Cardioprotective effects of sinomenine in myocardial ischemia/reperfusion injury in a rat model

BackgroundIschemia reperfusion (I/R) play an imperative role in the expansion of cardiovascular disease. Sinomenine (SM) has been exhibited to possess antioxidant, anticancer, anti-inflammatory, antiviral and anticarcinogenic properties. The aim of the study was scrutinized the cardioprotective effect of SM against I/R injury in rat.MethodsRat were randomly divided into normal control (NC), I/R control and I/R + SM (5, 10 and 20 mg/kg), respectively. Ventricular arrhythmias, body weight and heart weight were estimated. Antioxidant, inflammatory cytokines, inflammatory mediators and plasmin system indicator were accessed.ResultsPre-treated SM group rats exhibited the reduction in the duration and incidence of ventricular fibrillation, ventricular ectopic beat (VEB) and ventricular tachycardia along with suppression of arrhythmia score during the ischemia (30 and 120 min). SM treated rats significantly (P < 0.001) altered the level of antioxidant parameters. SM treatment significantly (P < 0.001) repressed the level of creatine kinase MB (CK-MB), creatine kinase (CK) and troponin I (Tnl). SM treated rats significantly (P < 0.001) repressed the tissue factor (TF), thromboxane B2 (TXB2), plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 (PAI-1) and plasma fibrinogen (Fbg) and inflammatory cytokines and inflammatory mediators.ConclusionOur result clearly indicated that SM plays anti-arrhythmia effect in I/R injury in the rats via alteration of oxidative stress and inflammatory reaction.     

Economic impact of pharmaceutical services on polymedicated patients: A systematic review

BackgroundPolypharmacy is commonly related to poor drug adherence, decreased quality of life and inappropriate prescribing in eldery. Furthermore, this condition also leads to a higher utilization of health services resources, due to the increased risk of adverse drug events, length of stays in hospitals and readmissions rates after discharge.ObjectiveThis Systematic Review aimed to synthesize the current evidence that evaluates pharmaceutical services on polymedicated patients, from an economic perspective.MethodsSystematic searches were conducted in MEDLINE, SCOPUS and Cochrane Library databases to identify studies that were published until January 2021. Experimental and observational studies were included in this review, using strict inclusion/exclusion criteria and were assessed for quality using the following tools: RoB and ROBINS-I. Two independent reviewers selected the articles and extracted the data.Results3,662 articles were retrieved from the databases. After the screening, 18 studies were included: 9 experimental and 9 observational studies. The studies reported that the integration of the pharmacist as a member of the healthcare team provides an optimized use of pharmacotherapy to polymedicated patients and contributes to health promotion, providing reduction of spending on medication, reduction of expenses related to emergency care and hospitalizations and other medical expenses. The ECRs made cost-effectiveness or cost-benefit analysis, and most of the Non Randomized studies had statistically significant cost savings even considering the expenses of pharmaceutical assistance. Experimental studies reported a cost reduction varying between US$ 193 to US$ 4,966 per patient per year. Furthermore, observational studies estimated a cost reduction of varying from US$ 3 to US$ 2,505 per patient per year. The cost savings are related to decrease in emergency visits and hospitalizations, through pharmacist intervention (medication review and pharmacotherapy follow-up).ConclusionsConsidering the set of studies included, pharmaceutical care services directed to polymedicated patients may cooperate to save financial resources. Most of the interventions showed positive economic trends and also contributed to improving clinical parameters and quality of life. However, due to the majority of the studies having exploratory or qualitative methodology, it is essential to carry out more robust studies, based on full economic evaluation.     

药物饲料添加剂吉他霉素耐药性风险评估

目的 为给兽药减量政策的制定、动物源性食品安全的维护提供理论依据。方法 利用每日允许摄入量（ADI）、估算每日摄入量（EDI）及慢性风险熵（CRQ），对中国居民通过摄入肉蛋乳等动物性食品暴露于吉他霉素的耐药性风险进行点评估。结果 随着年龄增长，中国居民的吉他霉素膳食暴露量逐渐降低。2～7岁人群吉他霉素的膳食暴露量最高，男女分别为2.17和2.29 μg/ ( kg·bw·d)；＞65岁人群膳食暴露量最低，男女分别为0.45和0.46 μg/ ( kg·bw·d)。2～7岁人群通过摄入乳制品的吉他霉素的膳食暴露量最大，男女分别为1.15和1.22 μg/ ( kg·bw·d)，8岁以上人群通过摄入肉类食品的吉他霉素的膳食暴露量最大。中国居民通过摄入肉蛋乳等动物性食品暴露于吉他霉素，各年龄段CRQ均小于1。其中2～7岁人群CRQ值最高，风险最大；65岁以上人群CRQ值最低，风险最小。结论 中国居民通过摄入动物性食品的吉他霉素耐药性风险较低，危害程度较小，但儿童通过摄入乳制品的吉他霉素耐药性风险较高，有必要制定乳制品中吉他霉素残留的限量标准。     

Decreased Incidence of Hirschsprung-Associated Enterocolitis During COVID-19 Across United States Children's Hospitals

BackgroundThe Coronavirus Disease 2019 pandemic provided a natural experiment to study the effect of social distancing on the risk of developing Hirschsprung's Associated Enterocolitis (HAEC).MethodsUsing the Pediatric Health Information System (PHIS), a retrospective cohort study of children (<18 years) with Hirschsprung's Disease (HSCR) across 47 United States children's hospitals was performed. The primary outcome was HAEC admissions per 10,000 patient-days. The exposure (COVID-19) was defined as April 2020–December 2021. The unexposed (historical control) period was April 2018–December 2019. Secondary outcomes included sepsis, bowel perforation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, mortality, and length of stay.ResultsOverall, we included 5707 patients with HSCR during the study period. There were 984 and 834 HAEC admissions during the pre-pandemic and pandemic periods, respectively (2.6 vs. 1.9 HAEC admissions per 10,000 patient-days, incident rate ratio [95% confidence interval]: 0.74 [0.67, 0.81], p < 0.001). Compared to pre-pandemic, those with HAEC during the pandemic were younger (median [IQR]: 566 [162, 1430] days pandemic vs. 746 [259, 1609] days pre-pandemic, p < 0.001) and more likely to live in the lowest quartile of median household income zip codes (24% pandemic vs. 19% pre-pandemic, p = 0.02). There were no significant differences in rates of sepsis (6.1% pandemic vs. 6.1% pre-pandemic, p > 0.9), bowel perforation (1.3% pandemic vs. 1.2% pre-pandemic, p = 0.8), ICU admissions (9.6% pandemic vs. 12% pre-pandemic, p = 0.2), mortality (0.5% pandemic vs. 0.6% pre-pandemic, p = 0.8), or length of stay (median [interquartile range]: 4 [(Pastor et al., 2009; Gosain and Brinkman, 2015) 2,112,11 days pandemic vs. 5 [(Pastor et al., 2009; Tang et al., 2020) 2,102,10 days pre-pandemic, p = 0.4).ConclusionsThe COVID-19 pandemic was associated with significantly decreased incidence of HAEC admissions across US children's hospitals. Possible etiologies such as social distancing should be explored.Level of evidenceII.     

Trends of self-reported non-adherence among type 2 diabetes medication users in the United States across three years using the self-reported Medication Adherence Reasons Scale

Background & aimsTo determine the trends of self-reported non-adherence rates among adults taking Type 2 medicines (T2D) medicines between 2017 and 2019 and to identify the patterns for the frequently reported reasons for non-adherence in the United States.Methods & resultsData from the National Health and Wellness Survey, a self-administered, internet-based cross-sectional survey of US adults from 2017 to 2019 was used. Non-adherence was measured using the self-reported Medication Adherence Reasons Scale (MAR-Scale). Frequencies were used to identify the reasons for non-adherence for insulin and non-insulin therapies for T2D.Data were obtained from 2983 respondents in 2017, 5416 in 2018, and 5268 in 2019. Based on the MAR-Scale, the self-reported medication non-adherence rate was 25% in 2017, 21% in 2018, and 27% in 2019. The most common reason for non-adherence across all the three years was simple forgetfulness, yet patients reported the lowest mean number of days missing medication for that reason. Though less frequently reported, non-adherence lasted longer when patient did not know how to take their medicines, cost was a reason, or had concerns about the long term effects of the medicines.ConclusionsWith no significant improvement in adherence with T2D medicines over time, regardless of better awareness and extensive diabetes education, focus should be on individualized non-adherence reasons-based interventions.