to identify parameters that significantly predicted recurrence in 1-year follow-up period and establish cutoff and recurrence-free rates. The maximally selected rank statistics (MSRS) were used to identify the optimal wall thickening cutoff for the prediction of recurrence. RESULTS: Patients with recurrence showed a greater mean parietal thickness compared to the group without recurrence (16 mm vs. 11.5 mm; HR 1.25, p < 0.001) and more evidence of grade 4 of peridiverticular inflammation (40% vs. 12%, p = 0.009, HR 3.44). 12-month recurrence-free rates progressively decrease with increasing thickness and inflammation. In multivariate analysis, only parietal thickness maintained its predictive power with an optimal cutpoint > 15 mm that causes a sixfold increased risk of recurrence (HR 6.22; 95% CI, 3.05-12.67; p < 0.001). Beyond thickness and peridiverticular inflammation, predictive value of early recurrence within 90 days from the 1st episode resulted also an Hinchey Ib on admission CT. CONCLUSIONS: The maximum wall thickening and the grade of peridiverticular inflammation can be considered as predictive factors of recurrence and may be helpful in selecting patients for a tailored treatment to prevent the risk of recurrence.

Outpatient management of obscure gastrointestinal bleeding: A new perspective in high-risk patients.

Mid-gastrointestinal bleeding accounts for approximately 5%-10% of all gastrointestinal bleeding cases, and vascular lesions represent the most frequent cause. The rebleeding rate for these lesions is quite high (about 42%). We hereby recommend that scheduled outpatient management of these patients could reduce the risk of rebleeding episodes.

Resultados de una encuesta nacional sobre el manejo de los pacientes diagnosticados de diverticulitis aguda no complicada / Results of a national survey about the management of patients with acute uncomplicated diverticulitis

Introducción: El manejo de los pacientes diagnosticados de diverticulitis aguda no complicada ha evolucionado en los últimos años, y según diversas guías clínicas internacionales actuales, el tratamiento ambulatorio y sin antibioterapia puede ser utilizado en pacientes seleccionados. El objetivo de este estudio es evaluar la adhesión de los distintos centros nacionales a estas y otras recomendaciones en esta enfermedad. Métodos: Se realizó una encuesta online a nivel nacional que se dio a conocer a través de diversas aplicaciones informáticas y se analizaron estadísticamente los resultados obtenidos. Resultados: Participaron 104 cirujanos, representando 69 centros hospitalarios nacionales. En el 82,6% de los centros, se realiza manejo ambulatorio de los pacientes diagnosticados de diverticulitis aguda no complicada. El 23,2% de los centros tiene implantado un protocolo de tratamiento sin antibioterapia en pacientes seleccionados, mientras que en los centros que no siguen estas recomendaciones, las razones principales son las dificultades logísticas para su desarrollo (49,3%) y la ausencia de evidencia actual para ello (44,8%). Se han encontrado diferencias estadísticamente significativas al comparar la implantación de dichos protocolos entre centros con unidades acreditadas avanzadas y aquellas que no, con mayores tasas de manejo ambulatorio y sin antibioterapia en los centros acreditados avanzados (p≤0,05). Conclusiones: A pesar de ser una enfermedad muy frecuente, existe mucha heterogeneidad en su tratamiento a nivel nacional, por lo que sería recomendable la unificación de criterios diagnósticos y de tratamiento mediante la colaboración de las sociedades científicas y la simplificación de la puesta en marcha de protocolos hospitalarios.(AU)

Introduction: Management of patients diagnosed of acute uncomplicated diverticulitis has evolved lately and according to the latest guidelines, outpatient treatment and management without antibiotherapy may be used in selected patients. The aim of this study is to evaluate the adhesion among national centres to these and others recommendations related to this pathology. Methods: An online national survey, that has been broadcast by several applications, was performed. The results obtained were statistically analysed. Results: A total of 104 surgeons participated, representing 69 national hospitals. Of those, in 82.6% of the centers, outpatient management is performed for acute uncomplicated diverticulitis. 23.2% of the hospitals have a protocol stablished for treatment without antibiotherapy in selected patients. Centers that do not follow these protocols allege that the mean reasons are the logistic difficulties to set them up (49.3%) and the lack of current evidence for it (44.8%). Significative statistical differences have been found when comparing the establishment of such protocols between centers with advanced accredited units and those who are not, with higher rates of outpatient management and treatment without antibiotics in accredited units (P≤.05). Conclusions: In spite that this a very common disease, there is a huge national heterogeneity in its treatment. This is why it would adviseable to unify diagnostic and treatment criteria by the collaboration of scientific societies and the simplification of the development of hospitalary protocols.(AU)

Results of a national survey about the management of patients with acute uncomplicated diverticulitis.

INTRODUCTION: Management of patients diagnosed of acute uncomplicated diverticulitis has evolved lately and according to the latest guidelines, outpatient treatment and management without antibiotherapy may be used in selected patients. The aim of this study is to evaluate the adhesión among national centres to these and others recommendations related to this pathology. METHODS: An online national survey, that has been broadcast by several applications, was performed. The results obtained were statistically analysed. RESULTS: A total of 104 surgeons participated, representing 69 national hospitals. Of those, in 82.6% of the centres, outpatient management is performed for acute uncomplicated diverticulitis. 23.2% of the hospitals have a protocol stablished for treatment without antibiotherapy in selected patients. Centres that do not follow these protocols allege that the mean reasons are the logistic difficulties to set them up (49.3%) and the lack of current evidence for it (44.8%). Significative statistical differences have been found when comparing the establishment of such protocols between centres with advanced accredited units and those who are not, with higher rates of outpatient management and treatment without antibiotics in accredited units (p ≤ .05). CONCLUSIONS: In spite that this a very common disease, there is a huge national heterogeneity in its treatment. This is why it would adviseable to unify diagnostic and treatment criteria by the collaboration of scientific societies and the simplification of the development of hospitalary protocols.

Mandible Fractures Undergoing Transfer Rarely Require Acute Intervention.

Study Design: A retrospective review was conducted of all patients with mandibular fractures who were evaluated by plastic surgery at a Level I trauma center between January 1, 2017 and May 1, 2020. Data including demographic characteristics, mechanism of injury, type of presentation (e.g., primary or transfer), treatment plan, and time to intervention were recorded. Objective: Mandibular fractures are common traumatic injuries. Because these injuries are managed by surgical specialists, these patients are often emergently transferred to tertiary care hospitals. This study aims to assess the benefits of emergent transfer in this patient group. Methods: Variables were summarized using descriptive statistics. The relationship with initial disposition was assessed via tests of association, including Student's t-test, Fisher's exact test, or chi-square tests. Significance was set to p values less than 0.05. Multivariate regression analysis was conducted to determine predictors of presentation to outside hospital followed by transfer to our institution. Results: Records from 406 patients with isolated mandibular fractures were evaluated. 145 (36%) were transferred from an outside hospital specifically for specialty evaluation. One patient required intervention in the Emergency Department (ED). Of the 145 patients that were transferred to our facility, eight (5.5%) were admitted for operative management. Patients with open injuries and pediatric patients showed benefit from transfer. Conclusions: Patients are frequently transferred to tertiary care facilities for specialty service evaluation and treatment. However, when isolated mandible fractures were evaluated, only one patient required intervention in the ED. Patients with grossly open fractures and pediatric patients were more frequently admitted specifically for operative management. This practice of acute interfacility transfer represents an unnecessary cost to our health system as isolated mandible fractures can be managed on an outpatient basis. We suggest that pediatric patients and patients with open fractures be transferred for urgent evaluation and management, whereas most patients would be appropriate for outpatient evaluation.

Disposition of emergency department patients with acute pulmonary embolism after ambulance arrival.

Objective: Most outpatients with pulmonary embolism (PE) are diagnosed in the emergency department (ED). The relationship between means of arrival, site of diagnosis, and disposition in ED patients with PE is unknown. We compared discharge home between patients arriving by emergency medical services (EMS) and those arriving by other means. Within the EMS cohort, we compared those with a recent PE diagnosis in the outpatient clinic setting to those who were diagnosed with PE in the ED. Methods: This study was a secondary analysis of a retrospective cohort that included all adult, non-pregnant ED patients treated for acute PE across 21 community EDs from January 2013 to April 2015. The primary outcome was discharge home within 24 h of ED registration; we also examined mortality. We described associations with patient arrival method and other patient characteristics. Results: Among 2996 ED patient encounters with acute PE, 644 (21.5%) arrived by EMS. This group had a lower frequency of discharge (9.2% vs 26.4%) and higher 30-day all-cause mortality (8.7% vs 3.1%) than their counterparts (p < 0.001 for both). These associations remained after adjusting for confounding variables. Among the EMS cohort, 14 patients (2.2%) arrived with a PE diagnosis recently made in the outpatient setting. Conclusion: Patients with PE who arrived at the ED by EMS were less likely to be discharged home within 24 h and more likely to die within 30 days than those who arrived by other means. Less than 3% of the EMS group had been diagnosed with PE before ED arrival.

Inpatient vs outpatient management of pregnancies with vasa previa: A historical cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Vasa previa, a condition where unprotected fetal blood vessels lie in proximity to the internal cervical opening, is a potentially lethal obstetric complication. The precarious situation of these vessels increases the risk of fetal hemorrhage with spontaneous or artificial rupture of membranes, frequently causing fetal/neonatal demise or severe morbidity. As a result, in many centers, inpatient management forms the mainstay when vasa previa is diagnosed antenatally. This study aimed to determine whether a subpopulation of pregnancies diagnosed antenatally with vasa previa could be safely managed as outpatients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We reviewed all cases of vasa previa in singleton pregnancies, with no fetal anomalies, diagnosed at Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, from January 2008 to December 2017. Cases were categorized into three arms for analysis: outpatients (OP), asymptomatic hospitalized (ASH) and symptomatic hospitalized (SH). The SH arm included patients admitted with any antepartum bleeding or suspicious fetal non-stress test. Those that presented with symptomatic uterine activity/threatened preterm labor and delivered within 7 days of diagnosis were excluded from the study. Records were analyzed for details on hospitalization, antenatal corticosteroid administration, cervical length measurements, and fetal/neonatal mortality and morbidity. RESULTS: Of the 84 antenatally-diagnosed cases of vasa previa, 47 fulfilled eligibility criteria. A total of 15 cases were managed as OP, 22 as ASH and 10 as SH. Unplanned cesareans were highest in the SH arm (40% vs. 0% ASH vs. 13.3% OP). Those in the SH arm delivered earliest (median 33.8 weeks, interquartile range (IQR) 33.2-34.3 weeks). Of the asymptomatic patients, those in the ASH arm delivered earlier than those in the OP arm (35.3 [34.6-36.2] weeks vs. 36.7 [35.6-37.2] weeks, p = 0.037). There were no cases of fetal/neonatal death, anemia or severe neonatal morbidity and no significant differences between groups based on cervical length or antenatal corticosteroid administration. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that asymptomatic women with an antenatal diagnosis of vasa previa, singleton pregnancies, and at low risk for preterm birth may safely managed as outpatients, as long as they are able to access hospital promptly in the event of antepartum bleeding or early labor.

Outpatient management of preterm prelabor rupture of membranes before 34 weeks: Maternal and neonatal outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the maternal, fetal, and neonatal outcomes of pregnant women complicated with preterm prelabor rupture of membranes (PPROM) eligible for outpatient care. METHODS: This study included a retrospective cohort of patients with singleton pregnancies with PPROM between 23+0 to 34+0 weeks who remained pregnant after the first 72 h. Outpatient management was considered in women with clinical, ultrasound and analytical stability, and easy access to hospital. Maternal, fetal, and neonatal results were compared between women managed as inpatients versus those managed as outpatients. RESULTS: Women eligible for the outpatient management had a better prognostic profile (no anhydramnios, longer cervical length, less intraamniotic infection, and clinical, ultrasound, and analytical stability) and presented a lower gestational age at admission and longer latency to delivery, resulting in a similar gestational age at delivery as the inpatient group. Postpartum curettage, uterine atony, respiratory distress syndrome, and bronchopulmonary dysplasia were less frequent in the outpatient group. Composite maternal-fetal morbidity and mortality outcomes were similar in both groups, while composite neonatal morbidity and mortality outcomes were significantly lower in the outpatient group. CONCLUSION: Outpatient management may be an option for women presenting stable PPROM before 34 weeks when adequate selection criteria are fulfilled. Differences in perinatal outcomes in the outpatient group compared with the inpatient group are probably attributable to baseline characteristics. Further prospective randomized studies are needed to confirm the benefits of outpatient management in PPROM.

Outpatient management of acute uncomplicated appendicitis after laparoscopic appendectomy: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To confirm the safety and efficacy of outpatient management of laparoscopic appendectomy, with an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol, in adult patients with uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Outpatient laparoscopic appendectomy is feasible and secure in selected patients in observational studies. The benefits include reduced length of stay (LOS) and postoperative complications. This is the first randomized controlled trial of outpatient management following ERAS protocol. METHODS: Patients admitted from the emergency department with acute appendicitis were randomized into one of two groups: standard care within the hospital (HG) or the outpatient group (OG). An ERAS protocol was followed for both groups. Patients in the HG were admitted to the surgical ward. Patients in the OG were referred to the day-surgery unit. The primary endpoint was the length of stay. RESULTS: Ninety-seven patients were included: 49 in the OG and 48 in the HG. LOS was significantly shorter in the OG (mean 8.82 h) than in the HG (mean 43.53 h), p < 0.001. There was no difference in readmission rates (p = 0.320); we observed only one readmission in the OG. No further emergency consultations or complications were observed. The cost saving was $516.52/patient as a result of the intervention. CONCLUSION: Outpatient management of appendectomy is safe and feasible procedure in selected patients. This approach could become the standard of care for patients with uncomplicated appendicitis, showing fewer complications, lower LOS and cost. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registration: www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov (NCT05401188) Clinical Trial ID: NCT05401188.

Outpatient Management of COVID-19: A Primer for the Dermatologist.

Purpose of Review: To summarize diagnostic and therapeutic management of COVID-19 in the outpatient setting for dermatologists. Recent Findings: Paxlovid (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir) is the preferred treatment in patients with mild symptoms at high risk of progression to severe SARS-CoV2 infection. Additional options include monoclonal antibodies (bebtelovimab), remdesivir, and molnupiravir. Summary: Dermatologists need to be aware of recent developments in diagnostic and therapeutic management of COVID-19 in the outpatient setting, as their patients may rely on dermatologists to provide advice, particularly in cases where treatments for dermatological disease may impact the risk of COVID-19 and/or vaccine efficacy. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13671-022-00368-3.

The return visit, outcome and predicting factors of return visit among suspected COVID-19 outpatients.

Rate of return visit, predicting factors of return visit and occurrence of adverse events in suspected to be or likely cases of COVID-19 patients who received outpatient treatment. This is a retrospective observational cohort study on patients (> 16 years), suspected to be or likely cases of COVID-19 who were visited in a respiratory emergency department and subsequently discharged home. Patients' baseline characteristics were extracted from medical charts. All patients were followed-up for 7 days after their first visit. Patients' outcomes during the7-day follow-up, as well as the severity of pulmonary involvement based on imaging were recorded. A total number of 601 patients (350 men and 251 women) were recruited. The rate of return visit was 27.74% (144 patients) with 6.74% (34 patients) experiencing a poor outcome. Six factors with a significant odds ratio were predictors of poor outcome in patients who received outpatient treatment, namely, older age [odds ratio = 3.278, 95% confidence interval: 1.115-9.632], days from onset of symptoms [1.068, 1.003-1.137], and history of diabetes [6.373, 2.271-17.883]). Predictors of favorable outcome were female gender [0.376, 0.158-0.894], oxygen saturation > 93% [0.862, 0.733-1.014], smoking habit [0.204, 0.045-0.934]. The findings of this study demonstrate that the rate of return visit with poor outcome in patients who received outpatient treatment was reasonably low. Age, male sex, diabetes mellitus and pulmonary disease are predicting factors of poor outcome in these COVID-19 patients who received outpatient management.

Outpatient Day-Care Management of Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysm: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the outcomes of outpatient day-care management of unruptured intracranial aneurysm (UIA), and to present the risks associated with different management strategies by comparing the outcomes and adverse events between outpatient day-care management and management with longer admission periods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used prospectively registered data and was approved by a local institutional review board. We enrolled 956 UIAs from 811 consecutive patients (mean age ± standard deviation, 57 ± 10.7 years; male:female = 247:564) from 2017 to 2020. We compared the outcomes after embolization among the different admission-length groups (1, 2, and ≥ 3 days). The outcomes included pre- and post-modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores and rates of adverse events, cure, recurrence, and reprocedure. Events were defined as any cerebrovascular problems, including minor and major stroke, death, or hemorrhage. RESULTS: The mean admission period was 2 days, and 175 patients (191 aneurysms), 551 patients (664 aneurysms), and 85 patients (101 aneurysms) were discharged on the day of the procedure, day 2, and day 3 or later, respectively. During the mean 17-month follow-up period (range 6-53 months; 2757 patient years), no change in post-mRS was observed compared to pre-mRS in 99.6% of patients. Cure was achieved in 95.6% patients; minimal recurrence that did not require re-procedure occurred in 3.5% patients, and re-procedure was required in 2.3% (22 of 956) patients due to progressive enlargement of the recurrent sac during follow up (mean 17 months, range, 6-53 months). There were eight adverse events (0.8%), including five cerebrovascular (two major stroke, two minor strokes and one transient ischemic stroke), and three non-cerebrovascular events. Statistical comparison between groups with different admission lengths (1, 2, and ≥ 3 days) revealed no difference in the outcomes. CONCLUSION: This study revealed no difference in outcomes and adverse events according to the admission period, and suggested that UIA could be managed by outpatient day-care embolization.

Preterm Premature Rupture of Membranes - Inpatient Versus Outpatient Management: an Evidence-Based Review.

According to current guidelines, inpatient management until birth is considered standard in pregnant women with preterm premature rupture of membranes (PPROM). With the increasing burden on obstetric departments and the growing importance of satisfaction and right to self-determination in pregnant women, outpatient management in PPROM is a possible alternative to inpatient monitoring. The most important criterion for this approach is to ensure the safety of both the mother and the child. Due to the small number of cases (n = 116), two randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing inpatient and outpatient management were unable to draw any conclusions. By 2020, eight retrospective comparative studies (cohort/observational studies) yielded the following outcomes: no significant differences in the rate of maternal complications (e.g., chorioamnionitis, premature placental abruption, umbilical cord prolapse) and in neonatal morbidity, significantly prolonged latency period with higher gestational age at birth, higher birth weight of neonates, and significantly shorter length of stay of preterm infants in neonatal intensive care, shorter hospital stay of pregnant women, and lower treatment costs with outpatient management. Concerns regarding this approach are mainly related to unpredictable complications with the need for rapid obstetric interventions, which cannot be performed in time in an outpatient setting. Prerequisites for outpatient management are the compliance of the expectant mother, the adherence to strict selection criteria and the assurance of adequate monitoring at home. Future research should aim at more accurate risk assessment of obstetric complications through studies with higher case numbers and standardisation of outpatient management under evidence-based criteria.

Orthopaedic Implant-Associated Staphylococcal Infections: A Critical Reappraisal of Unmet Clinical Needs Associated with the Implementation of the Best Antibiotic Choice.

Infections associated with orthopaedic implants represent a major health concern characterized by a remarkable incidence of morbidity and mortality. The wide variety of clinical scenarios encountered in the heterogeneous world of infections associated with orthopaedic implants makes the implementation of an optimal and standardized antimicrobial treatment challenging. Antibiotic bone penetration, anti-biofilm activity, long-term safety, and drug choice/dosage regimens favouring outpatient management (i.e., long-acting or oral agents) play a major role in regards to the chronic evolution of these infections. The aim of this multidisciplinary opinion article is to summarize evidence supporting the use of the different anti-staphylococcal agents in terms of microbiological and pharmacological optimization according to bone penetration, anti-biofilm activity, long-term safety, and feasibility for outpatient regimens, and to provide a useful guide for clinicians in the management of patients affected by staphylococcal infections associated with orthopaedic implants Novel long-acting lipoglycopeptides, and particularly dalbavancin, alone or in combination with rifampicin, could represent the best antibiotic choice according to real-world evidence and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic properties. The implementation of a multidisciplinary taskforce and close cooperation between microbiologists and clinicians is crucial for providing the best care in this scenario.

Lung ultrasound-guided management to reduce hospitalization in chronic heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Pulmonary edema is a leading cause of hospital admissions, morbidity, and mortality in heart failure (HF) patients. A point-of-care lung ultrasound (LUS) is a useful tool to detect subclinical pulmonary edema. We performed a comprehensive literature search of multiple databases for studies that evaluated the clinical utility of LUS-guided management versus standard care for HF patients in the outpatient setting. The primary outcome of interest was HF hospitalization. The secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality, urgent visits for HF worsening, acute kidney injury (AKI), and hypokalemia rates. Pooled risk ratio (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated and combined using random-effect model meta-analysis. A total of 3 randomized controlled trials including 493 HF patients managed in the outpatient setting (251 managed with LUS plus physical examination (PE)-guided therapy vs. 242 managed with PE-guided therapy alone) were included in the final analysis. The mean follow-up period was 5 months. There was no significant difference in HF hospitalization rate between the two groups (RR 0.65; 95% CI 0.34-1.22; P = 0.18). Similarly, there was no significant difference in all-cause mortality (RR 1.39; 95% CI 0.68-2.82; P = 0.37), AKI (RR 1.27; 95% CI 0.60-2.69; P = 0.52), and hypokalemia (RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.21-2.44; P = 0.59). However, LUS-guided therapy was associated with a lower rate for urgent care visits (RR 0.32; 95% CI 0.18-0.59; P = 0.0002). Our study demonstrated that outpatient LUS-guided diuretic therapy of pulmonary congestion reduces urgent visits for worsening symptoms of HF. Further studies are needed to evaluate LUS utility in the outpatient treatment of HF.

Efficacy of remote physiological monitoring-guided care for chronic heart failure: an updated meta-analysis.

Previous studies have reported contradictory findings on the utility of remote physiological monitoring (RPM)-guided management of patients with chronic heart failure (HF). Multiple databases were searched for studies that evaluated the clinical efficacy of RPM-guided management versus standard of care (SOC) for HF patients. The primary outcome was HF-related hospitalization (HFH). The secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality, cardiovascular-related (CV) mortality, and emergency department (ED) visits. Pooled relative risk (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated and combined using a random-effects model. A total of 16 randomized controlled trials, including 8679 HF patients (4574 managed with RPM-guided therapy vs. 4105 managed with SOC), were included in the final analysis. The average follow-up period was 15.2 months. There was no significant difference in HFH rate between the two groups (RR: 0.94; 95% CI: 0.84-1.07; P = 0.36). Similarly, there were no significant differences in CV mortality (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.73-1.02, P = 0.08) or in ED visits (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.59-1.08, P = 0.14). However, RPM-guided therapy was associated with a borderline statistically significant reduction in all-cause mortality (RR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.78-1.00; P = 0.05). Subgroup analysis based on the strategy of RPM showed that both hemodynamic and arrhythmia telemonitoring-guided management can reduce the risk of HFH (RR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.64-0.97; P = 0.02) and (RR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.67-0.94; P = 0.008) respectively. Our study demonstrated that RPM-guided diuretic therapy of HF patients did not reduce the risk of HFH but can improve survival. Hemodynamic and arrhythmia telemonitoring-guided management could reduce the risk of HF-related hospitalizations.

Management of Acute Uncomplicated Diverticulitis: Inpatient or Outpatient.

Objectives: Diverticular disease is a highly frequent condition and affects 50% of the population in the 9th decade in Western society. Acute diverticulitis is the most prevalent complication. The patients who are clinically stable and tolerate fluid should be hospitalized if fluid intake tolerance worsens, fever occurs, or pain increases. Bowel rest, intravenous fluid therapy, and empiric antibiotic therapy are the traditional treatments for patients admitted to the hospital. This retrospective study aimed to determine the parameters that will affect the outpatient or inpatient treatment of patients diagnosed with uncomplicated acute diverticulitis. Methods: Patients who presented to the emergency department with abdominal pain between January 2018 and December 2020 and were diagnosed with uncomplicated diverticulitis (modified Hinchey 1a) on computed tomography (CT) taken after intravenous contrast material shoot up were included in the study. Patient records were recorded retrospectively in the Excel file. After being seen in the emergency department, a comparison was performed between the inpatient group (Group 1) and the outpatient follow-up group (Group 2). Results: The study comprised 172 patients with acute uncomplicated diverticulitis (modified Hinchey 1a). While 110 (64.0%) patients were followed up and treated as inpatients (Group 1), 62 (36.0%) patients were followed up as outpatients (Group 2). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of patients readmitted to the hospital in the first 30 days after discharge (both for outpatient follow-up in the emergency department and after treatment in the inpatient group). Conclusion: In this retrospective study, in which we evaluated the hospitalization criteria in uncomplicated Modified Hinchey 1a patients, it was found that patients can be safely treated as an outpatient if they have poor physical examination findings. Although there was no difference between the two groups in terms of hospital readmission after discharge and it was thought that follow-up of patients with Modified Hinchey 1a diverticulitis with outpatient oral antibiotic therapy might be reliable, prospective studies with larger numbers of patients are needed.

Once-a-Day Ceftriaxone-Amikacin Combination as Empiric Antibiotic Therapy to Enable Outpatient Management of Febrile Neutropenia in Children-16-Year Experience from a Single Institute.

Shailesh KanvindeBackground To enable outpatient department (OPD) management of febrile neutropenia (FN), we used once-a-day (OD) ceftriaxone-amikacin (CFT-AMK) as empiric antibiotic therapy. Our experience over 16-year period is presented. Methods This was a retrospective study conducted from January2002 to December2017. Inclusion criteria were <18 years of age, undergoing cancer chemotherapy, and having FN. Exclusion criteria were FN after palliative chemotherapy, bone marrow transplantation, or at diagnosis of malignancy. Empiric CFT-AMK was used in all, except those having respiratory distress, hypotension, altered sensorium, paralytic ileus, or clinical evidence of peritonitis. Admission criteria were age <1 year, acute myeloid leukemia (AML) chemotherapy, poor performance status, need for blood transfusions, convenience, insurance, or persistent fever >48 to 72 hours after CFT-AMK. Outcomes analyzed were response (defervescence within 48-72 hours), OPD management, antibiotic upgrade, and mortality. AML diagnosis, >7 days to absolute neutrophil count >0.5 × 10 9 /L, poor performance status, and malignancy not in remission were considered high-risk FN criteria. Results CFT-AMK was given in 877/952 (92.2%) FN episodes. Seventy-six percent had hematolymphoid malignancies. Response, antibiotic upgrade, and mortality were seen in 85.7 and 65.5% ( p < 0.0001), 15 and 45.5% ( p < 0.0001), and 0 and 2% ( p = 0.003) of low- and high-risk patients, respectively. Treatment was started in OPD in 52%, of which 21.6% required subsequent admission. Of those initially admitted, early discharge (hospital stay < 5 days) was possible in 24.6%. Forty-one percent episodes were managed entirely on OPD. Overall, 80% of low-risk and 42% of high-risk episodes received treatment wholly or partially on OPD. Conclusion Our results show empiric OD CFT-AMK allows OPD management for most of the low-risk and a proportion of high-risk FN following chemotherapy in children, without compromising clinical outcomes.

Inpatient Versus Outpatient Acute Venous Thromboembolism Management: Trends and Postacute Healthcare Utilization From 2011 to 2018.

Background Acute outpatient management of venous thromboembolism (VTE), which includes pulmonary embolism (PE) and deep vein thrombosis (DVT), is perceived to be as safe as inpatient management in some settings. How widely this strategy is used is not well documented. Methods and Results Using MarketScan administrative claims databases for years 2011 through 2018, we identified patients with International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes indicating incident VTE and trends in the use of acute outpatient management. We also evaluated healthcare utilization and hospitalized bleeding events in the 6 months following the incident VTE event. A total of 200 346 patients with VTE were included, of whom 50% had evidence of PE. Acute outpatient management was used for 18% of those with PE and 57% of those with DVT only, and for both DVT and PE its use increased from 2011 to 2018. Outpatient management was less prevalent among patients with cancer, higher Charlson comorbidity index scores, and whose primary treatment was warfarin as compared with a direct oral anticoagulant. Healthcare utilization in the 6 months following the incident VTE event was generally lower among patients managed acutely as outpatients, regardless of initial presentation. Acute outpatient management was associated with lower hazard ratios of incident bleeding risk for both patients who initially presented with PE (0.71 [95% CI, 0.61, 0.82]) and DVT only (0.59 [95% CI, 0.54, 0.64]). Conclusions Outpatient management of VTE is increasing. In the present analysis, it was associated with lower subsequent healthcare utilization and fewer bleeding events. However, this may be because healthier patients were managed on an outpatient basis.