Development and validation of standardized severity rating scale to assess the consistency of drug-drug interaction severity among various drug information resources

BackgroundThe consistency in reporting the severity of drug interactions across the drug information resources is important in guiding the appropriate clinical use of drug-pairs, to minimize the associated adverse events. This necessitates the need of a standardized severity rating scale, that can accommodate the different severity ratings of the same interacting drug-pair into a reasonable severity category, that can ease the consistency assessment among different drug information resources.ObjectiveTo develop and validate a standardized severity rating scale that can ease the consistency assessment among the various drug information resources.MethodsThe definitions of various severity rating categories as documented in the eight drug information resources was consolidated to develop a standardized severity rating scale. Thus developed rating scale was validated using twenty commonly used drug-pairs. Fleiss' kappa score was used as an indicator for assessing overall consistency among various drug information resources, whereas, Cohen's kappa was used as an indicator of level of consistency between two drug information resources and between individual drug information resource and newly developed standardized severity rating scale.ResultsThe newly developed standardized severity rating scale classifies the severity of drug-drug interactions into three categories namely mild, moderate and major. The Fleiss' kappa score was improved from 0.047 to 0.176, indicating improved strength of agreement [Average pairwise agreement: 16% Vs 36.7%] among various drug information resources. The average pairwise Cohen's kappa was 0.082 [Strength of agreement: poor] in original severity ratings whereas it was improved to 0.198 [Strength of agreement: almost equal to fair] in standardized severity rating scale.ConclusionThe newly developed standardized severity rating scale can be used as a tool to assess the consistency of severity rating categories among the various drug information resources.     

Are risk factors necessary for pretest probability assessment of coronary artery disease? A patient similarity network analysis of the PROMISE trial

BackgroundPretest probability (PTP) calculators utilize epidemiological-level findings to provide patient-level risk assessment of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). However, their limited accuracies question whether dissimilarities in risk factors necessarily result in differences in CAD. Using patient similarity network (PSN) analyses, we wished to assess the accuracy of risk factors and imaging markers to identify ≥50% luminal narrowing on coronary CT angiography (CCTA) in stable chest-pain patients.MethodsWe created four PSNs representing: patient characteristics, risk factors, non-coronary imaging markers and calcium score. We used spectral clustering to group individuals with similar risk profiles. We compared PSNs to a contemporary PTP score incorporating calcium score and risk factors to identify ≥50% luminal narrowing on CCTA in the CT-arm of the PROMISE trial. We also conducted subanalyses in different age and sex groups.ResultsIn 3556 individuals, the calcium score PSN significantly outperformed patient characteristic, risk factor, and non-coronary imaging marker PSNs (AUC: 0.81 vs. 0.57, 0.55, 0.54; respectively, p ?< ?0.001 for all). The calcium score PSN significantly outperformed the contemporary PTP score (AUC: 0.81 vs. 0.78, p ?< ?0.001), and using 0, 1–100 and ?> ?100 cut-offs provided comparable results (AUC: 0.81 vs. 0.81, p ?= ?0.06). Similar results were found in all subanalyses.ConclusionCalcium score on its own provides better individualized obstructive CAD prediction than contemporary PTP scores incorporating calcium score and risk factors. Risk factors may not be able to improve the diagnostic accuracy of calcium score to predict ≥50% luminal narrowing on CCTA.     

Impact of modified-release opioid use on clinical outcomes following total hip and knee arthroplasty: a propensity score-matched cohort study

Modified-release opioids are often prescribed for the management of moderate to severe acute pain following total hip and knee arthroplasty, despite recommendations against their use due to increasing concerns regarding harm. The primary objective of this multicentre study was to examine the impact of modified-release opioid use on the incidence of opioid-related adverse events compared with immediate-release opioid use, among adult inpatients following total hip or knee arthroplasty. Data for total hip and knee arthroplasty inpatients receiving an opioid analgesic for postoperative analgesia during hospitalisation were collected from electronic medical records of three tertiary metropolitan hospitals in Australia. The primary outcome was the incidence of opioid-related adverse events during hospital admission. Patients who received modified with or without immediate-release opioids were matched to those receiving immediate-release opioids only (1:1) using nearest neighbour propensity score matching with patient and clinical characteristics as covariates. This included total opioid dose received. In the matched cohorts, patients given modified-release opioids (n = 347) experienced a higher incidence of opioid-related adverse events overall, compared with those given immediate-release opioids only (20.5%, 71/347 vs. 12.7%, 44/347; difference in proportions 7.8% [95%CI 2.3–13.3%]). Modified-release opioid use was associated with an increased risk of harm when used for acute pain during hospitalisation after total hip or knee arthroplasty.     

Minimally Invasive Treatments for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

PurposeTo review and to compare indirectly the outcomes of minimally invasive therapies for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia.Materials and MethodsA literature search via Medline and Cochrane Central databases was completed for randomized control studies published between January 2000 to April 2020 for the following therapies: Rezum, Urolift, Aquablation, and prostatic artery embolization (PAE). Data on the following variables were included: International prostate symptom score (IPSS), maximum urinary flow rate, quality of life, and postvoid residual (PVR). Standard mean differences between treatments were compared through a meta-analysis using transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) to assess differences in treatment effect.ResultsThere was no significant difference in outcomes between therapies for IPSS at the 3, 6, and 12-month follow ups. Although outcomes for Rezum were only available out to 3 months, there were no consistently significant differences in outcomes when comparing Aquablation versus PAE versus Rezum. TURP PVR was significantly better than Urolift at 3, 6, and 12 months. No significant differences in minor or major adverse events were noted.ConclusionAlthough significant differences in outcomes were limited, Aquablation and PAE were the most durable at 12 months. PAE has been well studied on multiple randomized control trials with minimal adverse events while Aquablation has limited high quality data and has been associated with bleeding-related complications.     

A Pilot First-in-Human Study of Embrace,a Polyethylene Glycol-Based Liquid Embolic Agent,in the Embolization of Malignant and Benign Hypervascular Tumors

PurposeTo investigate the safety and efficacy of an aqueous polyethylene glycol-based liquid embolic agent, Embrace Hydrogel Embolic System (HES), in the treatment of benign and malignant hypervascular tumors.Materials and MethodsA prospective, single-arm, multicenter study included 8 patients, 5 males and 3 females, with a median age of 58.5 years (30–85 years), who underwent embolization in 8 tumors between October 2019 and May 2020. Technical success was defined as successful delivery of HES to the index vessel, with disappearance of >90% of the targeted vascular enhancement or, for portal vein embolization, occlusion of the portal branches to the liver segments for future resection. The volume of HES administered, ease of use (5 point Likert scale), administration time, and adverse events (AEs) were recorded. Evaluation was performed at 7, 30, and 90 days via clinical assessment and blood testing, and follow-up imaging was performed at 30 days.ResultsEight patients were enrolled, and 10 embolizations were performed in 8 lesions. Tumors included hepatocellular carcinoma (n = 4), renal angiomyolipoma (n = 3), and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (n = 1). Technical success was 100%, and the average ease of use was 3.3 ± 1.0 SD. The HES delivery time was 1–28 minutes (median, 16.5 minutes), and the HES volume injected was 0.4–4.0 mL (median, 1.3 mL). All patients reached 30-day follow-up with imaging, and 6 patients reached 90-day follow-up. There were 3 serious AEs in 2 patients that were unrelated to the embolic agent.ConclusionHES resulted in a 100% embolization technical success rate. The product ease of use was acceptable, and no target vessel recanalization was noted on follow-up imaging at 30 days.