Summary Background Since December, 2019, Wuhan, China, has experienced an outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of patients with COVID-19 have been reported but risk factors for mortality and a detailed clinical course of illness, including viral shedding, have not been well described. Methods In this retrospective, multicentre cohort study, we included all adult inpatients (≥18 years old) with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 from Jinyintan Hospital and Wuhan Pulmonary Hospital (Wuhan, China) who had been discharged or had died by Jan 31, 2020. Demographic, clinical, treatment, and laboratory data, including serial samples for viral RNA detection, were extracted from electronic medical records and compared between survivors and non-survivors. We used univariable and multivariable logistic regression methods to explore the risk factors associated with in-hospital death. Findings 191 patients (135 from Jinyintan Hospital and 56 from Wuhan Pulmonary Hospital) were included in this study, of whom 137 were discharged and 54 died in hospital. 91 (48%) patients had a comorbidity, with hypertension being the most common (58 [30%] patients), followed by diabetes (36 [19%] patients) and coronary heart disease (15 [8%] patients). Multivariable regression showed increasing odds of in-hospital death associated with older age (odds ratio 1·10, 95% CI 1·03–1·17, per year increase; p=0·0043), higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (5·65, 2·61–12·23; p Interpretation The potential risk factors of older age, high SOFA score, and d-dimer greater than 1 μg/mL could help clinicians to identify patients with poor prognosis at an early stage. Prolonged viral shedding provides the rationale for a strategy of isolation of infected patients and optimal antiviral interventions in the future. Funding Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences; National Science Grant for Distinguished Young Scholars; National Key Research and Development Program of China; The Beijing Science and Technology Project; and Major Projects of National Science and Technology on New Drug Creation and Development.

Clinical course and risk factors for mortality of adult inpatients with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China: a retrospective cohort study

/pdf/cdc-guideline-for-prescribing-opioids-for-chronic-pain-48d7kdjqlr.pdf

CDC guideline for prescribing opioids for chronic pain

Opioid-induced hyperalgesia (OIH) is defined as a state of nociceptive sensitization caused by exposure to opioids. The condition is characterized by a paradoxical response whereby a patient receiving opioids for the treatment of pain could actually become more sensitive to certain painful stimuli. The type of pain experienced might be the same as the underlying pain or might be different from the original underlying pain. OIH appears to be a distinct, definable, and characteristic phenomenon that could explain loss of opioid efficacy in some patients. Findings of the clinical prevalence of OIH are not available. However, several observational, cross-sectional, and prospective controlled trials have examined the expression and potential clinical significance of OIH in humans. Most studies have been conducted using several distinct cohorts and methodologies utilizing former opioid addicts on methadone maintenance therapy, perioperative exposure to opioids in patients undergoing surgery, and healthy human volunteers after acute opioid exposure using human experimental pain testing. The precise molecular mechanism of OIH, while not yet understood, varies substantially in the basic science literature, as well as clinical medicine. It is generally thought to result from neuroplastic changes in the peripheral and central nervous system (CNS) that lead to sensitization of pronociceptive pathways. While there are many proposed mechanisms for OIH, 5 mechanisms involving the central glutaminergic system, spinal dynorphins, descending facilitation, genetic mechanisms, and decreased reuptake and enhanced nociceptive response have been described as the important mechanisms. Of these, the central glutaminergic system is considered the most common possibility. Another is the hypothesis that N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptors in OIH include activation, inhibition of the glutamate transporter system, facilitation of calcium regulated intracellular protein kinase C, and cross talk of neural mechanisms of pain and tolerance. Clinicians should suspect OIH when opioid treatment's effect seems to wane in the absence of disease progression, particularly if found in the context of unexplained pain reports or diffuse allodynia unassociated with the original pain, and increased levels of pain with increasing dosages. The treatment involves reducing the opioid dosage, tapering them off, or supplementation with NMDA receptor modulators. This comprehensive review addresses terminology and definition, prevalence, the evidence for mechanism and physiology with analysis of various factors leading to OIH, and effective strategies for preventing, reversing, or managing OIH.

A comprehensive review of opioid-induced hyperalgesia.

Background For many years, low back pain has been both the leading cause of days lost from work and the leading indication for medical rehabilitation. The goal of the German Disease Management Guideline (NDMG) on nonspecific low back pain is to improve the treatment of patients with this condition. Methods The current update of the NDMG on non-specific low back pain is based on articles retrieved by a systematic search of the literature for systematic reviews. Its recommendations for diagnosis and treatment were developed by a collaborative effort of 29 scientific medical societies and organizations and approved in a formal consensus process. Results If the history and physical examination do not arouse any suspicion of a dangerous underlying cause, no further diagnostic evaluation is indicated for the time being. Passive, reactive measures should be taken only in combination with activating measures, or not at all. When drugs are used for symptomatic treatment, patients should be treated with the most suitable drug in the lowest possible dose and for as short a time as possible. Conclusion A physician should be in charge of the overall care process. The patient should be kept well informed over the entire course of his or her illness and should be encouraged to adopt a healthful lifestyle, including regular physical exercise.

/pdf/non-specific-low-back-pain-10hfrn4v3k.pdf

Non-Specific Low Back Pain.

Pancreatic cancer is currently one of the deadliest of the solid malignancies. However, surgery to resect neoplasms of the pancreas is safer and less invasive than ever, novel drug combinations have been shown to improve survival, advances in radiation therapy have resulted in less toxicity, and enormous strides have been made in our understanding of the fundamental genetics of pancreatic cancer. These advances provide hope but they also increase the complexity of caring for patients. It is clear that multidisciplinary care that provides comprehensive and coordinated evaluation and treatment is the most effective way to manage patients with pancreatic cancer.

https://acsjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.3322/caac.21190

Recent Progress in Pancreatic Cancer

Epidural steroid injections: What's new?

Management of back pain in pregnancy

Many of the patients undergoing interventional procedures have daily regimens of medications including analgesics, muscle relaxants, and other drugs that can have significant additive/synergistic effects during the perioperative period. Further, many patients also present with comorbid states, including obesity, cardiovascular, and pulmonary disease. Consequently, in the perioperative period, a significant number of patients have suffered permanent neurologic injury, hypoxic brain injury, and even death as a result of over sedation, hypoventilation, and spinal cord injury. In addition, physicians are concerned about aspiration, subsequent complications, and as a result, they ask patients to fast for several hours prior to the procedures. Based on extensive literature and consensus, a minimum fasting period is established as 2 hours before a procedure for clear liquids and 4 hours before procedure for light meals, rather than having all patients fast for 8 hours or even fasting beginning at midnight the night before the procedure. Gastrointestinal stimulants, gastric acid secretion blockers, and antacids may be used, even though not routinely recommended. Due to the nature of chronic pain and anxiety, many patients undergoing interventional techniques may require mild to moderate sedation. Deep sedation and/or general anesthesia for most interventional procedures is considered as unsafe, since the patient cannot communicate acute changes in symptoms, thus, resulting in morbidity and mortality, as well as creating compliance issues. We are adapting the published standards of the American Society of Anesthesiologists for monitoring patients under sedation, regardless of the location of the procedure, either office-based, in a surgery center, or a hospital outpatient department. These standards include monitoring of blood pressure, cardiac rhythm, temperature, pulse oximetry, and continuous quantitative end tidal CO2 monitoring. Sedation must be provided either by qualified anesthesia or non-anesthesia providers, with appropriate understanding of the medications, drug interactions, and resuscitative protocols.KEY WORDS: Guidelines, sedation, fasting status, monitoring, neurological complications.

/pdf/asipp-guidelines-for-sedation-and-fasting-status-of-patients-15vncxamo1.pdf

ASIPP Guidelines for Sedation and Fasting Status of Patients Undergoing Interventional Pain Management Procedures.

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has emerged and has challenged us to look for alternatives to bring about a paradigm shift in interventional chronic pain management. As the disease lowers the body's immune system, the use of medications that suppress the immune system are not recommended during the COVID-19 pandemic. Objective The purpose of this study was to review medications other than steroids used for interventional pain management and the emphasis on mitigation of the untoward consequences of steroid injections on the immune system during the COVID-19 pandemic. Literature search The literature was searched for articles in English with key words COVID-19, immunity, steroid for pain management injections with steroid, local anesthetics, dextrose water, normal saline, pain and genetic medicine, pain, and regenerative medicine. The sources of articles were PubMed, Embase, and open Google search. Literature review The medications used for interventional pain management include steroids and opioids. The side effects of these medications are well known but have never been looked at as critically as they are now. Many other medications have been used for interventional pain procedures to relieve pain, such as dextrose water, normal saline solution, local anesthetics, and many adjuvants. Regarding regenerative therapy, despite plenty of evidence in literature, we have not yet considered it as a routine therapy for chronic pain injections. It is now time to move on beyond steroids and consider other types of medications and treatment options.The use of these medications in clinical practice is less auspicious, and thus more research is needed on the practical applications. Further areas for research include studies to determine definitive efficacy and safety assessment and determine whether or not the analgesic effects of these drugs are duration or dose-dependent. The optimal identification of candidates, volume, concentration, and intervals of injection are essential for routine application in interventional chronic pain practice. Conclusions The future of interventional pain practice is trending toward regenerative medicine and genetic research. Numerous scientific studies have been conducted to investigate the genetic basis of phenotypic variability in individuals with different ethnic groups in terms of susceptibility to chronic pain, as well as response to treatment for the personalized medicine model. Despite the preliminary data on genetic variations, there is no evidence for the use of a pharmacogenomics-based approach to personalized medicine for patients with chronic pain. The field of medicine therefore needs further research in pharmacogenetics, including large-scale prospective studies that focus on pain pathways. However, recent research, including larger studies and larger-scale genomic perspectives, may yield more promising findings in the future. The COVID-19 pandemic proved the need for medications with the most impact and least complications.

/pdf/covid-19-pandemic-implications-on-interventional-pain-36nawd7plo.pdf

Covid-19 pandemic: Implications on interventional pain practice—a narrative review

SECTION I: General Considerations Chapter 1: Basic Science of Spinal Receptors Chapter 2: Pharmacologic Agents and Compounding of Intrathecal Drugs Chapter 3: Polyanalgesia for Implantable Drug Delivery Systems Chapter 4: Principles of Patient Management for Intrathecal Analgesia Chapter 5: Patient Selection for Intrathecal Infusion to Treat Chronic Pain Chapter 6: Patient Preparation Chapter 7: Psychological Considerations in IDD Chapter 8: Intrathecal Drug Delivery: Medical Necessity, Documentation, Coding and Billing SECTION II: Implant Devices Chapter 9: Methods of Trials for Consideration of ITDDS Chapter 10: Techniques of Implant Placement for Intrathecal Pumps Chapter 11: Programmable versus Fixed-Rate Pumps for Intrathecal Drug Delivery Chapter 12: SynchroMed EL vs SynchroMed II Chapter 13: Minimizing the Risks of Intrathecal Therapy Chapter 14: Complications Associated with Intrathecal Drug Delivery Systems SECTION III: Evidence-based practice Chapter 15: Management of ITDDS in Patients with Co-Morbidities Chapter 16: Cost-Effectiveness of Implanted Drug Delivery Systems Chapter 17: Neuroaugmentation by Stimulation vs Intrathecal Drug Delivery Systems Chapter 18: Anticoagulation guidelines and Intrathecal Drug Delivery Systems Chapter 19: Intrathecal Therapy for Malignant Pain SECTION IV: ITDDs for spasticity Chapter 20: Intrathecal Baclofen Trialing Chapter 21: Baclofen Pump Management SECTION V: Future of ITDDs Chapter 22: Future of Intrathecal Drug Delivery Systems (including new devices) Chapter 23: Trialing for Ziconotide Intrathecal Analgesic Therapy Chapter 24: Perioperative Management of Patients with ITDDS

Sudhir Diwan

Papers

Epidural steroid injections: What's new?

Management of back pain in pregnancy

ASIPP Guidelines for Sedation and Fasting Status of Patients Undergoing Interventional Pain Management Procedures.

Covid-19 pandemic: Implications on interventional pain practice—a narrative review

Intrathecal drug delivery for pain and spasticity