Lawrence M. Lewis

Bio: Lawrence M. Lewis is an academic researcher from Washington University in St. Louis. The author has contributed to research in topics: Emergency department & Triage. The author has an hindex of 33, co-authored 82 publications receiving 6754 citations.

Second symposium on the definition and management of anaphylaxis: summary report--Second National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease/Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network symposium.

Abstract: There is no universal agreement on the definition of anaphylaxis or the criteria for diagnosis. In July 2005, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease and Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network convened a second meeting on anaphylaxis, which included representatives from 16 different organizations or government bodies, including representatives from North America, Europe, and Australia, to continue working toward a universally accepted definition of anaphylaxis, establish clinical criteria that would accurately identify cases of anaphylaxis with high precision, further review the evidence on the most appropriate management of anaphylaxis, and outline the research needs in this area.

Symposium on the Definition and Management of Anaphylaxis: Summary report

Abstract: Hugh A. Sampson, MD, Anne Munoz-Furlong, BA, S. Allan Bock, MD, Cara Schmitt, MS, Robert Bass, MD, Badrul A. Chowdhury, MD, Wyatt W. Decker, MD, Terence J. Furlong, MS, Stephen J. Galli, MD, David B. Golden, MD, Rebecca S. Gruchalla, MD, Allen D. Harlor, Jr, MD, David L. Hepner, MD, Marilyn Howarth, MD, Allen P. Kaplan, MD, Jerrold H. Levy, MD, Lawrence M. Lewis, MD, Phillip L. Lieberman, MD, Dean D. Metcalfe, MD, Ramon Murphy, MD, Susan M. Pollart, MD, Richard S. Pumphrey, MD, Lanny J. Rosenwasser, MD, F. Estelle Simons, MD, Joseph P. Wood, MD, and Carlos A. Camargo, Jr, MD New York, NY, Fairfax and Charlottesville, Va, Boulder and Denver, Colo, Baltimore, Rockville, and Bethesda, Md, Rochester, Minn, Stanford, Calif, Dallas, Tex, Eugene, Ore, Boston, Mass, Philadelphia, Pa, Charleston, SC, Atlanta, Ga, St Louis, Mo, Cordova, Tenn, Scottsdale, Ariz, Manchester, United Kingdom, and Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

Pharmacomechanical Catheter-Directed Thrombolysis for Deep-Vein Thrombosis

Abstract: BackgroundThe post-thrombotic syndrome frequently develops in patients with proximal deep-vein thrombosis despite treatment with anticoagulant therapy. Pharmacomechanical catheter-directed thrombolysis (hereafter “pharmacomechanical thrombolysis”) rapidly removes thrombus and is hypothesized to reduce the risk of the post-thrombotic syndrome. MethodsWe randomly assigned 692 patients with acute proximal deep-vein thrombosis to receive either anticoagulation alone (control group) or anticoagulation plus pharmacomechanical thrombolysis (catheter-mediated or device-mediated intrathrombus delivery of recombinant tissue plasminogen activator and thrombus aspiration or maceration, with or without stenting). The primary outcome was development of the post-thrombotic syndrome between 6 and 24 months of follow-up. ResultsBetween 6 and 24 months, there was no significant between-group difference in the percentage of patients with the post-thrombotic syndrome (47% in the pharmacomechanical-thrombolysis group and 48% ...

Time Course and Diagnostic Accuracy of Glial and Neuronal Blood Biomarkers GFAP and UCH-L1 in a Large Cohort of Trauma Patients With and Without Mild Traumatic Brain Injury.

Abstract: Importance Glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) and ubiquitin C-terminal hydrolase L1 (UCH-L1) have been widely studied and show promise for clinical usefulness in suspected traumatic brain injury (TBI) and concussion. Understanding their diagnostic accuracy over time will help translate them into clinical practice. Objectives To evaluate the temporal profiles of GFAP and UCH-L1 in a large cohort of trauma patients seen at the emergency department and to assess their diagnostic accuracy over time, both individually and in combination, for detecting mild to moderate TBI (MMTBI), traumatic intracranial lesions on head computed tomography (CT), and neurosurgical intervention. Design, Setting, and Participants This prospective cohort study enrolled adult trauma patients seen at a level I trauma center from March 1, 2010, to March 5, 2014. All patients underwent rigorous screening to determine whether they had experienced an MMTBI (blunt head trauma with loss of consciousness, amnesia, or disorientation and a Glasgow Coma Scale score of 9-15). Of 3025 trauma patients assessed, 1030 met eligibility criteria for enrollment, and 446 declined participation. Initial blood samples were obtained in 584 patients enrolled within 4 hours of injury. Repeated blood sampling was conducted at 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, 84, 96, 108, 120, 132, 144, 156, 168, and 180 hours after injury. Main Outcomes and Measures Diagnosis of MMTBI, presence of traumatic intracranial lesions on head CT scan, and neurosurgical intervention. Results A total of 1831 blood samples were drawn from 584 patients (mean [SD] age, 40 [16] years; 62.0% [362 of 584] male) over 7 days. Both GFAP and UCH-L1 were detectible within 1 hour of injury. GFAP peaked at 20 hours after injury and slowly declined over 72 hours. UCH-L1 rose rapidly and peaked at 8 hours after injury and declined rapidly over 48 hours. Over the course of 1 week, GFAP demonstrated a diagnostic range of areas under the curve for detecting MMTBI of 0.73 (95% CI, 0.69-0.77) to 0.94 (95% CI, 0.78-1.00), and UCH-L1 demonstrated a diagnostic range of 0.30 (95% CI, 0.02-0.50) to 0.67 (95% CI, 0.53-0.81). For detecting intracranial lesions on CT, the diagnostic ranges of areas under the curve were 0.80 (95% CI, 0.67-0.92) to 0.97 (95% CI, 0.93-1.00)for GFAP and 0.31 (95% CI, 0-0.63) to 0.77 (95% CI, 0.68-0.85) for UCH-L1. For distinguishing patients with and without a neurosurgical intervention, the range for GFAP was 0.91 (95% CI, 0.79-1.00) to 1.00 (95% CI, 1.00-1.00), and the range for UCH-L1 was 0.50 (95% CI, 0-1.00) to 0.92 (95% CI, 0.83-1.00). Conclusions and Relevance GFAP performed consistently in detecting MMTBI, CT lesions, and neurosurgical intervention across 7 days. UCH-L1 performed best in the early postinjury period.

Guidelines for the Early Management of Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke A Guideline for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association

Abstract: Background and Purpose—The authors present an overview of the current evidence and management recommendations for evaluation and treatment of adults with acute ischemic stroke. The intended audienc...

Medscape

Abstract: Secret History: Return of the Black Death Channel 4, 7-8pm In 1348 the Black Death swept through London, killing people within days of the appearance of their first symptoms. Exactly how many died, and why, has long been a mystery. This Secret History documentary follows experts as they pick through the evidence and reveal why the plague killed on such a scale. And they ask, what might be coming next?

Guidelines for the Early Management of Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke: 2019 Update to the 2018 Guidelines for the Early Management of Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Guideline for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association.

Abstract: Background and Purpose- The purpose of these guidelines is to provide an up-to-date comprehensive set of recommendations in a single document for clinicians caring for adult patients with acute arterial ischemic stroke. The intended audiences are prehospital care providers, physicians, allied health professionals, and hospital administrators. These guidelines supersede the 2013 Acute Ischemic Stroke (AIS) Guidelines and are an update of the 2018 AIS Guidelines. Methods- Members of the writing group were appointed by the American Heart Association (AHA) Stroke Council's Scientific Statements Oversight Committee, representing various areas of medical expertise. Members were not allowed to participate in discussions or to vote on topics relevant to their relations with industry. An update of the 2013 AIS Guidelines was originally published in January 2018. This guideline was approved by the AHA Science Advisory and Coordinating Committee and the AHA Executive Committee. In April 2018, a revision to these guidelines, deleting some recommendations, was published online by the AHA. The writing group was asked review the original document and revise if appropriate. In June 2018, the writing group submitted a document with minor changes and with inclusion of important newly published randomized controlled trials with >100 participants and clinical outcomes at least 90 days after AIS. The document was sent to 14 peer reviewers. The writing group evaluated the peer reviewers' comments and revised when appropriate. The current final document was approved by all members of the writing group except when relationships with industry precluded members from voting and by the governing bodies of the AHA. These guidelines use the American College of Cardiology/AHA 2015 Class of Recommendations and Level of Evidence and the new AHA guidelines format. Results- These guidelines detail prehospital care, urgent and emergency evaluation and treatment with intravenous and intra-arterial therapies, and in-hospital management, including secondary prevention measures that are appropriately instituted within the first 2 weeks. The guidelines support the overarching concept of stroke systems of care in both the prehospital and hospital settings. Conclusions- These guidelines provide general recommendations based on the currently available evidence to guide clinicians caring for adult patients with acute arterial ischemic stroke. In many instances, however, only limited data exist demonstrating the urgent need for continued research on treatment of acute ischemic stroke.

Interventions for enhancing medication adherence.

Abstract: Background People who are prescribed self-administered medications typically take less than half the prescribed doses. Efforts to assist patients with adherence to medications might improve the benefits of prescribed medications, but also might increase their adverse effects. Objectives To update a review summarizing the results of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions to help patients follow prescriptions for medications for medical problems, including mental disorders but not addictions. Search methods We updated searches of The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (IPA), PsycINFO (all via OVID) and Sociological Abstracts (via CSA) in January 2007 with no language restriction. We also reviewed bibliographies in articles on patient adherence and articles in our personal collections, and contacted authors of relevant original and review articles. Selection criteria Articles were selected if they reported an unconfounded RCT of an intervention to improve adherence with prescribed medications, measuring both medication adherence and treatment outcome, with at least 80% follow-up of each group studied and, for long-term treatments, at least six months follow-up for studies with positive initial findings. Data collection and analysis Study design features, interventions and controls, and results were extracted by one review author and confirmed by at least one other review author. We extracted adherence rates and their measures of variance for all methods of measuring adherence in each study, and all outcome rates and their measures of variance for each study group, as well as levels of statistical significance for differences between study groups, consulting authors and verifying or correcting analyses as needed. The studies differed widely according to medical condition, patient population, intervention, measures of adherence, and clinical outcomes. Therefore, we did not feel that quantitative analysis was scientifically justified; rather, we conducted a qualitative analysis. Main results For short-term treatments, four of ten interventions reported in nine RCTs showed an effect on both adherence and at least one clinical outcome, while one intervention reported in one RCT significantly improved patient adherence, but did not enhance the clinical outcome. For long-term treatments, 36 of 83 interventions reported in 70 RCTs were associated with improvements in adherence, but only 25 interventions led to improvement in at least one treatment outcome. Almost all of the interventions that were effective for long-term care were complex, including combinations of more convenient care, information, reminders, self-monitoring, reinforcement, counseling, family therapy, psychological therapy, crisis intervention, manual telephone follow-up, and supportive care. Even the most effective interventions did not lead to large improvements in adherence and treatment outcomes. Authors' conclusions For short-term treatments several quite simple interventions increased adherence and improved patient outcomes, but the effects were inconsistent from study to study with less than half of studies showing benefits. Current methods of improving adherence for chronic health problems are mostly complex and not very effective, so that the full benefits of treatment cannot be realized. High priority should be given to fundamental and applied research concerning innovations to assist patients to follow medication prescriptions for long-term medical disorders.