Ocular dysfunctions and toxicities induced by antiepileptic medications: Types,pathogenic mechanisms,and treatment strategies

Introduction: Ocular dysfunctions and toxicities induced by antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are rarely reviewed and not frequently received attention by treating physicians compared to other adverse effects (e.g. endocrinologic, cognitive and metabolic). However, some are frequent and progressive even in therapeutic concentrations or result in permanent blindness. Although some adverse effects are non-specific, others are related to the specific pharmacodynamics of the drug.

Areas covered: This review was written after detailed search in PubMed, EMBASE, ISI web, SciELO, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register databases (from 1970 to 2019). It summarized the reported ophthalmologic adverse effects of the currently available AEDs; their risks and possible pathogenic mechanisms. They include ocular motility dysfunctions, retinopathy, maculopathy, glaucoma, myopia, optic neuropathy, and impaired retinal vascular autoregulation. In general, ophthalmo-neuro- or retino-toxic adverse effects of AEDs are classified as type A (dose-dependent), type B (host-dependent or idiosyncratic) or type C which is due to the cumulative effect from long-term use.

Expert opinion: Ocular adverse effects of AEDs are rarely reviewed although some are frequent or may result in permanent blindness. Increasing knowledge of their incidence and improving understanding of their risks and pathogenic mechanisms are crucial for monitoring, prevention, and management of patients’ at risk.     

Circumstances of substance use by street youth in Egypt support the case for intervening to prevent adverse childhood experiences

Background: Egyptian street youth use substances including tobacco, illicit drugs, and pharmaceutical drugs. To understand the circumstances, including adverse childhood experiences, that place adolescents at risk for engaging in substance use, we conducted in-depth interviews among a sample of Egyptian street children. Methods: From youth residing at or attending Caritas, a non-profit organization, which provides shelter and education to street youth, seven girls and twelve boys, aged 12–18 years, participated in open-ended, in-depth interviews. Results: Eight out of the 19 participants reported family history (early exposure) to substance use; and seven of them were initiated by either a family member (sibling), friend or coworker. Most of the participants reported a history of conflict with or abuse (verbal or physical) by their parents or siblings, or stressful situations at home; they used substance(s) to alleviate their stress. Few attended school, and some were forced to work and help their family. Conclusions: Among Egyptian youth, adverse childhood experiences, such as poverty, child abuse, and family substance use, challenge somewhat susceptible youths and lead them to the path of substance use and addiction. Prevention intervention should be multifaceted, culturally adaptable, and primarily targeting the social environment during childhood.     

Are hand biomechanics affected following radial forearm flap harvest? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Donor site morbidity following radial forearm flap (RFF) harvest remains a controversial issue. The aim of this meta-analysis was to answer the question “Are the range of wrist movements (range of motion, ROM) and hand strength affected after RFF harvesting?” The PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library electronic databases were systematically searched (to December 2019). Self-controlled studies evaluating hand biomechanics after RFF harvest were included. Weighted mean differences with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using the random-effects model. The outcome variables were ROM, forearm movements, grip, and pinch strengths. Thirteen studies involving a total of 335 patients were included. With the exception of grip strength and supination, which showed statistically significant reductions of about 2.40 kg and 2.86° (P < 0.05), all other ROM, forearm movements, and pinch strengths showed an insignificant difference when the operated hand was compared to the non-operated hand (P > 0.05). Regression analysis showed that the method of donor site closure and size of the donor site defect had an insignificant impact on hand biomechanics. This study confirms the lack of discernible biomechanical morbidity after RFF transfer. The minimal reduction in hand biomechanics after RFF is considered to be clinically negligible.     

Conserving resources in the diagnosis of intraoral fibroepithelial polyps

Fibroepithelial polyps (FEPs) are common, benign intraoral lesions that tend to develop slowly at predictable sites, often in response to local irritation or trauma. Historical precedent often results in referral to oral and maxillofacial surgery (OMFS) departments for biopsy, often irrespective of symptoms, and histological assessment. OMFS and pathology services are struggling to cope with an increasing workload that will potentially lead to widespread delays to diagnosis and treatment. Over the past 20 years, clinical pathways and guidance have been developed to ensure that healthcare interventions, such as the removal of third molars, tonsils, skin tags, and benign moles, are evidence-based, have a net patient benefit, and ensure the best use of finite NHS resources. However, no such guidance exists for intraoral lesions and we regard this as an oversight. We analysed the removal of 682 FEPs over a seven-year period and report sensitivities of 92.4% for a “confirmed clinical suspicion of an FEP” and 99.7% for a “confirmed clinical suspicion of a benign diagnosis”. The incidence of non-benign disease was 0.3%. Primary care dentists should be able to diagnose and monitor FEPs and refer only if symptoms are serious or in high-risk patients or sites. Adopting this practice across the UK could free up to 1825 four-hour OMFS clinics, 405 hours of consultant histopathologists’ time, and recurring savings to the NHS estimated to be in the region of £620 000/annum. We believe that the removal of FEPs should be reclassified as an “intervention not normally funded”, and the time and resources put to better use treating patients with lesions of questionable pathology.     

Accuracy of MRI-guided Versus Systematic Prostate Biopsy in Patients Under Active Surveillance: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

This meta-analysis focuses on the accuracy of upgrading to clinically significant prostate cancer (PCa) by multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsy (MRI-TB) versus systematic biopsy (SB). We searched the Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Scopus, and Literatura Latino Americana em Ciências da Saúde databases through January 2020 for comparative, retrospective/prospective, paired-cohort, and randomized clinical trials with paired comparisons. The population consisted of patients with low-risk PCa in active surveillance with at least 1 index lesion on imaging. We evaluated the quality of evidence by using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 score. Group comparisons considered the differences between the area under the curve summary receiver operating characteristic curve in a 2-tailed method. We also compared the positive predictive value of the best single method (MRI-TB or SB) and the referral study test (combined biopsy, a combination of MRI-TB and SB). The meta-analysis included 6 studies enrolling 741 patients. The pooled sensitivity for the 2 groups was 0.79 (95% confidence interval, 0.74-0.83; I² = 75%) and 0.67 (95% confidence interval, 0.63-0.74; I² = 55.4%), respectively. The area under the curve for the MRI-TB and SB groups were 0.99 and 0.92 (P < .001), respectively. The positive predictive value for the MRI-TB and combined biopsy groups were similar. The accumulated evidence suggests better results for MRI-TB compared with SB. Therefore, use of MRI-TB alone may be preferable in patients in active surveillance harboring low-risk PCa.     

Patients' expectations,experience and acceptability of postoperative analgesia: a nested qualitative study within a randomised controlled trial comparing rectus sheath catheter and thoracic epidural analgesia

Adequate postoperative analgesia is a key element of enhanced recovery programmes. Thoracic epidural analgesia is associated with superior postoperative analgesia but can lead to complications. Rectus sheath catheter analgesia may provide an alternative. In a nested qualitative study (within a two-year randomised controlled trial) focussing on the acceptability, expectations and experiences of receiving the interventions, participants (n = 20) were interviewed 4 weeks post-intervention using a grounded theory approach. Constant comparative analysis, with patient and public involvement, enabled emerging findings to be pursued through subsequent data collection. We found no notable differences regarding postoperative acceptability or the experience of pain management. Pre-operatively, however, thoracic epidural analgesia was a source of anticipatory fear and anxiety. Both interventions resulted in some experienced adverse events (proportionately more with thoracic epidural analgesia). Participants had negative experiences of the insertion of thoracic epidural analgesia; others receiving the rectus sheath catheter lacked confidence in staff members' ability to manage the local anaesthetic infusion pump. The anticipation of the technique of thoracic epidural analgesia, and concerns about its impact on mobility, represented an additional, unpleasant experience for patients already managing an illness experience, anticipating a life-changing operation and dealing with concerns about the future. The anticipation of rectus sheath catheter analgesia was not associated with such anxieties. Patients' experiences start far earlier than the experience of the intervention itself through anticipatory anxieties and fears about receiving a technique and its potential implications. Complex pain packages can take on greater meaning than their actual efficacy in relieving postoperative pain. Future research into patient acceptability and experience should not focus solely on efficacy of pain relief but should include anticipatory fears, anxieties and experiences.