A systematic review of mucoadhesive vaginal tablet testing

Drug administration through the vaginal tract is one of the oldest modalities of pharmacotherapy, and it is also one of the most explored. Since the vaginal cavity has a wide surface area, a plentiful blood supply, and a complex network of blood arteries, it can evade hepatic first-pass metabolism and obtain high local drug concentrations. Vaginal pills look to be a good dose form since they are simple to use, portable, and can easily deliver the required amount of medicine. Vaginal formulations, on the other hand, are vulnerable to rapid expulsion due to the vaginal tract’s self-cleaning action, which reduces the formulation’s efficiency. Currently, there is an increasing amount of focus on mucoadhesive vaginal formulation research and development to fix the formulation at the place where the medicine can be released and/or absorbed. This article examines all of the strategies used by researchers to develop a mucoadhesive vaginal tablet that is safe, effective, and comfortable for the user

Treatment with levosimendan in an experimental model of early ventilator-induced diaphragmatic dysfunction

Introduction: Mechanical ventilation (MV) is a life-saving approach in critically ill patients. However, it may affect the diaphragmatic structure and function, beyond the lungs. Levosimendan is a calcium sensitizer widely used in clinics to improve cardiac contractility in acute heart failure patients. In vitro studies have demonstrated that levosimendan increased force-generating capacity of the diaphragm in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients. Thus the aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of levosimendan administration in an animal model of ventilator-induced diaphragmatic dysfunction (VIDD) on muscle contraction and diaphragm muscle cell viability. Methods: Sprague-Dawley rats underwent prolonged MV (5 hours). VIDD+Levo group received a starting bolus of levosimendan immediately after intratracheal intubation and then an intravenous infusion of levosimendan throughout the study. Diaphragms were collected for ex vivo contractility measurement (with electric stimulation), histological analysis and Western blot analysis. Healthy rats were used as the control. Results: Levosimendan treatment maintained an adequate mean arterial pressure during the entire experimental protocol, preserved levels of autophagy-related proteins (LC3BI and LC3BII) and the muscular cell diameter demonstrated by histological analysis. Levosimendan did not affect the diaphragmatic contraction or the levels of proteins involved in the protein degradation (atrogin). Conclusions: Our data suggest that levosimendan preserves muscular cell structure (cross-sectional area) and muscle autophagy after 5 hours of MV in a rat model of VIDD. However, levosimendan did not improve diaphragm contractile efficiency

Patterns of use of adjunctive therapies in patients with early moderate- severe Acute Respiratory Distress syndrome: Insights from the LUNG SAFE Study

Background: Adjunctive strategies are an important part of the management of ARDS. However, their application in clinical practice remains inconsistent. Research Question: We wished to determine the frequency and patterns of use of adjunctive strategies in patients with moderate to severe ARDS (PaO2/FIO2 [P/F ratio] < 150) enrolled into the Large observational study to UNderstand the Global impact of Severe Acute respiratory FailurE (LUNG SAFE) study. Study Design and Methods: The LUNG SAFE study was an international, multicenter, prospective cohort study of patients with severe respiratory failure, conducted in 2014 in 459 ICUs from 50 countries. The primary objective of this substudy was to determine the frequency of use of widely available (neuromuscular blockade, prone position) adjuncts vs adjuncts requiring specialized equipment (extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, inhaled vasodilators, high-frequency ventilation) in patients in the first 48 h of moderate to severe ARDS (P/F ratio < 150). Results: Of 1,146 patients on invasive ventilation with moderate to severe ARDS, 811 patients (71%) received no adjunct within 48 h of ARDS onset. Of 335 (29%) that received adjunctive strategies, 252 (75%) received a single strategy, and 83 (25%) receiving more than one adjunct. Of ARDS nonsurvivors, 67% did not receive any adjunctive strategy in the first 48 h. Most patients (67%) receiving specialized adjuncts did not receive prone positioning or neuromuscular blockade. Patients that received adjuncts were more likely to have their ARDS recognized, be younger and sicker, have pneumonia, be more difficult to ventilate, and be in a European high-income country than those that did not receive adjuncts. Interpretation: Three in 10 patients with moderate to severe ARDS, and only one-third of nonsurvivors, received adjunctive strategies over the first 48 h of ARDS. A more consistent and evidence-driven approach to adjunct use may reduce costs and improve outcomes in patients with moderate to severe ARDS. Trial Registry: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT02010073; URL: www.clinicaltrials.go

Prophylaxis of venous thrombosis in patients with spontaneous intracerebral bleeding

Spontaneous intracerebral haemorrhage (SIH) represents a severe clinical event that is associated with high rates of mortality and morbidity. Only a minority of SIH patients receive surgical treatment, whereas the majority are treated conservatively. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is one of the most common complications in SIH patients and a potential cause of death. Because of the lack of adequate evidences from the literature, the risk to benefit ratio of pharmacologic prophylaxis of VTE, represented on the one hand by hematoma enlargement and/or rebleeding and on the other hand by an expected reduction of the risk of VTE, remains controversial. Mechanical prophylaxis is a potentially safer alternative, but the efficacy of this approach is uncertain. In the absence of specific clinical guidelines containing clear-cut recommendations, physicians have insufficient tools to assist their therapeutic decisions

Death in hospital following ICU discharge: insights from the LUNG SAFE study

To determine the frequency of, and factors associated with, death in hospital following ICU discharge to the ward. The Large observational study to UNderstand the Global impact of Severe Acute respiratory FailurE study was an international, multicenter, prospective cohort study of patients with severe respiratory failure, conducted across 459 ICUs from 50 countries globally. This study aimed to understand the frequency and factors associated with death in hospital in patients who survived their ICU stay. We examined outcomes in the subpopulation discharged with no limitations of life sustaining treatments ('treatment limitations'), and the subpopulations with treatment limitations. 2186 (94%) patients with no treatment limitations discharged from ICU survived, while 142 (6%) died in hospital. 118 (61%) of patients with treatment limitations survived while 77 (39%) patients died in hospital. Patients without treatment limitations that died in hospital after ICU discharge were older, more likely to have COPD, immunocompromise or chronic renal failure, less likely to have trauma as a risk factor for ARDS. Patients that died post ICU discharge were less likely to receive neuromuscular blockade, or to receive any adjunctive measure, and had a higher pre- ICU discharge non-pulmonary SOFA score. A similar pattern was seen in patients with treatment limitations that died in hospital following ICU discharge. A significant proportion of patients die in hospital following discharge from ICU, with higher mortality in patients with limitations of life-sustaining treatments in place. Non-survivors had higher systemic illness severity scores at ICU discharge than survivors. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02010073

Dynamics of disease characteristics and clinical management of critically ill COVID-19 patients over the time course of the pandemic: an analysis of the prospective, international, multicentre RISC-19-ICU registry.

BACKGROUND It remains elusive how the characteristics, the course of disease, the clinical management and the outcomes of critically ill COVID-19 patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU) worldwide have changed over the course of the pandemic. METHODS Prospective, observational registry constituted by 90 ICUs across 22 countries worldwide including patients with a laboratory-confirmed, critical presentation of COVID-19 requiring advanced organ support. Hierarchical, generalized linear mixed-effect models accounting for hospital and country variability were employed to analyse the continuous evolution of the studied variables over the pandemic. RESULTS Four thousand forty-one patients were included from March 2020 to September 2021. Over this period, the age of the admitted patients (62 [95% CI 60-63] years vs 64 [62-66] years, p < 0.001) and the severity of organ dysfunction at ICU admission decreased (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment 8.2 [7.6-9.0] vs 5.8 [5.3-6.4], p < 0.001) and increased, while more female patients (26 [23-29]% vs 41 [35-48]%, p < 0.001) were admitted. The time span between symptom onset and hospitalization as well as ICU admission became longer later in the pandemic (6.7 [6.2-7.2| days vs 9.7 [8.9-10.5] days, p < 0.001). The PaO2/FiO2 at admission was lower (132 [123-141] mmHg vs 101 [91-113] mmHg, p < 0.001) but showed faster improvements over the initial 5 days of ICU stay in late 2021 compared to early 2020 (34 [20-48] mmHg vs 70 [41-100] mmHg, p = 0.05). The number of patients treated with steroids and tocilizumab increased, while the use of therapeutic anticoagulation presented an inverse U-shaped behaviour over the course of the pandemic. The proportion of patients treated with high-flow oxygen (5 [4-7]% vs 20 [14-29], p < 0.001) and non-invasive mechanical ventilation (14 [11-18]% vs 24 [17-33]%, p < 0.001) throughout the pandemic increased concomitant to a decrease in invasive mechanical ventilation (82 [76-86]% vs 74 [64-82]%, p < 0.001). The ICU mortality (23 [19-26]% vs 17 [12-25]%, p < 0.001) and length of stay (14 [13-16] days vs 11 [10-13] days, p < 0.001) decreased over 19 months of the pandemic. CONCLUSION Characteristics and disease course of critically ill COVID-19 patients have continuously evolved, concomitant to the clinical management, throughout the pandemic leading to a younger, less severely ill ICU population with distinctly different clinical, pulmonary and inflammatory presentations than at the onset of the pandemic

Effect of a quality improvement program on compliance to the sepsis bundle in non-ICU patients: a multicenter prospective before and after cohort study

ObjectiveSepsis and septic shock are major challenges and economic burdens to healthcare, impacting millions of people globally and representing significant causes of mortality. Recently, a large number of quality improvement programs focused on sepsis resuscitation bundles have been instituted worldwide. These educational initiatives have been shown to be associated with improvements in clinical outcomes. We aimed to evaluate the impact of a multi-faceted quality implementing program (QIP) on the compliance of a “simplified 1-h bundle” (Sepsis 6) and hospital mortality of severe sepsis and septic shock patients out of the intensive care unit (ICU).MethodsEmergency departments (EDs) and medical wards (MWs) of 12 academic and non-academic hospitals in the Lombardy region (Northern Italy) were involved in a multi-faceted QIP, which included educational and organizational interventions. Patients with a clinical diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock according to the Sepsis-2 criteria were enrolled in two different periods: from May 2011 to November 2011 (before-QIP cohort) and from August 2012 to June 2013 (after-QIP cohort).Measurements and main resultsThe effect of QIP on bundle compliance and hospital mortality was evaluated in a before–after analysis. We enrolled 467 patients in the before-QIP group and 656 in the after-QIP group. At the time of enrollment, septic shock was diagnosed in 50% of patients, similarly between the two periods. In the after-QIP group, we observed increased compliance to the “simplified rapid (1 h) intervention bundle” (the Sepsis 6 bundle – S6) at three time-points evaluated (1 h, 13.7 to 18.7%, p = 0.018, 3 h, 37.1 to 48.0%, p = 0.013, overall study period, 46.2 to 57.9%, p &lt; 0.001). We then analyzed compliance with S6 and hospital mortality in the before- and after-QIP periods, stratifying the two patients’ cohorts by admission characteristics. Adherence to the S6 bundle was increased in patients with severe sepsis in the absence of shock, in patients with serum lactate &lt;4.0 mmol/L, and in patients with hypotension at the time of enrollment, regardless of the type of admission (from EDs or MWs). Subsequently, in an observational analysis, we also investigated the relation between bundle compliance and hospital mortality by logistic regression. In the after-QIP cohort, we observed a lower in-hospital mortality than that observed in the before-QIP cohort. This finding was reported in subgroups where a higher adherence to the S6 bundle in the after-QIP period was found. After adjustment for confounders, the QIP appeared to be independently associated with a significant improvement in hospital mortality. Among the single S6 procedures applied within the first hour of sepsis diagnosis, compliance with blood culture and antibiotic therapy appeared significantly associated with reduced in-hospital mortality.ConclusionA multi-faceted QIP aimed at promoting an early simplified bundle of care for the management of septic patients out of the ICU was associated with improved compliance with sepsis bundles and lower in-hospital mortality