Evidence supporting idarucizumab for the reversal of dabigatran.

Idarucizumab is a monoclonal antibody fragment specifically targeted to dabigatran. It has demonstrated prompt and durable reversal of the anticoagulant effects of dabigatran in animal studies and phase 1 studies of young, elderly, and renally impaired volunteers. Although elective invasive procedures and most bleeding complications in dabigatran-treated patients can be managed by temporarily stopping dabigatran therapy and using supportive measures, there are rare clinical situations that require urgent reversal of the anticoagulant effect of dabigatran. The effectiveness and safety of 5 g of intravenous idarucizumab is being investigated in a prospective, open-label, single-cohort study in patients with serious bleeding or in those requiring an urgent procedure. In an interim analysis of the first 90 participants, idarucizumab rapidly and completely reversed the anticoagulant activity of dabigatran in 88%-98% of participants, and there were no safety concerns, with no deaths or serious adverse events being attributable to idarucizumab. Supported by these interim results, idarucizumab has been approved in the United States and the European Union for use when reversal of the anticoagulant effects of dabigatran is needed for emergency surgery/urgent procedures or in patients with life-threatening or uncontrolled bleeding. Clinical use of idarucizumab should follow the same processes as patient enrollment in this study, which is projected to be completed in 2016. The outcomes achieved with this specific reversal agent are likely to be of continued interest to treating physicians

New Functional Imaging Technology to Differentiate between Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Heart Failure

[West J Emerg Med. 2011;12(1):17-18.

Balancing Potency of Platelet Inhibition with Bleeding Risk in the Early Treatment of Acute Coronary Syndrome

Objective: To review available evidence and examine issues surrounding the use of advanced antiplatelet therapy in an effort to provide a practical guide for emergency physicians caring for patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS).Data Sources: American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) 2007 guidelines for the management of patients with unstable angina (UA) and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), AHA/ACC 2007 focused update for the management of patients with STEMI, selected clinical articles identified through the PubMed database (1965-February 2008), and manual searches for relevant articles identified from those retrieved.Study Selection: English-language controlled studies and randomized clinical trials that assessed the efficacy and safety of antiplatelet therapy in treating patients with all ACS manifestations.Data Extraction and Synthesis: Clinical data, including treatment regimens and patient demographics and outcomes, were extracted and critically analyzed from the selected studies and clinical trials. Pertinent data from relevant patient registries were also evaluated to assess current clinical practice.Conclusions: As platelet activation and aggregation are central to ACS pathology, antiplatelet agents are critical to early treatment. A widely accepted first-line treatment is aspirin, which acts to decrease platelet activation via inhibition of thromboxane A2 synthesis. Thienopyridines, which inhibit ADP-induced platelet activation, and glycoprotein (GP) receptor antagonists, which bind to platelet GP IIb/IIIa receptors and hinder their role in platelet aggregation and thrombus formation, provide complementary mechanisms of platelet inhibition and are often employed in combination with aspirin. While the higher levels of platelet inhibition that accompany combination therapy improve protection against ischemic and peri-procedural events, the risk of bleeding is also increased. Thus, the challenge in choosing appropriate therapy in the emergency department lies in balancing the need for potent platelet inhibition with the potential for increased risk of bleeding and future interventions the patient is likely to receive during the index hospitalization.[WestJEM. 2009;10:163-175.

Medicinal Cannabis Use in Sickle Cell Anemia

Approximately 100,000 Americans suffer from sickle cell anemia (SCA), a severe hereditary form of anemia in which red blood cells can mutate into a sickled shape causing severe pain crises that can lead to ED visits, hospitalization, and negatively impact multiple organ systems. Pain crises greatly impact the quality of life for SCA patients. Living with SCA can be stressful and often affects patients’ mental health, causing anxiety or depression (National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, 2016). Opioids have been a treatment mainstay for the severe pain caused by SCA but the side effects of opioids, plus the risk of dependence, are issues that have led both patients and researchers to consider medicinal cannabis as a treatment option. While there is limited research addressing the treatment of sickle cell pain with cannabis some research does suggest that cannabis could have a beneficial effect on the management of both chronic pain and acute pain (Choo, Feldstein Ewing, & Lovejoy, 2016; Kroenke & Cheville, 2017). The aim of this study is to evaluate the association between medicinal cannabis use and quality of life for individuals with SCA. The primary goal of this pilot study is to gather a cohort of participants and administer a baseline survey that will be used in a larger study. The goal of the larger study is to assess the impact of medicinal cannabis available through Pennsylvania’s Department of Health-approved dispensaries in Philadelphia on the quality of life for individuals with sickle cell anemia (SCA)

Contemporary NSTEMI management: the role of the hospitalist.

Non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) is defined as elevated cardiac biomarkers of necrosis in the absence of persistent ST-segment elevation in the setting of anginal symptoms or other acute event. It carries a poorer prognosis than most ST-segment elevation events, owing to the typical comorbidity burden of the older NSTEMI patients as well as diverse etiologies that add complexity to therapeutic decision-making. It may result from an acute atherothrombotic event (\u27Type 1\u27) or as the result of other causes of mismatch of myocardial oxygen supply and demand (\u27Type 2\u27). Regardless of type and other clinical factors, the hospital medicine specialist is increasingly responsible for managing or coordinating the care of these patients. Following published guidelines for risk stratification and basing anti-anginal, anticoagulant, antiplatelet, other pharmacologic therapies, and overall management approach on that individualized patient risk assessment can be expected to result in better short- and long-term clinical outcomes, including near-term readmission and recurrent events. We present here a review of the evidence basis and expert commentary to assist the hospitalist in achieving those improved outcomes in NSTEMI. Given that the Society for Hospital Medicine cites care of patients with acute coronary syndrome as a core competency for hospitalists, it is essential that those specialists stay current on optimal NSTEMI care