Podcasts about dvts

Today's episode covers a case I saw in the clinic in which a patient presented with symptoms consistent with a calf muscle strain, but ended up having a blood clot or deep vein thrombosis (DVT). Deep Vein Thrombosis or DVT describes a situation in which a blood clot (thrombus) forms in one of our deep veins. In many instances, this occurs in the calf region and happens after a person has undergone a surgical procedure. Typical symptoms include pain, swelling and warmth in the region. Besides surgery, blood clots can occur when we have been sedentary for extended periods (plane flight, bed rest after an injury, etc). DVTs can become a life-threatening if they break loose and move through the blood stream to the lungs. This situation is referred to as a pulmonary embolism (PE) and blocks blood flow to a portion of the lungs. If you enjoyed this episode, please consider following my podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify by clicking the 'follow' button. Also, if you would consider leaving a 5-star review for the podcast, it would mean a lot to me. Thank you!

In this episode of the BackTable Podcast, vascular surgeon Dr. Nicolas Mouawad and interventional radiologist Dr. Raja Ramaswamy share their insights on the changing landscape of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) management, steps of mechanical thrombectomy, and current research on DVT interventions. --- CHECK OUT OUR SPONSOR Inari Medical https://www.inarimedical.com/ --- SYNPOSIS The guests start by describing their typical referral patterns, noting that most cases come through the emergency department. In terms of workup, it is important to distinguish between acute and chronic DVTs and classify the thrombosis location as either proximal (femoral vein or higher) or distal. Anticoagulation, usually with direct oral anticoagulants, is always started, with efficacy largely determined by patient compliance. Regarding endovascular intervention, thrombolysis may be an effective adjunctive treatment if the clot occurred within a two-week timespan, but it carries a bleeding risk and requires ICU monitoring. On the other hand, mechanical thrombectomy is an option for both acute and chronic clots, allows for intervention in patients with high bleeding risk, and does not require post-procedural hospitalization. Both physicians emphasize that interventions should be employed if there are long-term benefits of avoiding post-thrombotic syndrome and pulmonary embolism. The physicians walk through a typical mechanical thrombectomy procedure, which involves the thrombectomy device, venogram, intravascular ultrasound, and possible stent placement. Finally, they discuss recent data, including the ATTRACT Trial for thrombolytics and the CLOUT Registry and Trial for ClotTriever use. Notably, they mention the DEFIANCE Trial as a current prospective randomized clinical trial for ClotTriever use in the iliofemoral region. --- TIMESTAMPS 00:00 - Introduction 03:48 - DVT Referral Patterns and Treatment Algorithms 08:55 - Choosing an Anticoagulation Regimen 11:01 - DVT Interventions 13:54 - Patient Scenarios and Treatment Decisions 22:29 - Post-Thrombotic Syndrome 26:16 - Mechanical Thrombectomy Technique 35:45 - Postoperative Care 39:09 - The Evolution of Mechanical Thrombectomy 43:38 - ATTRACT Trial 46:20 - CLOUT Trial --- RESOURCES Inari ClotTriever System: https://www.inarimedical.com/clottriever-system ATTRACT Trial: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1615066 CLOUT Trial: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35218955/ DEFIANCE Trial: https://evtoday.com/news/inari-medical-begins-defiance-randomized-clinical-trial-of-clottriever-system-in-dvt

In this episode, we dive into what a DVT is, what to look out for, how this could impact your ACL rehab, and common preventive measures you can take - a very overlooked red flag after your ACL surgery.If you found value in today's episode, please leave a quick review so we can continue to reach more ACLers, healthcare professionals, supporting roles, and more. The goal is to redefine ACL rehab and elevate the standard of care.Ways we can connect:My IG: www.instagram.com/ravipatel.dptOur website: www.theaclathlete.comEmail: ravi@theaclathlete.com_________________Check out our website and tons of free ACL resourcesSign up for The ACL Athlete - VALUE Newsletter (an exclusive newsletter packed with value - ACL advice, go-to exercises, ACL research reviews, athlete wins, frameworks we use, mindset coaching, blog articles, podcast episodes, and pre-launch access to some exciting projects we have lined up)1-on-1 Remote ACL Coaching - A clear plan. Structured ACL program. Based on your goals. Expert guidance and support with every step. Objective testing. From anywhere in the world.

We all know that staying in bed increases the risk of pressure injuries and DVTs. But the adverse effects of immobilization go far beyond those basics. In this eye-opening episode, Margaret Arnold, PT pulls back the curtain on the rapid and surprising physiological changes that occur when your patients are inactive. You'll learn about the hidden dangers of immobility most nurses overlook, spanning metabolic, musculoskeletal, cardiopulmonary, and neurological systems. We'll also equip you with practical tips to incorporate safe mobilization into your busy shift. This discussion will drastically change the way you view the vital importance of patient mobility.Check out Margaret's Early Mobility Conference this April 2024. I will be there!Learn more about the physiology of immobility with Margaret's webpage The Difference a Day Can Make: The Effects of Immobility.Check out Nicole Kupchik's exam reviews and practice questions at nicolekupchikconsulting.com. Use the promo code UPMYGAME20 to get 20% off all products.Do you need help with your resume, interviewing, or need career coaching? Check out Sarah at New Thing Nurse:Get 15% off of her resume and cover letter templates using the promo code UPMYGAMENursing students and new grad career services Experienced RN career servicesNP career servicesSee the show notes at upmynursinggame.com.

What is a deep vein thrombosis and how do we know we have it. How do we treat them? https://dralo.net/links

Pastor Lucas Miles joined VERONICA LIVE to discuss his new book Woke Jesus: The False Messiah Destroying Christianity. The Pastor shared with us the real dangers to Christianity and America from the Christian Left, Progressive and Woke Christianity that Christians face today. He also shared how to find out if your religious leader has gone woke. Superb discussion with this God Warrior.Dr. Carol Swain joined VERONICA LIVE to discuss her new book The Adversity of Diversity. Dr. Swain discussed how she rose from poverty and through hard work and perseverance she climbed the academic ladder to be a tenured Professor at some of America's top Ivy league schools. She also discussed why she wrote the book, her support of the Supreme Court's Decision to remove race from college admissions and how she weighs in as a conservative leader in politics. Outstanding leader with Dr. Swain who is truly an American national star. VERONICA LIVE regular Terry Strada, the National Chair for 9/11 Families United joined the show. Terry updated us on the new law the Ensuring Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act (EJVTA), how she was with Governor Ron DeSantis and the First Lady Casey for the 9/11 Memorial event in New York City and so much more. Hear what this passionate Warrior had to say on her continued 22 year fight for justice for 9/11 families.Dr. Marlin Schul joined VERONICA LIVE to discuss Deep Vein Thrombosis, Veins and Arteries, COVID, and COVID vaccinations. Outstanding discussion with Dr. Schul who is a leader in the artery & vein field. Dr. Schul works to ensure his patients can live a meaningful life with quality treatment. He also discussed prevention and lifestyle factors that we all can live by when it comes to vascular health and disease prevention.

In this episode, CardioNerds Dr. Daniel Ambinder, Dr. Giselle Suero Abreu, and Dr. Saahil Jumkhawala discuss thromboembolic disease in cardio-oncology with faculty expert Dr. Joshua Levenson, the Associate Program Director of the cardiology fellowship and an Assistant Professor of Medicine at the University of Pittsburg School of Medicine. Venous (VTE) and arterial thromboembolic (ATE) events are precipitants of morbidity and mortality in patients with cancer. Here, we discuss the pathophysiology of thromboembolism, risk factors and epidemiology for ATE and VTE, the role of risk prediction and patient stratification, and the approach to treatment for and prophylaxis of thromboembolic events with anticoagulation. Show notes were drafted by Dr. Saahil Jumkhawala and episode audio was edited by CardioNerds Intern Dr. Tina Reddy. This episode is supported by a grant from Pfizer Inc. This CardioNerds Cardio-Oncology series is a multi-institutional collaboration made possible by contributions of stellar fellow leads and expert faculty from several programs, led by series co-chairs, Dr. Giselle Suero Abreu, Dr. Dinu Balanescu, and Dr. Teodora Donisan.  CardioNerds Cardio-Oncology PageCardioNerds Episode PageCardioNerds AcademyCardionerds Healy Honor Roll CardioNerds Journal ClubSubscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!Check out CardioNerds SWAG!Become a CardioNerds Patron! Pearls and Quotes - Thromboembolic Disease in Cardio-oncology Patients with cancer are at higher risk of developing both arterial and venous thromboembolic events compared to the general population. Certain cancer subtypes are associated with a relatively higher risk of developing thromboembolic complications. Anticoagulation type and duration should be dependent on patient characteristics and risk factors, with shared decision-making between the patient and their providers. Subgroups of patients may benefit from more aggressive management of their atherosclerotic cardiovascular risk factors while being treated for cancer to reduce the risk of thromboembolic complications. Show notes - Thromboembolic Disease in Cardio-oncology What are the incidence and main manifestations of thromboembolic events (venous and arterial) in patients with active malignancy? Approximately 10% of outpatients with active cancer have venous thromboembolic events, many of which are asymptomatic. Clinically relevant VTEs are predominantly deep venous thrombosis (DVTs) with pain and/or swelling of the involved extremities or pulmonary emboli (PEs) resulting in chest pain and/or shortness of breath. VTE is the number one preventable cause of death for all hospitalized patients, and the ability to prevent and treat these events is crucial, particularly in high-risk populations such as patients with cancer. Are there any high-risk associations with specific cancer subtypes? Patients with metastatic disease and those receiving chemotherapy are more likely to develop arterial or venous thromboembolic events. Patients with acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) and thrombocytopenic patients are at the lowest risk for thromboembolic events. Multiple myeloma patients on medication such as proteasome inhibitors or lenalidomide appear at particular risk. Patients with localized, early-stage cancers such as breast, prostate, and melanoma are also at lower risk. What are the main risk factors to identify patients at a higher risk of developing thrombotic complications? Patients with a sedentary lifestyle, deconditioning, and undergoing active treatment with chemotherapy are at the highest risk of developing DVT or PE. How should we approach choosing the optimal type and duration of anticoagulation for acute pulmonary embolism (PE) in the setting of malignancy? This remains an area of active research. Historically, patients would receive systemic anticoagulation with heparin followed by warfarin.

Jack, AMK, and Maddy discuss their approaches to cytopenias and DVTs as they talk through a case presented by Sharmin. Frameworks: Pancytopenia Thrombocytopenia Download CPSolvers App here RLRCPSOLVERS

Significantly increased side effects that include infections, DVTs, cardiovascular disease apart from skeletal ones are related to a lifetime cumulative dose of oral corticosteroids greater than 1gm Tapering doses, bursts of higher dose and chronic low dose oral corticosteroids are patterns of oral steroid usage we should avoid Earlier referral to a specialist asthma clinic can be of great benefit for patients struggling with asthma control as much can be offered to help, including new biologics that are game changing   Host: Dr David Lim | Total Time: 39 mins Guests: Prof Vanessa McDonald, Professor of Nursing & A/Prof John Blakey, Respiratory Consultant Register for our fortnightly FREE WEBCASTSEvery second Tuesday | 7:00pm-9:00pm AEST Click here to register for the next oneSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Amanda Stoyko is a working mother of (now) 3! Aside from those 2 full time jobs, she sells anti-aging, vegan hair care and skin care. She has been active in health and wellness for over 15 years.  Amanda has returned to tell her birth story after sharing her pregnancy story with us in episode 5. Be sure to go back and listen to her original episode. You can follow Amanda on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/amanda.stoykoInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/apstoykoTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@apstoyko Coaching offerSupport the showConnect with Kelly Hof at kellyhof.comMedical Disclaimer:This podcast is intended as a safe space for women to share their birth experiences. It is not intended to provide medical advice. Each woman's medical course of action is individual and may not appropriately transfer to another similar situation. Please speak to your medical provider before making any medical decisions. Additionally, it is important to keep in mind that evidence based practice evolves as our knowledge of science improves. To the best of my ability I will attempt to present the most current ACOG and AWHONN recommendations at the time the podcast is recorded, but that may not necessarily reflect the best practices at the time the podcast is heard. Additionally, guests sharing their stories have the right to autonomy in their medical decisions, and may share their choice to go against current practice recommendations. I intend to hold space for people to share their decisions. I will attempt to share the current recommendations so that my audience is informed, but it is up to each individual to choose what is best for them.

Welcome to a new episode of the Hot Topics Podcast from NB Medical with Dr Neal Tucker.  In this podcast, we look at new research in the BMJ on optimal duration to treatment distal DVTs (wait... do we even check for these...?), and the Lancet examines the benefits of high-dose chronic heart failure therapies after acute decompensation. In Just One More Thing... this episode we are joined by Dr Rachel Ainley, head of research and evidence at Crohn's & Colitis UK to find out what's new in Inflammatory Bowel Disease. You'll find links to the RCGP IBD toolkit and C&CUK's awareness campaign below. ReferencesRCGP IBD Toolkit C&CUK Professional ResourcesBMJ Distal DVT paperLancet Post-Acute Heart Failure Dosage

How a lifetime cumulative dose of oral corticosteroids greater than 1gm is associated with significantly increased side effects that include infections, DVTs and cardiovascular disease (apart from skeletal ones) Tapering doses; bursts of higher dose and chronic low dose oral corticosteroids are patterns of oral steroid usage we should avoid How an earlier referral to a specialist Asthma clinic can be of great benefit for patients struggling with Asthma control, as much can be offered to help including new biologics that are game changing Host: Dr David Lim | Total Time: 40 mins Guests: Prof Vanessa McDonald and A/Prof John Blakey Register for our fortnightly FREE WEBCASTSEvery second Tuesday | 7:00pm-9:00pm AEDT Click here to register for the next oneSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On Episode 21 of the Stroke Alert Podcast, host Dr. Negar Asdaghi highlights two articles from the October 2022 issue of Stroke: “Oral Contraceptives, Hormone Replacement Therapy, and Stroke Risk” and “Effectiveness and Safety of Antithrombotic Medication in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Intracranial Hemorrhage.” She also interviews Dr. Shadi Yaghi about his article “Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Vitamin K Antagonists in Cerebral Venous Thrombosis.” Dr. Negar Asdaghi:         Let's start with some questions. 1) Do hormone replacement therapies or oral contraceptives increase the risk of stroke? And if yes, does the age of the individual or the duration of therapy modify this risk? 2) Should survivors of intracranial hemorrhage who have atrial fibrillation be treated with antithrombotic therapies for secondary prevention of stroke? 3) And finally, what is the anticoagulant of choice for treatment of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis? We have the answers and much more in today's podcast as we continue to bring you the latest in cerebrovascular disorders. You're listening to the Stroke Alert Podcast, and this is the best in Stroke. Stay with us. Welcome back to another amazing issue of the Stroke Alert Podcast. My name is Negar Asdaghi. I'm an Associate Professor of Neurology at the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, and your host for the monthly Stroke Alert Podcast. The October issue of Stroke covers a number of timely topics. As part of our October Literature Synopsis, we have a nice paper by Dr. Farida Sohrabji and colleague, which summarizes three recently published animal studies to evaluate the association between small vessel ischemic injury and either development of Parkinsonism or the future risk of Parkinson's disease. These studies looked at how ischemia, specifically involving the lenticulostriate arteries, can modulate the nigrostriatal dopaminergic pathway and ultimately lead to Parkinsonism. As part of our Original Contributions, we have the results of a small randomized trial out of Korea, which was led by Dr. Yun-Hee Kim from Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine in Seoul, where we learned that doing 20 sessions of transcranial direct current stimulation for about 30 minutes for each session at home can improve post-stroke cognition. This was found to be specifically effective in patients with post-stroke moderate cognitive decline. Now, transcranial current stimulation can be given using a handheld device at home, and if truly proven safe and efficacious in larger studies, can dramatically change the landscape of stroke recovery in cognitive rehabilitation. I encourage you to review these articles in addition to listening to our podcast today. Later in the podcast, I have the great pleasure of interviewing Dr. Shadi Yaghi from Brown University. Shadi will walk us through a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies to compare the safety and efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants to that of vitamin K antagonists in patients with cerebral venous sinus thrombosis. Our devoted Stroke Alert Podcast listeners recall that we did cover this topic in our March podcast when we reviewed the results of ACTION-CVT, a multicenter international study that was led by none other than Shadi himself. I'm delighted to have him as a guest on my podcast today to talk more about the seminal study and all things cerebral venous sinus thrombosis. But first, with these two articles. Millions of women worldwide use exogenous hormones, most commonly in the form of oral contraceptives and hormone replacement therapies. Despite the many different formulations of these drugs that are now available on the market, the two therapies are similar in that both combined oral contraceptives and hormone replacement therapies, or HRTs, contain various dosage of estrogen and progestin. Now, the principal difference between them being that the hormone contents of oral contraceptives are at high enough dosage to prevent ovulation, whereas hormone replacement therapies are considered more physiological as their aim is to return post-menopausal hormone levels to what they were before menopause. Well, by now, you must wonder how is any of this even relevant to vascular neurology? Well, the answer lies in the close relationship between hormonal therapies and stroke. But before we get to that, we have to review a few things. First of all, it's long been known that the endogenous estrogen has strong and protective effects on the arteries. It promotes vasodilation and cell survival of the endothelial layer. It increases the endothelial mitochondrial efficiency and stimulates angiogenesis. In other words, endogenous estrogen is good for vascular health. And in fact, that's why we think that premenopausal women, in general, are at a lower risk of stroke as compared to their age and vascular risk factors–matched male counterparts. And to make things even better for estrogen, there's enough evidence to suggest that exogenous estrogen also does all of these good things for the endothelium. So, why are we even talking about an increased risk of stroke associated with use of hormonal therapies? The problem is, we have to remember that exogenous estrogen also does other things. It can increase the blood concentration of procoagulants, which, in turn, can increase the risk of thromboembolism, especially venous thrombosis. But there's still a lot of unknown on this topic. For instance, the majority of the prior research on the topic involves postmenopausal women using hormonal therapies. Some of that research has actually suggested that HRTs may be protective against vascular events, while others showed the opposite. Well, we know that a majority of oral contraceptive users are actually much younger and use these medications premenopausal. So, there seems to be a lot of gaps in our current knowledge on the simple question of whether or not oral contraceptives and hormonal replacement therapies do, in fact, increase the risk of stroke or not. In the current issue of the journal, a group of researchers led by Drs. Therese Johansson, Torgny Karlsson, and Åsa Johansson from the Department of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology at Uppsala University in Sweden set out to fill some of these gaps with their study titled, "Oral Contraceptives, Hormone Replacement Therapy, and Risk of Stroke," as part of a large UK Biobank population-based cohort. Just a bit about the UK Biobank. This was a large population-based cohort from 2006 to 2010 that included over 500,000 residents of the United Kingdom between the ages of 37 and 73. Participants at the time of enrollment would have extensive information collected from them through questionnaires, interviews, health records, physical measures, as well as some imaging and biological samples. Data on each participant was collected from the time of their birth all the way to the day of assessment, which is interesting, because the day of assessment would then count as the end of the follow-up for each participant. Now, for the current study, they included over 250,000 women of White race in whom information required for the study on whether or not they use hormonal therapies, duration of treatment, age at the time of exposure was available. And just a quick comment about their methodology. They analyzed their cohort once for oral contraceptive use and once for HRT use and compared each group to a reference group of either women who never used their set therapy or the number of years they contributed to the study prior to initiating that set treatment. So, for instance, if a person started using oral contraceptives at the age of 21, all of the years that she contributed to the study before that age would count as non-exposed user years and were included in the control cohort. So now, on to their findings. A total of 3007 stroke diagnosis of any type were identified prior to the initial visit to the assessment center, which, as we mentioned, was the end of the follow-up in the study. Of these, 578 were ischemic strokes, 177 intracerebral hemorrhage, and 478 were subarachnoid hemorrhages. But as expected for any large cohort, over half of total strokes were self-reported as stroke of any type and could not be classified into any of the above subtypes. Now, let's look at the effects of oral contraceptives on the outcome of stroke. Overall of the women included in the study, 81% were classified as oral contraceptive users, while 19% reported never having used oral contraceptives at any point during the study. On the association between oral contraceptive use and the risk of stroke, at first glance, things looked OK. The hazard rates of any stroke for any stroke subtypes were not different between women who had used oral contraceptives as compared to those in the reference group. That's great news. But when they looked deeper, they realized that the odds of development of any stroke was actually quite high during the first year after the initiation of oral contraceptives with hazard rate of 2.49 for any stroke, while there was no difference in hazard rates found during the remaining years of use and after discontinuation of oral contraceptive use. So, meaning that there was no lingering effects of oral contraceptives on increased risk of stroke after the first year or after discontinuing the medication. Now, on to HRTs. In total, 37% of women in the study had initiated HRTs at some point during the study, while 63% had never used this therapy. Here's the bad news. Overall, HRTs did increase the risk of stroke. An approximately 20% increase event rate of any stroke was noted among women who had initiated HRTs as compared to those who had not. When analyzing stroke subtypes, the use of HRTs was associated with increased risk of only the subarachnoid hemorrhage subtypes. We don't know why. Diving deeper, in considering timing of HRT initiation, very similar to what was observed for the oral contraceptives, during the first year after starting the HRTs, the treatment group was twice more likely to suffer from any type of stroke, and the hazard rate was also increased for all three stroke subtypes that were available in the study. But, unlike oral contraceptives, the hazard rate of any stroke remains significantly high even after the first year of use, not just for those who continued HRTs, but sadly, even for those who discontinued the therapy. Though the risk remained high, the hazard ratio declined over time as we went further away from the first year when treatment was initiated. So, bottom line, if women had initiated HRTs at some point in their life, the hazard risk of any stroke increased significantly in the first year. That hazard risk did decline over time, but it always remained significantly higher than non–HRT users. Now, what about timing of treatment in relation to the onset of menopause? Is the risk of stroke any different if women start on HRTs prior to or after their menopause? The answer is no. Initiation of HRTs was associated with an increased hazard rate of any stroke if it was started pre- or postmenopausal, but the risks were higher if the treatment was started prior to menopause. So, in summary, this large population-based cohort has truly given us some very important practical findings. We learned that both oral contraceptives and hormone replacement therapies do, in fact, increase the risk of stroke, an effect that was most notable in this study in the first year after initiation of both of these therapies, and in the case of oral contraceptives, was just actually limited to that one year alone. Why does this happen? I guess the easy answer is that these drugs, as we noted earlier, have an immediate prothrombotic effect, which gradually weakens over time. That's one plausible explanation, but for instance, why HRTs increase the risk of subarachnoid hemorrhage is something we can't explain based on the prothrombotic effects of HRTs. So, we have to come back to the vessels, the impact of hormone therapies and estrogen specifically on the blood vessels, on the endothelial cells, the potential increase in blood pressure, especially early on in the course of treatment with these medications. And also, we have to think about the role these drugs may play in increasing inflammatory markers, providing a more suitable milieu for accelerated atherosclerosis, as to why these associations were noted in this study. And it's fair to say that we need more research on this topic in the future. One challenging scenario that we commonly face in our daily practice is deciding whether or not we should resume antithrombotics in patients with atrial fibrillation who have survived an intracranial hemorrhage. The majority of intracranial hemorrhage survivors with atrial fibrillation actually have a very high CHA2DS2-VASc score, which means that they are actually at a very high risk of future ischemic stroke and systemic embolic events unless they're treated with anticoagulants. On the other hand, the risk of spontaneous intracranial bleeding is substantially higher in a person who has previously suffered from one, let alone if we treat them with anticoagulants. And to make matters worse, we have little evidence from the literature to guide us. So, in the current issue of the journal, in the study titled "Effectiveness and Safety of Antithrombotic Medication in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Intracranial Hemorrhage," a group of researchers from the UK led by Dr. Deirdre Lane, Professor of Medicine at the University of Liverpool, performed a much needed systematic review and meta-analysis of the available evidence on this subject. I have to say that lately, it seems that we've been covering a few of these reviews in our podcasts, and we are just getting started. In fact, my next paper in today's episode is also a systematic review and meta-analysis. These papers are packed with details, a testament to the work needed to complete them, but I have to say that even summarizing these papers for a podcast has been a bit challenging. So, feel free to put me on pause, go get some coffee, and let's power through this one together. For their methods, they used the usual search engines looking for papers that included adults over the age of 18 with atrial fibrillation who had survived a non-traumatic spontaneous intracranial hemorrhage of any size, any type, and any location, be it lobar, brain stem, deep, cerebellar, subdural, epidural, or subarachnoid hemorrhage. And very importantly, they included even those with evidence of microbleeds on neuroimaging. The intervention of interest was either long-term oral anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy versus no antithrombotic use for the following three outcomes of interest: number one, recurrent thromboembolic events; number two, recurrent intracranial hemorrhage; and number three, all-cause mortality. Just a quick note that for this analysis, they excluded studies that looked at either short-term anticoagulation or non-oral anticoagulation use for any reason that was given to the patient other than for secondary prevention of stroke. For example, if a patient suffered from a pulmonary embolism and was treated with IV heparin or, for a short period of time after that, with oral anticoagulation, those patients or those studies were excluded from this meta-analysis. So, with this criteria, they pulled over 4,000 citations and abstracts, and finally included 20 papers that were published between 2015 and 2021 for a total of over 50,000 participants for this meta-analysis, very nice sample size. Most of the papers included were observational cohorts, but in addition, we had two small randomized trials, and I want to take a moment and review these trials for our listeners. The first one was a small noninferiority pilot trial out of the UK, the SoSTART trial, that looked at any anticoagulant versus either antiplatelet therapy or no antithrombotics in this population, and the other trial was the Phase 2 trial, the APACHE-AF, that studied apixaban versus no anticoagulation after anticoagulant-associated intracerebral hemorrhage. A reminder that both of these trials were published in Lancet Neurology in 2021. And before we move on to the findings of the meta-analysis, it's worth noting that they had included a mix of patients, some were oral anticoagulant–naive, and some had developed their index intracranial hemorrhage while already on treatment with anticoagulants or antiplatelet therapies. OK, now on to their findings, as mentioned, we're going to review three outcomes of recurrent thromboembolism, recurrent intracranial hemorrhage, and all-cause death for the following three groups: group one, oral anticoagulant therapy versus no therapy; group two, oral anticoagulation therapy versus either antiplatelet treatment or no therapy; group three, comparing new oral anticoagulants versus warfarin. So, for the first outcome of recurrent thromboembolic events in group one, when comparing oral anticoagulant therapy to no therapy, the study showed a significant reduction in thromboembolic events in favor of oral anticoagulation compared to no therapy. That's great news. Next, analysis of the studies that compared oral anticoagulation versus either antiplatelets or no therapy didn't show the same difference in prevention of embolic events in favor of either groups. Actually, no difference was noted between the two groups. Number three, now, in terms of comparing NOACs to warfarin, three studies had the information on this comparison, and they reported a significant reduction in the risk of thromboembolic events with NOAC as compared to warfarin. So, great news for oral anticoagulation overall, and especially for NOACs. Now, on the next outcome. Our second outcome was a recurrent intracranial hemorrhage. Keeping in mind that they included some studies where the outcome was defined as any form of intracranial hemorrhage, meaning they included subdurals, epidurals, etc., and some studies only included the outcome of intracerebral hemorrhage. So, on to the first group, comparing oral anticoagulants to no therapy, the pooled estimate revealed no statistically significant difference between oral anticoagulant–treated patients to those who were not treated with any antithrombotics on the risk of recurrent intracranial hemorrhage. That's great news. Next, on our second group, for the same outcome of recurrent intracranial hemorrhage, comparing oral anticoagulants to either antiplatelet therapy or no treatment, they found that oral anticoagulation was associated with a higher risk of recurrent intracranial hemorrhage as compared to antiplatelets or no therapy. And finally, third group comparing new oral anticoagulants to warfarin for the same outcome, the risk of recurrent intracranial hemorrhage was significantly reduced in patients treated with NOACs as compared to warfarin. And now, we're finally on to our last outcome of the study, which is the outcome of all-cause mortality. So, again back to group one, comparing oral anticoagulants to no therapy, this meta-analysis showed a significant reduction in all-cause mortality rate associated with oral anticoagulation. That's, again, great news. Next group, for the same outcome of mortality, comparing oral anticoagulants to either antiplatelet therapy or no treatment, they found no significant difference in the mortality rates between the two groups. And finally, comparing NOACs to warfarin, the pooled estimate showed that NOACs were associated with a significantly reduced risk of all-cause mortality. Amazing news for NOACs. So, in summary, here's what we learned from this big study. Oral anticoagulation use after intracranial hemorrhage in patients with atrial fibrillation did significantly reduce the risk of thromboembolic events and all-cause mortality without significantly increasing the risk of recurrent intracranial hemorrhage. In general, new oral anticoagulants, or NOACs, are preferred to warfarin as they do prevent embolic events with a lower risk of recurrent intracranial hemorrhage. But, of course, we still have a lot more questions. For instance, would any of the outcomes mentioned above be different in patients with lobar intracerebral hemorrhage, a condition typically associated with amyloid angiopathy, which carries a high risk of development of intracerebral hemorrhage? Also, we have to keep in mind that the majority of the studies included in the meta-analysis were observational. So, there remains an urgent need for a larger randomized trial on this subject, and we have to stay tuned for more research. Cerebral venous sinus thrombosis, or CVST, is an uncommon form of stroke resulting in headaches, seizure, or focal neurological symptoms due to either intracranial hemorrhage or venous ischemic infarcts. The rarity of the disease has made it difficult to study as part of randomized trials, so current treatment guidelines for CVST are consensus-based with much of the recommendations extrapolated from data on treatment of patients with systemic deep vein thrombosis. In general, based on the current evidence, the field agrees that a patient with CVST should be anticoagulated. The decision that is difficult and sometimes inappropriately delayed in the setting of acute hemorrhage in the brain. And not surprisingly, there's significant equipoise around the choice of anticoagulant, duration of therapy, and the role of heroic therapies, especially in the acute setting. Currently, there are a number of ongoing trials to address some of these issues. The direct oral anticoagulants present an attractive alternative to vitamin K antagonists for treatment of patients with CVST. This is partly because of their convenience of use. But how do direct anticoagulants compare in safety and efficacy to the vitamin K antagonists in the setting of CVST is less known. In our March podcast, we reviewed the results of ACTION-CVT, which was a multicenter international study that compared the safety and efficacy profile of the direct oral anticoagulants to that of warfarin in routine practice. The study included over a thousand imaging-confirmed CVST patients from multiple centers in the US, Italy, Switzerland, and New Zealand. And if you missed it, no worries at all. We're here to review some of the results again, as in this issue of the journal, many of the ACTION-CVT investigators, led by Dr. Shadi Yaghi, present the results of a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the safety and efficacy of DOACs, or direct oral anticoagulants, to that of vitamin K antagonists. I'm joined today by Dr. Yaghi himself to discuss ACTION-CVT and the current meta-analysis. Dr. Yaghi is a Director of Vascular Neurology at Lifespan and Co-Director of Comprehensive Stroke Center and a Director of Research at the Neurovascular Center at Rhode Island Hospital. Good afternoon, Shadi, and welcome to our podcast. Dr. Shadi Yaghi:               Good afternoon, Dr. Asdaghi. Thank you so much for having me. Dr. Negar Asdaghi:         Thank you. And please call me Negar. Congrats on the paper. Before we talk about the meta-analysis, can you please remind us of the results of ACTION-CVT and why the systematic review, in your opinion, was an important next step to that effort? Dr. Shadi Yaghi:               Thank you so much for having me and for bringing up ACTION-CVT. So ACTION-CVT is a real-world multicenter international study that used real-world observational data to compare the safety and efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants to vitamin K antagonists in patients with cerebral venous thrombosis. The reason why we did ACTION-CVT was, as you know, cerebral venous thrombosis is a rare disease, and it's hard to have large studies that would be powered enough to compare the safety and efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants to vitamin K antagonists. So, most of the studies that were done are small, retrospective. There's one randomized controlled trial, but most of them are underpowered to detect the difference between the two groups. So, we decided to do a large-scale international multicenter study using real-world data to compare the safety and efficacy of both. Dr. Negar Asdaghi:         OK, so we're glad you did. Let's start with the methodology of the current meta-analysis. Can you please give us an overview of the inclusion criteria for selection of the papers and the intervention and outcomes that you were interested in? Dr. Shadi Yaghi:               Of course. So, this is a systematic review and meta-analysis that included studies comparing direct oral anticoagulants to vitamin K antagonists in patients with cerebral venous thrombosis. The studies needed to have the two groups included, the direct oral anticoagulants and vitamin K antagonists, and they need to include at least one of the outcomes in our study to compare this outcome between the two groups. In addition, we included articles published in English, and we also included papers that had five patients or more in each group. Dr. Negar Asdaghi:         Perfect. So just recap for our listeners, in order to have been included in the meta-analysis, the paper had to have a reasonable number of patients, and you put that reasonable at the number five, and also they had to have at least one of the outcomes of interest reported in their papers. And those outcomes were either recurrent venous thromboembolism or recanalization rates. Right? Dr. Shadi Yaghi:               Correct. Yes. Dr. Negar Asdaghi:         Perfect. So with that, how many papers did you have to go through to come up with the current number of papers included? Dr. Shadi Yaghi:               That's a great question. We had a little over 10,000 papers, and then we went through a screening process. We used this tool that was developed by Brown University. It's called Abstrackr, and what you do is, we did the search and using several databases like PubMed, Cochrane, and then we included all these studies. We uploaded them in Abstrackr, and Abstrackr was utilized to be able to review all these abstracts and select studies that may or will probably qualify and then go through the studies and details that would qualify. So, we had about 10,000 studies with the initial search, and we had two reviewers go through each abstract, and from these 10,665, we excluded 10,411, and that left us with 254 studies. And then we went through these 254 studies in details. And then finally, we had 19 studies included that met our inclusion/exclusion criteria. And these 19 studies included three randomized control trials and 16 observational studies. Dr. Negar Asdaghi:         Incredible effort. So, three randomized trials in this meta-analysis and 16 observational studies. I think we're very ready to hear the primary outcomes. Dr. Shadi Yaghi:               Yeah, so, the primary outcomes were recurrent venous thrombosis, and that included recurrent venous thromboembolism like peripheral DVTs or PEs, for example, and including recurrent cerebral venous thrombosis. And we know that most of the events are recurrent VTEs, not CVTs, like probably about two-thirds to three-quarters were VTEs, and a third to a quarter were CVT. And then the other efficacy outcome is venous recanalization on follow-up imaging. And we found that direct oral anticoagulants and warfarin were not significantly different in the primary efficacy outcomes. Dr. Negar Asdaghi:         Thank you. I just want to repeat this for our listeners. So, you mentioned some important information here. First one was the fact that about three-quarters of recurrent events were actually systemic thromboembolic events rather than cerebral thromboembolism. So, an important outcome to keep in mind for our practicing physicians. And the fact that DOACs did the same as compared to vitamin K antagonist. So, I think you can already guess my next question, and that is, was there any compromise on the safety profile when using DOACs as compared to vitamin K antagonists in this meta-analysis? Dr. Shadi Yaghi:               Thank you. That's a great question. In ACTION-CVT, we found that there was a lower risk of major hemorrhage with direct oral anticoagulants compared to vitamin K antagonists. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we didn't find a significant difference, but there were fewer events in patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants versus vitamin K antagonists. This did not reach statistical significance, but if you look at the raw data, it's kind of along the same lines as ACTION-CVT, so the risk of major hemorrhage was about 3.5% with warfarin, and that was about 2% with direct oral anticoagulants. Dr. Negar Asdaghi:         So, again, very important finding, and I want to repeat this for our listeners. So, important finding number one was that there was a superiority in favor of DOACs that you found in terms of a reduced risk of intracerebral hemorrhage in ACTION-CVT. You didn't find this superiority in the meta-analysis, but there was sort of a hint to perhaps lower risk of intracerebral hemorrhage in patients that were treated with DOACs. Did I get that right? Dr. Shadi Yaghi:               Yes, that is correct, and in addition, also major hemorrhage in general, and that included also ICH. Dr. Negar Asdaghi:         Oh, OK, so not just intracranial, but systemic hemorrhages as well. All right. Very good. So, I think my next question would be, why do you think that DOACs have a lower chance of causing hemorrhage? Dr. Shadi Yaghi:               Yeah, that's a really good question. This is not unexpected with DOACs as opposed to vitamin K antagonists. We saw these same trends in patients with atrial fibrillation. We saw improved bleeding profiles with direct oral anticoagulants as compared to vitamin K antagonists. And the risks were along the same lines that we found in patients with cerebral venous thrombosis in ACTION-CVT. Also in the VTE trials as well, there was also reduced bleeding complications with direct oral anticoagulants as compared to vitamin K antagonists. So, it was kind of reassuring to see the same results in patients with cerebral venous thrombosis. Dr. Negar Asdaghi:         Perfect, so kind of expected based on what we know from treatment of systemic conditions with DOACs. The next question I have for you is that in routine practice, treatment of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis almost always starts parenterally with either unfractionated heparin or low molecular weight heparin and then we switch to an oral agent. In the observational studies, did you find any differences in terms of timing of this switch or characteristics of the patients in whom vitamin K antagonists were chosen over direct oral anticoagulants? Dr. Shadi Yaghi:               Thank you very much. Most of the studies did not report these details. I think the one study, off the top of my head, that does report the differences in characteristics between the two groups is RESPECT-CVT. That's the randomized controlled trial comparing dabigatran to vitamin K antagonists. In this study, there was a treatment with parenteral anticoagulation for several days, I think seven to 14 days, prior to transitioning to oral anticoagulation. And this is generally my practice. I typically would treat patients with at least seven days or so parenteral anticoagulation, and once they're clinically stable, then I would transition them to oral anticoagulation, either vitamin K antagonists or direct oral anticoagulant. Dr. Negar Asdaghi:         And I think my next question is along the lines of this question as well. We have several direct oral anticoagulants now available on the market. What was the most common DOACs used for treatment of CVST in these studies, and did you note a preference for the use of any particular agent over others? Dr. Shadi Yaghi:               Thank you so much for the question. Anti-Xa inhibitors were much more common than dabigatran, and the anti-Xa inhibitors most commonly used were apixaban and rivaroxaban. It's in line with what we saw in ACTION-CVT as well, although most of the randomized controlled trials or the largest randomized controlled trial, RESPECT-CVT, used dabigatran, but overall people have been using anti-Xa inhibitors, more particularly apixaban, which was also in line with what we saw in ACTION-CVT. Dr. Negar Asdaghi:         But I think it's fair to say that we don't really have data on superiority of one over others. Is that fair? Dr. Shadi Yaghi:               Yes, that is correct. Dr. Negar Asdaghi:         OK, and so now, where are we at in terms of the future of studies on this topic? We have one ongoing randomized trial now? Dr. Shadi Yaghi:               Yes, we have one randomized controlled trial ongoing, and this is the SECRET trial, and it's looking at rivaroxaban versus vitamin K antagonists in patients with cerebral venous thrombosis. There's another study, it's a prospective observational study that's called the DOAC-CVT study. It's an international study also looking at real-world data prospectively to see if there's a difference in outcomes between the two groups. Dr. Negar Asdaghi:         So, we look forward to the results of those studies. Shadi, a follow-up question I have on this topic is, how long should a duration of therapy be in idiopathic cases of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis? Dr. Shadi Yaghi:               Thank you so much for this question. So, it's unknown at this point for how long should we treat. The key things from the treatment are first achieving venous recanalization, and second is preventing another venous thromboembolic event from happening. So, regarding the venous recanalization, studies have shown that there's not a lot of recanalization beyond four months of treatment. So, a lot of the recanalization really happens early, and continuing anticoagulation beyond the six-months interval, for example, in order to achieve further venous recanalization probably has limited utility. And the second important reason why we treat patients with anticoagulation is also to reduce the risk of a recurrent venous thromboembolic event or cerebral venous thrombosis. And for that, if it's a provoked CVT, then I think usually it's three to six months. If it's unprovoked, up to maybe six to 12 months or even longer, depending on the profile. And if there's a persistent provoking factor, such as cancer, antiphospholipid antibody syndrome, then the treatment is lifelong or until this condition subsides. There's a lot of controversy about the duration of treatment. The European guidelines were very helpful in identifying the duration of treatment. Hopefully, also, we have some guidelines or at least a scientific statement by the AHA that also doles details out and provides some guidance to practitioners. Dr. Negar Asdaghi:         Shadi, what should be our top two takeaways from the current meta-analysis and also ACTION-CVT? Dr. Shadi Yaghi:               So, really, the top two from ACTION-CVT and the meta-analysis are, first is direct oral anticoagulants have a comparable efficacy to vitamin K antagonists in terms of recurrent venous thrombosis and achieving venous recanalization on follow-up imaging. And then the second point is direct oral anticoagulants are probably safer than vitamin K antagonists. We have to keep in mind that this data is based mostly on observational studies. And, as we mentioned earlier, we need more randomized controlled trials to support these findings. Dr. Negar Asdaghi:         Dr. Shadi Yaghi, it was a pleasure interviewing you on the podcast. Thank you very much for joining us, and we look forward to having you back on the podcast and reviewing this topic again in the future. Dr. Shadi Yaghi:               Thank you so much. I appreciate you having me. Dr. Negar Asdaghi:         Thank you. And this concludes our podcast for the October 2022 issue of Stroke Please be sure to check out this month's table of contents for the full list of publications, including an important update from the European Stroke Organisation by Prof. Martin Dichgans. I also want to draw your attention to this month's InterSECT paper, which is our International Stroke Early Career and Training section, to discuss the key topic of burnout and mental health amongst physicians, especially amongst neurologists and stroke neurologists. It's alarming to read in this article that neurology is one of the specialties with the highest reported rates of burnout syndrome, and stroke neurologists are at particularly higher risk than other neurological subspecialties. The article tackles some tough subjects, such as the barriers for physicians to seek help and important strategies to mitigate burnout and how to improve mental health in general. I think it's also timely to know that October is the Mental Health Awareness Month, and the theme for October 2022 is "Back to Basics." The basics of recognizing the burden of stress, anxiety, the burden of isolation and depression, not only on those who we take care of, but also on those who give care to us. So, whether you're a stroke physician, a stroke caregiver, or whether you've been touched by this disease in some way or shape, please know that you are part of the stroke community and a part of our Stroke podcast family. Thank you for listening to us, and, as always, stay alert with Stroke Alert. This program is copyright of the American Heart Association, 2022. The opinions expressed by speakers in this podcast are their own and not necessarily those of the editors or of the American Heart Association. For more, visit AHAjournals.org.  

Kerry Curran brings a career in medical device technology to a nimble startup leveraging student engineering skill to design products addressing post surgical Pulmonary Atelectasis and Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT's). While in it's early stages, this company is demonstrating how creative use of student skill and ingenuity, combined with a strong clinician feedback loop, can lead to useful innovation.

ASCO: You're listening to a podcast from Cancer.Net. This cancer information website is produced by the American Society of Clinical Oncology, known as ASCO, the voice of the world's oncology professionals. The purpose of this podcast is to educate and to inform. This is not a substitute for professional medical care and is not intended for use in the diagnosis or treatment of individual conditions. Guests on this podcast express their own opinions, experience, and conclusions. Guests' statements on this podcast do not express the opinions of ASCO. The mention of any product, service, organization, activity, or therapy should not be construed as an ASCO endorsement. Cancer research discussed in this podcast is ongoing, so data described here may change as research progresses. In the Research Round Up series, ASCO experts and members of the Cancer.Net Editorial Board discuss the most exciting and practice-changing research in their field and explain what it means for people with cancer. In today's episode, our guests will discuss new research in head and neck cancer, brain tumors, and health equity that was presented at the 2022 ASCO Annual Meeting, held June 3-7 in Chicago, Illinois. First, Dr. Cristina Rodriguez will discuss 2 studies on new treatment options for locally advanced head and neck cancer. Dr. Rodriguez is a medical oncologist at Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, an Associate Professor in the Division of Medical Oncology at the University of Washington, and an Associate Member for solid tumor clinical research at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center. She is also the Cancer.Net Associate Editor for Head and Neck Cancers. You can view Dr. Rodriguez's disclosures at Cancer.Net. Dr. Rodriguez: Hello. My name is Christina Rodriguez. I'm a medical oncologist with a clinical and research focus on head and neck cancer. And today I'm going to discuss research on head and neck cancer that was presented at the most recent 2022 ASCO Annual Meeting. I don't have any relationship to disclose that pertains to the research that I will talk about today. I'd like to discuss 2 abstracts that I thought were practice changing or practice affirming that really addresses some of the key questions that patients and doctors like me have about the treatment of patients with head and neck cancer. So, as you know, most patients with head and neck cancer present with typically locally advanced disease, and most head and neck cancer patients are treated with the intent of curing them most of the time with the use of radiation either as the main treatment or after surgery. And many clinical trials have shown that when we add a chemotherapy called cisplatin to radiation, we improve curative outcomes for patients. But the first abstract that I will talk about, abstract 6003, asks the question "What do we do for patients who are not candidates for cisplatin chemotherapy?" And we know that a significant proportion of our patients will have other medical problems that could make it difficult for us to give chemotherapy and often will result in complications or more toxicity or in side effects for patients. This clinical trial was carried out in India, and it compared radiation alone for patients with head and neck cancer versus radiation given with a non-cisplatin chemotherapy called docetaxel. What's unique about this clinical trial is that it's specifically focused on patients who were not candidates for cisplatin chemotherapy, something that really hasn't been done for this population. Interestingly enough, they found that when we give docetaxel with radiation in these patients, we find that they do better, they live longer, and they feel better based on quality-of-life questionnaires. So I will say that this study, abstract 6003, tells us that even in patients who are not candidates for cisplatin to be given with radiation, there is an alternative treatment that we can use, such as docetaxel given with radiation, that might still improve patient's cure rates for their head and neck cancer. The second study that I think was another interesting study was a clinical trial that asked the question, "Can we give cisplatin in an alternative manner for patients who are undergoing definitive radiation treatment as their main treatment for head and neck cancer?" Like I mentioned, the clinical trials that led to the use of chemoradiation as a standard use cisplatin given in larger doses every 3 weeks, but there's been concern about how well that approach is tolerated by patients. So this particular clinical trial compared patients receiving radiation as curative intense therapy for head and neck cancer with either the cisplatin given every  3 weeks or the cisplatin given at a lower dose once a week. It's important to know that this trial was done in India, where the population is pretty different from what we see in the United States. These are mostly patients who have HPV-negative cancers, mostly cancers acquired through exposures like tobacco and alcohol. And what they found was that these 2 groups of patients had very similar outcomes. In other words, there didn't seem to be a reduction in the rates of cure when we give chemotherapy every week versus every 3 weeks. And interestingly enough, it looked like from a toxicity or side effect standpoint, the every week seems to be a little bit better tolerated. Patients who got the treatment every 3 weeks also had less need for hospitalization or IV fluids and less utilization of health care resources. I think this is a very interesting finding because it really provides us with what we call high-level data that the weekly administration can work. I think it's important to recognize that the population that it studied for this particular clinical trial really was more an HPV-negative population. That's important to know because the standards for HPV-positive head and neck cancer are generated from larger trials that use cisplatin every 3 weeks. But we are continuing to study this question, and there's actually a large NRG study, HN009, that is asking that question both for the HPV- positive and HPV- negative population. So we are, I think, making strides in terms of asking the questions that allow our patients not only to receive treatment that is highly efficacious but also that limits side effects and toxicity. I will also mention that these trials were completed during the COVID-19 pandemic, which tells you that the dedication of these researchers to complete something like this in such a challenging time is to be commended. That's all I have to say, and thank you for listening to this brief summary of new research in head and neck cancer from the ASCO 2022 Annual Meeting. ASCO: Thank you, Dr. Rodriguez. Next, Dr. Glenn Lesser will discuss 3 studies that looked at new treatments for different types of brain tumors. Dr. Lesser is the inaugural Louise McMichael Miracle Professor and Associate Chief in the section on Hematology and Oncology in the Department of Internal Medicine at Wake Forest Health. He is also the Cancer.Net Associate Editor for Central Nervous System Tumors. You can view Dr. Lesser's disclosures at Cancer.Net.   Dr. Lesser: Hello. My name is Glenn Lesser, and I'm a professor of medical oncology and the director of medical neuro-oncology at the Wake Forest Baptist Comprehensive Cancer Center in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. I'm also the editor of the brain tumor section for ASCO's Cancer.Net. And today, I would like to briefly discuss several clinically relevant research studies involving patients with brain tumors that were presented at this year's ASCO Scientific Program. Of note, I have no disclosures or relationships relevant to the abstracts I'll be discussing today. The first presentation to talk about is a late-breaking abstract presented by Dr. Eric Bouffet, who described the results of a phase II trial of 2 targeted anticancer agents, dabrafenib and trametinib, in pediatric patients with a kind of brain tumor called a low-grade glioma, which harbored something called a BRAF V600E mutation in their tumor DNA. By way of background, gliomas account for about 45% of all pediatric brain tumors, and the majority of these gliomas are low-grade, which include World Health Organization grade 1 and 2 tumors. Common types of pediatric low-grade gliomas include pilocytic astrocytomas, gangliogliomas, and low-grade gliomas that are not otherwise specified. Now, mutations in the BRAF gene are common in certain kinds of cancers, particularly melanoma, and novel oral targeted therapies have been developed to effectively treat these tumors by targeting this mutant BRAF gene. A particular mutation in this gene called a V600E mutation occurs in about 15% to 20% of pediatric low-grade gliomas. The presence of this mutation is thought to lead to an increased risk of progression to a higher grade or a more malignant glioma in these patients, and these mutations in their tumors also predict a less favorable response to chemotherapy. In adults, recent studies in patients with malignant gliomas, papillary craniopharyngiomas, and melanomas containing V600E mutations have shown excellent results, with 1one of several similar 2-drug combinations that target both the V600E mutation and a second pathway that cells use to escape from this BRAF blockade. Now, early pediatric data suggested that one of these pairs of drugs, the combination of dabrafenib and trametinib, was safe and tolerable and had the ability to effectively treat patients whose tumors had the V600E mutation. So with that as background, this study was started and enrolled patients from 12 months to 18 years of age who had a low-grade glioma that contained a BRAF V600E mutation. And it randomized them to receive either the combination of dabrafenib and trametinib, or an older, standard cytotoxic chemotherapy regimen consisting of carboplatin and vincristine. Importantly, these patients were newly diagnosed, and this was the first systemic treatment they got, following their surgery or biopsy. 110 patients were enrolled, with 73 given the new targeted therapy combination and 37 receiving the standard combination. The most common types of tumors that the patients enrolled on this study had included pilocytic astrocytoma, ganglioglioma, and low-grade glioma. The results of this trial were that the patients who received the newer combination, targeted treatment of dabrafenib and trametinib, did substantially better than those who received standard, older cytotoxic chemotherapy. Their overall response rate - that's defined as a complete or partial disappearance of the tumor on MRI scan - was 47% versus 11% in the control arm. When patients who had stable disease by MRI were included, 86% of those on the new combination versus 46% of those patients treated with the older chemotherapy had the so-called best clinical response. Now, a large number of patients responding to dabrafenib and trametinib, remain on treatment and are receiving these drugs with an ongoing imaging and clinical response at the time of this report. Patients receiving the new combination had a median or average progression-free survival of 20 months versus about 7.4 months with the older, standard chemotherapy. The investigators conducting this study also had patients fill out a variety of questionnaires to assess their quality of life while on treatment. Once again, the patients who received dabrafenib and trametinib, on average, experienced an improved quality of life in contrast to those on standard chemo who, on average, had a worse quality of life. The new treatment was also well-tolerated with fewer serious adverse events or side effects when compared with standard chemotherapy. And these side effects were no different than what has been seen in patients without brain tumors who have been treated with this combination, including fevers, headaches, fatigue, skin changes, and lower blood counts. The authors appropriately suggested that these findings demonstrate the importance of molecular testing of these pediatric low-grade glioma tumors at the time of diagnosis and that this combination of dabrafenib and trametinib is a new potential standard of care in those patients who have the BRAF V600E mutant, low-grade tumors. Of note, liquid formulations of these drugs have been developed for those pediatric patients who are unable to swallow capsules or tablets. The second presentation at ASCO highlighted the continued importance of prospective randomized clinical trials in patients with malignant brain tumors. Dr. Jann Sarkaria from the Mayo Clinic presented the long-awaited results of the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology cooperative group phase II/III study of a PARP inhibitor or placebo added to standard temozolomide and radiation in adult patients with newly- diagnosed glioblastoma, and in addition, glioblastomas that had specific molecular finding called MGMT promoter methylation. This change to the DNA of the tumors prevents the MGMT DNA repair enzyme from being made in the tumors and leads to a better outcome with temozolomide treatment. Some very elegant laboratory science had suggested that adding a type of drug called a PARP inhibitor, which also causes defects in DNA repair, could lead to improved killing of glioblastoma tumor cells. So patients with newly- diagnosed glioblastomas, which had MGMT promoter methylation on genomic analysis, were enrolled on this study between December of 2014 and October of 2018. The study was conducted in 2 phases separated by a pre-planned pause after the first group of patients were enrolled, which was the phase II part of the study. This was done in order to allow a preliminary analysis of the outcomes of the treatment arms to make sure that there was a signal of activity that justified moving on to test this treatment in a larger number of patients, the so-called phase III part of the trial. This trial design hopes to minimize the number of patients treated with an inactive drug and save years of drug development time by avoiding large trials that go on for a long time with what turns out to be ineffective drugs. For this trial, 447 patients were eventually treated on this trial. Despite the convincing laboratory evidence and early, promising clinical results that led to the trial moving to the second or phase III portion, the final results showed no statistically significant difference in progression-free or overall survival between the 2 arms, that is, those treated with a PARP inhibitor, and those treated with placebo. I personally was very excited about this study and had hoped that the long wait to hear the results indicated that something good was happening. In addition, several of my patients who were treated on the study did exceedingly well, so I, incorrectly, it turns out, expected positive results from the trial. These negative results are a stark reminder of why we spend lots of time and money and energy performing well-designed clinical trials to determine appropriate treatment strategies for our patients, rather than relying on expert opinion or 1 institution's published experience. This approach turns out to be the best way to fairly test treatment strategies and establish new therapeutic approaches which are truly effective. A final, interesting abstract that was presented at a poster discussion session at ASCO was from the group with the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, and it dealt with the risk of bleeding in patients with brain tumors who had blood clots and were then treated with a newer class of blood thinners or anticoagulants called direct oral anticoagulants, or DOACs for short. It's been known for over 100 years that a variety of types of cancer cause patients to be hypercoagulable, that is, to be predisposed to developing blood clots throughout the venous system. Patients with malignant brain tumors have the highest incidence of all tumors of developing blood clots, which typically occur in the legs, called deep venous thrombosis or DVTs, or in the lungs, called pulmonary emboli or PEs. These clots can lead to a variety of severe and debilitating symptoms, including leg pain, swelling, shortness of breath, heart strain, and even death. For the past 2 to 3 decades, affected patients have typically been treated with a class of medications called low-molecular-weight heparins, which need to be injected under the skin once or twice daily. Over the past decade, a new class of oral anticoagulants called DOACs have generally replaced low-molecular-weight heparins as the primary method of treatment for patients with and without cancer who develop venous blood clots because of their safety, ease of administration, and a lack of requirement for regular blood tests or monitoring. However, little, if any, data has been available to determine the safety of these agents in patients with brain tumors and blood clots, a situation where bleeding into the brain or the brain tumor as a side effect of the anticoagulant could be catastrophic. In fact, this potential risk led to the exclusion of patients with brain tumors from several of the large trials which established the safety of the DOACs. Despite the absence of evidence, the DOACs are now pretty broadly used in brain tumor patients for the reasons described above. So this abstract described a cohort of patients with glioblastoma who developed venous blood clots between 2014 and 2021 while under treatment at Penn. The authors reviewed the medical record to determine the relative efficacy or effectiveness and the toxicity or side effects experienced by patients treated with the low-molecular-weight heparins and with the DOACs, including the rates of bleeding into the brain or the brain tumor. 121 patients were identified who fit these criteria, and the cumulative incidence of clinically significant intracranial hemorrhage, that is, bleeding into the brain or the brain tumor, by 30 days after starting the drugs, was minimal and similar in the 2 groups. When measured at 6 months, 24% of the patients in the low-molecular-weight heparin group had developed intracranial bleeding, and 4 of those patients had died from this bleeding, while none of the 32 patients in the DOAC group experienced this complication. Thus, these investigators felt that their data suggested that there was a lower incidence of clinically important intracranial hemorrhage or bleeding in patients with glioblastoma and venous blood clots who were treated with DOACs as compared to low-molecular-weight heparin. They went on to suggest that the use of DOACs was a safe alternative in patients with glioblastoma. Now clearly, either a prospective trial, a larger trial, or additional retrospective evaluations with a larger number of patients are needed to prove the safety of this approach. But this data is pretty comforting, as the use of these agents is now widespread in patients with high-grade gliomas. The ease of administration of a pill once or twice a day, as compared with potentially lifelong injections once or twice a day, is a major quality of life advantage for our patients. Thank you for listening to this brief summary of new research in neuro-oncology from the 2022 ASCO Annual Meeting. ASCO: Thank you, Dr. Lesser. Finally, Dr. Manali Patel discusses new research focused on reducing disparities in cancer care. Dr. Patel is a medical oncologist and Assistant Professor of Medicine at Stanford University. She is also the Cancer.Net Associate Editor for Health Equity. You can view Dr. Patel's disclosures at Cancer.Net. Dr. Patel: Today I have the privilege of discussing several really exciting research abstracts that were presented at the 2022 ASCO Annual Meeting. My name is Manali Patel. I'm a thoracic oncologist, meaning I take care of patients and try to provide good care delivery for patients with lung cancer. And I also am a researcher focused on health equity. I have no relevant disclosures for any of the studies that I will be presenting today with the exception of one that I was leading. And there were several wonderful abstracts that were presented on describing disparities and the ongoing state of disparities continuing within cancer care delivery. What I was particularly struck by were many of the abstracts that I'm presenting this morning and this podcast that really focus on what we can do as a nation and what we can do individually in our clinics to try to move towards action to overcoming these inequities. The first abstract I want to present was looking at how the Affordable Care Act and changes in the Affordable Care Act led to differences in mortality or deaths by race and ethnicity following the enactment in California. And this particular study looked at greater than 150,000 people who were diagnosed with breast cancer, colorectal cancer, and cervical cancer. And they evaluated death rates from these cancers both before and after the implementation of the Affordable Care Act. And what they found was that the cancer death rates for everyone was much lower after the Affordable Care Act was passed, but specifically for individuals who had self-identified as Hispanic ethnicity, who also identified as Black and who identified as White. And so what this abstract showed me was that at a larger level and a macro level, our policies that are enforced at the national level really do play a role in terms of how we can overcome disparities in cancer. Our group, as I mentioned before, has worked on really trying to integrate community health workers into care. So this abstract paired with local union organizations in Chicago and in Atlantic City to try to help individuals who self-identified as having been from families that were from low-income households and racial and ethnic minorities to communicate their goals and their preferences for care and to also better their relationships with their clinicians as well as to describe their symptoms. And what we found in this randomized trial was that for individuals who received this community health advocate who helped them to better engage with their clinician and who also helped them to describe the symptoms that they were experiencing as well as receive community resources such as food boxes if they were food insecure or be connected to household agencies if they were having difficulties with housing, we found a significant improvement in quality of life, but we also found reductions in the use of the hospital unnecessarily. We also found that this translated into reductions in total cost of care, thereby reducing the amount of out-of-pocket costs these individuals were spending on their cancer care. One of the other abstracts that I thought really was reflective of the many different ways that we can move towards action was an abstract which looked at during the pandemic, trying to reduce the number of times people need to come in for mammograms, their biopsies, and then any further testing that they needed after their biopsy. And this particular study evaluated what was called a same-day biopsy service, which layered on a same-day mammogram reading program. So at this particular institution, they had already implemented when you came in to get your mammogram as a woman or a man, you would have a read on the same day. So you did not have to wait to find out what your results were. And what they did further to push better care was that they layered on on that same day you could get your biopsy. So almost a one-stop shop. And what they found was that for everyone, regardless of race and ethnicity, the time to biopsies decreased by almost half. And the median days, for example, from an abnormal mammogram to obtaining a biopsy, meaning a sample of that tissue, that it decreased from 10 days median to 5 days. And particular patient populations did much better. And so they were able to show that when you do interventions that move the care to provide better care for everyone, everyone benefits, but particularly our patient populations who identify as racial and ethnic minorities who were more likely to experience delays in care, they also received some benefit from this intervention. The last study I want to highlight is work which looked at how to improve specialized services for people who would otherwise not receive those. And this particular study looked at stem cell transplantation for people with blood cancers. And what they found was that these services are often only offered in very tertiary centers, so places that may not be as accessible, large institutions that a lot of people may not have access to receiving care. So what they did was they partnered with this large academic institution so that they could build a pathway for individuals who would otherwise not get stem cell transplantation so that they could have access to those services. And it was really a multipronged approach where they not only educated the clinicians in the community practice about the effort, but they also educated the institution-level clinicians about the effort. They also provided shared medical records, which oftentimes in practice, we don't share our medical records with other clinics. And what they were able to do was to convince these clinics and the institution, let's share the medical records so that then you can have access to seeing what's happening for patients that are diagnosed in the community. And then that way we can both document, we can both have access in the community as well as in the institution where they're receiving the specialized service so that there's better communication. They also provided a navigator for each patient that would help each patient to identify any sort of barriers that they may experience to receiving stem cell transplantation. And then they offered telemedicine, which allowed for individuals to receive specialized services in the comforts of their own home without having to travel after the stem cell transplantation had occurred. And what they found was that usually in the institution, most individuals were more affluent. So they had higher levels of socioeconomic status. But after the intervention, individuals that were referred from this community clinic made it such that the affluence really decreased so that it was showing that people who wouldn't otherwise have access, who had identified as having low income, were now able to receive those services and had been receiving transplantation. I think that these studies really do move us towards a new paradigm of taking action on the many disparities that we know continue to happen. I really appreciate you all for listening to this brief summary of the new research on health equity from the 2022 ASCO Annual Meeting, and I hope to see you next year. ASCO: Thank you, Dr. Patel. You can find more research from recent scientific meetings at www.cancer.net. Cancer.Net Podcasts feature trusted, timely, and compassionate information for people with cancer, survivors, and their families and loved ones. Subscribe wherever you listen to podcasts for expert information and tips on coping with cancer, recaps of the latest research advances, and thoughtful discussions on cancer care. And check out other ASCO Podcasts to hear the latest interviews and insights from thought leaders, innovators, experts, and pioneers in oncology. Cancer.Net is supported by Conquer Cancer, the ASCO Foundation, which funds lifesaving research for every type of cancer, helping people with cancer everywhere. To help fund Cancer.Net and programs like it, donate at CONQUER.ORG/Donate.

The Second episode of Vision: distal DVTs

Drs. George Martin and Ted Rosen talk candidly about why JAK inhibitors are important in the treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD), when dermatologists should consider using them, and how to safely mitigate risks and side effects while effectively treating AD patients with these powerful, “revolutionary” medications. 0:50 – The role of JAKs in AD 4:50 – JAK nuances 9:13 – The ORAL study and expanded black box warning 15:07 – Newer JAKS and Black Box inheritance 17:00 – The new molecules 18:00 – How to present biologics vs JAKs (age + delivery) 21:10 – Women of childbearing years 27:00 – Legacy black box on mace events, PEs, and DVTs – who's at risk? 30:44 – Cancer and risk 32:10 – Patients at risk for serious infections 35:27 – JAKs and vaccinations 38:47 – Dosing adjustments 46:20 – Final thoughts on biologics and JAKs

After a brief hiatus we're back with more from the St Emlyn's Blog. We discuss a wide range of topics from crowding in Emergency Departments and the RePHILL trial to breastfeeding, genetic testing and diagnosing DVTs, as well as our highlights from the recent RCEM CPD Conference in Bournemouth. There really is something for everyone! 

Listen in as Board Certified Interventional Radiologist Dr Aaron Montgomery gives his expertise on DVTs and the evolution of treatments! DVTs can affect athletes and family , he gives us reasons to consider this issue and potential problems in our lives. Treatments are available from meds to intervention in order to get people back to their active lifestyles! --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/steven-donchey/support

Trying to keep up with the medical literature but...You've just watched Squid Games, you're feeling a bit stressed, and you thought some light-hearted medical education was just the ticket?Your ears are in the right place.Tonight your ears are joined by Barney, Cami and Alvin as we wade through an amazing collection of medical literature to bring you the best, most interesting and practice-changing information out there...In order:Respiratory RS - what O2 to use in COVID?AF - to screen or not?Metabolism over life - is this why we get fat later in life?Statins in elderly - to stop or not?Exercise in polluted areas - do the risks outweigh benefits?Cycling for diabetes - GET ON YOUR BIKES!Alcohol preventing diabetes - no, really?Sleep duration and delirium riskCan watching TV cause DVTs?Physician attire - what not to wearENJOY. And if you do enjoy, why not rate us on apple? And follow us on Twitter (please). And send wedding congratulations to Jon and Katia. I think that's it. 

In this episode, we discuss the recently published major updates in the 9th edition of the anticoagulation guidelines from CHEST. These new recommendations range from initiation of therapy, secondary prevention, and management of post-thrombotic syndrome. Key Concepts Among patients with cancer-associated VTE, DOACs are preferred over low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) EXCEPT in patients with GI cancers. The preferred anticoagulant in those with GI cancers is either LMWH or apixaban. Among patients with antiphospholipid antibody syndrome, warfarin (INR goal 2-3) is preferred over DOAC therapy. In the extended phase of treatment (secondary prevention after 3 months of treatment), lower anticoagulant doses should be used (such as apixaban 2.5 mg BID or rivaroxaban 10 mg daily). In patients with a DVT, IVC filters should only be used when anticoagulation therapy is contraindicated. IVC filters reduce the risk of PE but do not alter the risk of DVT extension or future DVTs. Compression stockings are not recommended for prevention of post-thrombotic syndrome nor for recurrent DVT prevention.

What is a Deep Vein Thrombosis? How can we assess for it in our patients? When do patients get a D-dimer test vs. an ultrasound vs. contrast venography? Find out more in this episode!The purpose of this podcast is to provide useful, condensed information for exhausted, time-crunched Physical Therapists and Student Physical Therapists who looking to build confidence in their foundational knowledge base and still have time to focus on other important aspects of life.  Hit subscribe to make sure you never miss an episode. Have questions? Want to connect? Contact me at ptsnackspodcast@gmail.com or check out more at ptsnackspodcast.com. On Instagram? Check out the unique content on @ptsnackspodcast!Support the show (https://buymeacoffee.com/Ptsnackspodcast)

Colleen Sosinski is poised to have her best year yet! She's been married to Bob for 27 wonderful years, is mother is Nick, has worked as a medical assistant at ENT Specialists of Wisconsin for almost 20 years, and is a survivor of multiple PEs with DVTs (pulmonary emboli/deep vein thrombosis) in 2019 and Necrotizing Fasciitis in 2020. Care warning: Life-threatening illness is discussed in this episode. Facebook: Colleen Sosinski Colleen.Sosinski@gmail.com or 920-410-7538 My website, email address, and handle: chrisdtgordon.com chris@chrisdtgordon.com @chrisdtgordon Post-production and theme music: @nateberan

Today's episode is dedicated to venous/arterial thrombi, also known as catheter directed thrombolysis. We are delighted to be joined by Dr. Anne E. Gill, Assistant Professor of Radiology and Imaging Sciences at Emory University School of Medicine. She is a pediatric interventional radiologist at Children's Healthcare of Atlanta. Her areas of expertise include pediatric thromboembolic disease, vascular malformations, enteric feeding tube access, and interventional oncology. Dr. Gill is on Twitter @AnneGillMD.  Show Highlights: Our case, symptoms, and diagnosis: A 17-year old girl with antithrombin III deficiency presented with bilateral leg pain to an outside ED. Duplex ultrasound of the bilateral lower extremities revealed extensive acute bilateral deep vein thrombosis. A CT scan of the abdomen and pelvis showed an extensive occlusive clot in the inferior vena cava involving the infrarenal and suprarenal IVC. She was transferred to our hospital and admitted to the ICU for thrombolysis and initiation of catheter-directed TPA infusion. In interventional radiology, an IVC filter was placed in the suprarenal IVC; additionally, the venogram in IR showed complete thrombosis of the right upper femoral, external iliac, common iliac, and IVC, with collateral veins in the right lower extremity draining into the thrombosed upper femoral vein. Interventional radiology performed pharmacomechanical thrombolysis and balloon angioplasty of right external iliac, common iliac, and IVC and placed infusion catheter to drip tPA from right femoral vein to the IVC filter. The patient was also placed on continuous heparin drip for systemic anticoagulation management. Morphine and Dexmedetomidine were used for pain management. The overall prevalence of systemic venous occlusion in children is difficult to ascertain due to their asymptomatic quality. Congenital SVOs in children can be due to developmental hypoplasia or agenesis of major conducting veins; they can happen in utero or manifest as neonatal thrombosis.  Acquired causes of SVOs can include catheter acquired obstruction, hypercoagulability/thrombophilia, mechanical obstruction, and trauma. A careful history is necessary to determine whether the occlusion was a congenital or acquired SVO. This is challenging because symptoms of venous obstruction in children may not present until later in life. This distinction is important as it affects the procedures that can be done. Better outcomes are possible if a native pathway is present, even if it's diminished from chronic obstruction and scarring.  Clinical presentations of systemic venous occlusions in children include head and neck swelling coupled with shortness of breath. In patients with acute DVT, venous congestion can manifest as prolonged capillary refill, coolness of extremities, and bluish discoloration to frank venous ischemia with loss of pulses.  Chronic DVT in extremities can present with a sense of heaviness, aching pain, and fatigue with activity; these symptoms are collectively described as post-thrombotic syndrome. Remember that obstruction to flow can compromise oxygen delivery! Common causes of venous occlusions are mal-positioned or wrongly sized central venous catheters, May-Turner syndrome, and long-standing central venous access lines in dialysis patients.  CDT is not recommended for DVTs below the inguinal ligament, based on the ATTRACT trial in 2017 that showed that CDT is most beneficial in veins above the inguinal ligament. Contraindications for CDT in children include allergy to tPA, active bleeding, surgery within the last 14 days, any invasive procedures in the last three days, recent seizures, recent trauma, or coagulopathy which can't be easily corrected. Caution is needed with premature infants and those with HTN or other risk factors for bleeding.  Diagnostics needed prior to consulting on a patient with venous occlusion include Doppler US, CT or MRI to visualize...

Check out the articles discussed in today's podcast hereATTRACT Trial https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1615066Dual Antiplatelets Following Lower Extremity Bypasshttps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32777321/

WMAL INTERVIEW - ALEX BERENSON -  former NY Times reporter and author of new book "Power Couple"-- discussed the latest news about vaccines and lifting lockdowns. 03/03/21 Website: www.alexberenson.com Twitter: https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson BIDEN: ENOUGH VACCINES FOR EVERY ADULT BY END OF MAY Biden says U.S. will have enough vaccines for every adult by end of May, moving up target date TWITTER TO CENSOR VACCINE TWEETS Twitter will begin labeling posts that contain misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines http://hill.cm/k6CNndQ / https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1366495444411572227 QUESTIONS ABOUT THE VACCINES: Alex Berenson @AlexBerenson: And if you don’t think these mRNA vaccines can kill healthy people - as in directly lead to their deaths - you tell me what these reports are saying? These are working adults 30-60 whose symptoms began almost immediately and who died in some cases within hours... https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1366455114676977670 Alex Berenson @AlexBerenson: Nothing to see here, folks: these are the most recent “life threatening” side effect VAERS reports in people under 50 - many healthcare workers, a baseline young and healthy group. Putting aside anaphylaxis, blood/CV events dominate - a lot of PEs and DVTs, a bunch of strokes... https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1366432132361560068 Alex Berenson @AlexBerenson: Also, the reports include more than 60 cases of myocarditis, pericarditis, or STEMI (heart attacks). This is notable because on Feb. 15 doctors in Israel were told to watch for post-vaccination multisystem inflammation, which often presents with heart damage... https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1366435967834423299 Alex Berenson @AlexBerenson: Unfortunately the #Covid vaccine mid/late term miscarriage and stillbirth reports keep coming: https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1366271776255279104 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Also ask yourself, did this study compare their treatment to the 'gold standard' and if the answer is no they compared it to a straw man, then think big Pharma, or authors that needed publication for their job. We can't treat what we don't know exist and 30-50% of the time COVID19 is asymptomatic. Combined Oral Contraception DO NOT have an increase risk of DVT and long term the risk are very minimal if a DVT does develop while on COC. Speaking of studies that should have never been done- Multicentre, prospective, randomised study comparing the diagnostic yield of colon capsule endoscopy versus CT colonography in a screening population (the TOPAZ study) | Gut (bmj.com) Diagnostic Yield of Colon Capsule Endoscopy vs CT Colonography in a Screening Population | PracticeUpdate The authors of this multicenter, prospective, randomized study compared the diagnostic yield of colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) with that of CT colonography (CTC) for colon cancer screening in an average-risk adult population. First you had either a CCE or a CTC and then the findings were confirmed with colonoscopy. The sensitivity and specificity of CCE for polyps ≥6 mm were 79.2% and 96.3%, respectively, compared with 26.8% and 98.9%, respectively, with CTC. The sensitivity and specificity of CCE for polyps ≥10 mm were 85.7% and 98.2%, respectively, compared with 50% and 99.1%, respectively, with CTC. They authors say this may work for people who refuse colonoscopy. Which is true it might but we have a fit test—it cost pennies—why in the world do we need this test?!? Its more money its more invasive its not better than FIT….. This is a study we didn’t need till I read the 30 line conflict of interest and I knew exactly why we needed this trial—to keep big pharm in business Colon cancer is scary cause most of the time we don’t know we have it and speaking of thigs we don’t know we have Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Infections Among Persons Entering China From April 16 to October 12, 2020 | Global Health | JAMA | JAMA Network China controlled their cases because Beginning April 1, 2020, persons entering China via air, sea, or land have been mandatorily tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection by PCR test at border checkpoints. retrospective cohort study looked at All international entrants found to have SARS-CoV-2 infection via a positive PCR test result at China’s border checkpoints from April 16 to October 12 were included in this study. 3103 had confirmed COVID-19 cases, AMONG THOSE 1612 (51.9%) never developed symptoms through day 13 and were considered to have asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. The Proportion of SARS-CoV-2 Infections That Are Asymptomatic: A Systematic Review: Annals of Internal Medicine: Vol 0, No 0 (acpjournals.org) Purpose: To estimate the proportion of persons infected with SARS-CoV-2 who never develop symptoms. And results found- about 1/3 of people had no symptoms and if you test positive and have no symptoms then about 75% of the time you will never have symptoms. WE will never be able to stop what we don’t even know about. WE can never and I repeat NEVER flatten a curve on something that you may not even know you have 33% of the time. Efficacy and safety of antidepressants for the treatment of back pain and osteoarthritis: systematic review and meta-analysis | The BMJ Prescribe antidepressants for depression not for pain Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Objective To investigate the efficacy and safety of antidepressants for back and osteoarthritis pain compared with placebo. Pain and disability were primary outcomes. Pain and disability scores were converted to a scale of 0 (no pain or disability) to 100 (worst pain or disability). Results 33 trials (5318 participants) were included. Back pain- serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) reduced back pain (mean difference −5.30, 95% confidence interval −7.31 to −3.30) at 3-13 weeks SNRIs reduced sciatica at two weeks or less (−18.60, −31.87 to −5.33) but not at 3-13 weeks (−17.50, −42.90 to 7.89). tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) did not reduce sciatica at two weeks or less but did at 3-13 weeks (−15.95, −31.52 to −0.39) and 3-12 months (−27.0, −36.11 to −17.89). SNRIs reduced disability from back pain at 1-13 weeks around 1-3 points—TO WHAT SIGNIFCANT CLINCALY ON 100 point scale. osteoarthritis- SNRIs reduced osteoarthritis pain (−9.72, −12.75 to −6.69) at 3-13 weeks TCAs and other antidepressants did not reduce pain or disability from back pain. ReplyForward 8000 women from 2004-2006- to be included you could not be pregnant or postpartum and aged ≤ 50 years, without active cancer There were 220 women had either a first distal dvt, first prox dvt, or a first PE Of these women, 47.3% (n/N = 104/220) were on COC pills at the time of their VTE event. Overall, 27.6% of patients developed venous thromboembolism (VTE)

With many people working from home and some less active there's been an uptick in Deep Vein Thrombosis -- better known as DVT. DVTs can lead to Pulmonary Embolims and PEs can be deadly. In this episode we talk about DVT ane PEs -- what they are, what causes them, and how we can avoid them. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

Contributor: Sam Killian, MD Educational Pearls: iliac vein compression syndrome is also called May-Thurner Syndrome The left leg more frequently develops deep venous thrombosis (DVT) in part because about 1/4 of the population has May-Thurner May-Thurner syndrome anatomic variant results in a right iliac artery compresses the left iliac vein against the spine, which can promote DVT formation This is thought to be the cause of 2-3% of DVTs in patients seen in the ED and suspicion for this disease should increased in those with recurrent DVT Diagnosis is made with MRV/MRA and will typically not be seen on duplex ultrasound Typical anticoagulation treatment fails to address the underlying structural cause References Demir MC, Kucur D, Çakır E, Aksu NM, Onur MR, Sabuncu T, Akkaş M. May-Thurner syndrome: A curious syndrome in the ED. Am J Emerg Med. 2016 Sep;34(9):1920.e1-3. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2016.02.045. Epub 2016 Feb 19. PMID: 26971822. Sharafi S, Farsad K. Variant May-Thurner syndrome: Compression of the left common iliac vein by the ipsilateral internal iliac artery. Radiol Case Rep. 2018;13(2):419-423. Published 2018 Feb 20. doi:10.1016/j.radcr.2018.01.001 Summarized by John Spartz, MS3 | Edited by Erik Verzemnieks, MD

This week feature a Double Feature of Discussions. In our first discussion, author Larry Allen and Associate Editor Justin Grodin discuss the article "An Electronically Delivered, Patient-Activation Tool for Intensification of Medications for Chronic Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction: The EPIC-HF Trial." Then in our second discussion, author Benjamin Scirica and Associate Editor Sandeep Das discuss the Research Letter "Digital Care Transformation: Interim Report From the First 5000 Patients Enrolled in a Remote Algorithm-Based Cardiovascular Risk Management Program to Improve Lipid and Hypertension Control." TRANSCRIPT BELOW Dr. Carolyn Lam: Welcome to Circulation on the Run, your weekly podcast summary and backstage pass to the journal and its editors. We're your co-hosts, I'm Dr. Carolyn Lam associate editor from the National Heart Center and Duke National University of Singapore. Dr. Greg Hundley: And I'm Dr. Greg Hundley, associate editor, director of the Pauley Heart Center at VCU Health in Richmond, Virginia. Dr. Carolyn Lam: Dr. Greg, I really love these double features that we have in 2021. Let me tell you about the first one. We are going to be talking about the EPIC heart failure trial. That's the electronically delivered patient activation tool for intensification on medications in HFrEF. Very important results. Dr. Greg Hundley: Yes, Carolyn. And the second feature is going to evaluate an algorithm based cardiovascular risk management program to improve lipid and hypertension control. But before we get to the double feature, how about we grab a cup of coffee and start with some of the other articles in the issue? Dr. Carolyn Lam: My coffee is right here and I want to talk about, guess what? SGLT2 inhibitors again for this first paper. Dapagliflozin, as we know, reduces the risk of end stage renal disease in patients with chronic kidney disease. We saw that in the DAPA-CKD trial. However, the primary and secondary preventive effects of SGLT2 inhibitors on cardiovascular outcomes have not been studied in patients with chronic kidney disease, with and without diabetes. Dr. Greg Hundley: Well Carolyn, remind us a little bit, what were the end points in the DAPA-CKD trial? Dr. Carolyn Lam: Okay, well yes. DAPA-CKD as a reminder, randomized more than 4,000 participants with chronic kidney disease to dapagliflozin, 10 milligrams daily or placebo. The primary endpoint was a composite of sustained decline in GFR of more or equal to 50% or end stage kidney disease or kidney or cardiovascular death. The secondary end points were a kidney composite outcome, the composite of hospitalization for heart failure or cardiovascular death and all cause death. Now the current paper is a pre-specified subgroup analysis where authors led by Dr. John McMurray from University of Glasgow, divided patients into primary and secondary prevention subgroups according to the history of cardiovascular disease. And results showed that dapagliflozin reduced the risk of the primary composite outcome to a similar extent in the primary and secondary prevention groups. This was also true for the composite of heart failure hospitalization or cardiovascular death and all cause mortality. The combined cardio renal benefits of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with chronic kidney disease with and without diabetes therefore are substantial, whether there is history of cardiovascular disease or not. Dr. Greg Hundley: Not very nice, Carolyn. Well, my paper comes from Dr. Pradeep Natarajan and his colleagues at the Massachusetts General Hospital. And Carolyn, this study evaluated whether premature menopause is associated with CHIP. For our listeners, CHIP stands for clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential and it is the age related expansion of hematopoietic cells with leukemogenic mutations without detectable malignancy. And previously it's been shown associated with accelerated atherosclerosis. Dr. Carolyn Lam: Yikes. Greg, is pretty much our menopause associated with CHIP? Dr. Greg Hundley: Well Carolyn, the investigators, among 19,606 women, they identified 418 or 2.1% with natural premature menopause and 887 or four and a half percent with surgical premature menopause. Premature menopause, especially the natural premature menopause was independently associated with CHIP among post-menopausal women. Natural premature menopause, therefore may serve as a risk signal for predilection to develop CHIP and CHIP associated cardiovascular disease. Dr. Carolyn Lam: Interesting. Okay. Well, my next paper really provides the first evidence for endogenous induction of type-1 protein kinase A disulfide formation in the heart and this occurring after ischemia and re-profusion in both humans and mice. Dr. Greg Hundley: Ah Carolyn, so tell us more about this interesting paper. Dr. Carolyn Lam: Well, this is from Dr. Simon from University of Oxford and colleagues who used high spatial and temporal resolution imaging modalities in conjunction with an interesting redox dead type-1 protein kinase A knock-in mouse model and demonstrated that disulfide modification targets this type-1 protein kinase A to the lysosome where it acts as a gatekeeper for two poor channel mediated calcium release and prevents inappropriate triggering of calcium release from the sarcoplasmic reticulum. In the post ischemic heart, they found that inhibition of lysosomal calcium release by these oxidized molecules was crucial for limiting infarct size and preserving cardiac function during re-profusion. All this thus offering a novel target for the design of cardio-protective therapeutics. This is discussed in an editorial by Doctors Westenbrink, Nijholt, and deBoer from University Medical Center Groningen. Dr. Greg Hundley: Thanks, Carolyn. Very nice. Well, my last paper comes from Dr. Nicholas Marston and colleagues from the TIMI study group at Brigham and Women's Hospital of the Harvard Medical School. Carolyn, genome wide association studies have identified single nucleotide polymorphisms or SNIPs that are associated with an increased risk of stroke. The authors sought to determine whether a genetic risk score could identify subjects at higher risk for ischemic stroke after accounting for traditional clinical risk factors across five trials involving the spectrum of cardiometabolic disease. Dr. Carolyn Lam: Interesting. And these genetic risk scores are very hot. What did they find? Dr. Greg Hundley: Thanks, Carolyn. Among 51,288 subjects across the five trials, a total of 960 subjects had an ischemic stroke over a median follow-up of two and a half years. Across a broad spectrum of subjects with cardiometabolic disease, a 32 SNIP genetic risk score was a strong, independent predictor of ischemic stroke. In patients with atrial fibrillation, but lower CHA2DS2-VASc two scores, the genetic risk score identified patients with risk comparable to those with higher CHA2DS2-VASc two scores. Dr. Carolyn Lam: Wow, that really is impressive. Well, guess what? We've got some other articles in today's issue. There's a beautiful White Paper about the definitions and clinical trial design principles for coronary artery chronic total occlusion therapies and this from the CTOARC consensus recommendations by Dr. Rinfret and colleagues from McGill University. There's a Research Letter entitled, The Randomized Control Trial to Evaluate the Effect of Dapagliflozin on Left Ventricular Diastolic Function in Patients with Type II Diabetes. And this is from Dr. Hong and colleagues from Yonsei University College of Medicine in Korea. Dr. Greg Hundley: Thanks, Carolyn. Well I have an exchange of letters from Doctors Albiero and Xie regarding the previously published paper, Patent Foramen Ovale Could be a Source of Paradoxical Embolism and Lead to Adverse Outcomes in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19 Pneumonia and DVTs.” There's also a Perspective piece to the 2020 AHA/ACC Guideline for the Management of Patients with Valvular Heart Disease from Dr. Bavry. And finally Carolyn, Dr. Tung has an ECG Challenge entitled, “Narrowing the Differential Diagnosis for a Wide Complex Tachycardia.” Well, how about we get on to both of our double features. Dr. Carolyn Lam: Let's go, Greg. Dr. Greg Hundley: Well listeners, we are here for our first feature discussion and we have with us today, Dr. Larry Allen from University of Colorado and our own associate editor, Dr. Justin Grodin from University of Texas Southwestern Medical School in Dallas, Texas. Welcome gentlemen. Larry, could you walk us through the background that really formulated your hypothesis? And then what was the hypothesis that you wanted to test with your study? Dr. Larry Allen: Well, thanks again for having me. I'm a heart failure doctor. The research group that I work with has spent a lot of time on patient empowerment and think about medication prescribing for HFrEF as shared decision making. Thinking about this as a discussion between the patient and me, rather than me deciding what to do. As you know, patients are now coming into the office because they've seen direct to consumer advertising around medications, but typically those are very biased. They're advertisements that are for only patented drugs. And what I'm really trying to think about is what is my patient's overall regimen in terms of heart failure? Dr. Larry Allen: And so we developed a tool which was a three minute video to tell patients that they should come into their visit and be excited to have discussions about their medicines and then a one page checklist that basically said, "Here's what an optimal regimen of medicines looks like for a patient with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction and nobody's really on a perfect regimen, but these are all the possibilities that you could have." Our hypothesis was that if we delivered that to patients before the clinic visit, that it would lead to better prescribing of these drugs. Essentially we imparted on a randomized trial within our healthcare system to do that and that's what we're discussing today, the results of the EPIC heart failure trial. Dr. Greg Hundley: Very nice, Larry. Tell us a little bit, what patients did you enroll in your trial? And then what outcomes did you work to assess? Dr. Larry Allen: We're part of the UC Health System, which has 12 hospitals, but a number of cardiology clinics across the front range of Colorado. Our entire system is on a single instance of the EPIC electronic health record so we're now able to essentially automatically identify all the patients in our system who have HFrEF. We generated lists of patients who had HFrEF who were going to see a cardiology provider in clinic and then we identified them ahead of time, enrolled them in the study prospectively. And the enrollment was for them to agree to be randomized in the study and then for us to be able to collect data on them. Dr. Larry Allen: The patients were kind of a wide range of HFrEF. They were an average of 65 years old, about 70% of the patients were male and reflected the race and ethnicity of Colorado with 11% Blacks and about 7% Hispanics. And everybody in the study had an ejection fraction of 40% or less on their last echocardiogram or other recent cardiac study. And then they were randomized to either get this three minute video sent to them as an email or as a text link that kicked them over to the one page checklist. And then we had them come in. A 145 patients came to clinic having got the information and a 145 patients just came to clinic like usual. Dr. Greg Hundley: Very nice. What did you find, Larry? What were your results? Dr. Larry Allen: Yeah, so we found not surprisingly that the majority of patients who were in usual care had no change to their medical regimen. What we found in the patients who received the EPIC heart failure three minute video and checklist, we saw about a 19% absolute increase in intensification of guideline directed medical therapy. And then we found that most of that was actually an increase in beta blocker dose prescribing. To some extent, the cheapest therapy that could be increased on a drug that people are already on. Dr. Greg Hundley: Very good. Well Justin, we'll turn to you. Help us put the results from Larry's work in the context of A, management of patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction and then also B, tell us a little bit about what attracted you to this article and maybe even where you see some of this going next. Dr. Justin Grodin: Thanks, Greg. And Larry, obviously I want to echo Greg's comments by thanking you for your submission. This was a paper that we thought obviously very highly of. Greg, for your first point, we've got novel therapies, but really one of the major issues now is not can we find a newer, better drug? I think we've all come to this realization, it's scalability and implementing these therapies into our regular practice, like beta blockers, RAS inhibitors and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists. And as Larry said, the problem now is not the quality of our therapies, it's really scaling it and getting it to everyone. It's also increasing these therapies to optimum dosages in patients that can tolerate it over time. Dr. Justin Grodin: And then, to answer your second question, I think some of the things that struck us by this was that this is a wonderfully simple intervention that truly does empower patients. The majority of our interventions to optimize medical therapy has been targeting the physicians, the APP, the nurses, et cetera. This is beautiful in that it empowers the patient and we are putting the ball in their court. And I think to kind of dovetail with your third question, this is a health system clinical trial and I think that tells us a few things. I think one, it provides the framework on how one could perhaps implement that in their health systems. And we'll have to see if this is something that could translate to other health systems across the country or multiple centers. But I think really the intrigue with this work is that it all comes back to empowering the patients. Dr. Greg Hundley: Very nice. Dr. Larry Allen: Greg, I wanted to just add one thing that in the heart failure community, there's this argument going back and forth about whether the lack of optimization of guideline directed medical therapies is due to intolerance or whether it's due to therapeutic inertia. And one of the things I like about this study is on face value, we're empowering patients, but the fact that by asking patients to get involved in prescribing decisions, I think one of the take home messages is that this is partially about therapeutic inertia and that as clinicians, we have a lot of things we're dealing with. And if patients come in to the clinic visit and they're motivated to make these changes actually, we can intensify the therapy. Dr. Greg Hundley: Very good. Larry and Justin, both one at a time here quickly, in the last minute that we have, what do you see as the next study, Larry, that needs to be performed in this space? Dr. Larry Allen: I see two things quickly. One is, as Justin mentioned, validating that this kind of intervention, while simple can be pragmatically deployed in other health systems and in other contexts. The second thing is how do we integrate this kind of small intervention with the larger overall care of patients? One of the concepts that I've talked a lot about over the years with others, including Len Stevenson, is this concept of an annual heart failure review, where rather than seeing people on multiple short visits where we tackle small issues, we actually create a little bit of time to stand back and take a global view of heart failure therapy and how that heart failure therapy fits into the goals of care for the patient, the other medical problems they have and where they're headed. Dr. Greg Hundley: Very good. Justin, anything? Dr. Justin Grodin: Greg, I have to agree with Larry. I think he hit the nail on the head with his first comment. At least for me from an editorial standpoint is really we like to see how generalizable this is and really this implemented in other health systems. I think that's the logical next step. I can tell you, at least from our discussions at our medical center about this manuscript since it's been published at Circulation is, is there something like this we could implement in our own health system? Or in the health systems that we're affiliated with? Dr. Larry Allen: And I would just add that this research and the intervention was funded by the American Heart Association under the strategically focused research network for heart failure and so we've made the interventions public they're online at the research website we have, patientdecisionaid.org. Dr. Greg Hundley: Well fantastic. Well listeners, we want to thank Dr. Larry Allen from University of Colorado and our associate editor, Dr. Justin Grodin from UT Southwestern, for bringing us this article, demonstrating a process that facilitates patient physician interactions to improve the administration of guideline based therapy to patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction. And so we're going to wind up this feature discussion and we will head to our next feature. Dr. Greg Hundley: And we have with us Dr. Benjamin Scirica from Brigham and Women's Hospital and our own associate editor, Dr. Sandeep Das from UT Southwestern. Benjamin, could you tell us a little bit about the background information that you used to formulate your hypothesis that you wanted to test for this study? Dr. Benjamin Scirica: Thanks so much first for the invitation. It's a great honor to obviously be in Circulation and to be part of this podcast. We started with the recognition that in our practice, which is similar, I think to a lot of the United States, we are not doing as good a job as we could in terms of care for a lot of the chronic cardiovascular conditions we see. And hypertension and high cholesterol are one of those clear areas where we know there are very good guidelines with clear indication for therapy in specific situations and that these drugs that are available are predominantly generic. But when we looked at our registries, we found that we were not doing as well as we thought. We felt that there are a lot of reasons for that. Dr. Benjamin Scirica: A lot of it was based on the fact that for something good to happen, the right thing to happen, you have to have a patient and a doctor in the same room, the doctor has to recognize that there's a problem. They have to know that there is something they can do about it. They have to be able to convince the patient or educate the patient that they should start this new therapy. They have to know how to start the therapy and then have the ability to follow up and make sure that there is longitudinal care for these chronic diseases. Dr. Benjamin Scirica: And that's a lot to ask for any of us when we have 15 minutes to see the patient, we may only see the patient a couple times a year at most. And so we felt that our hypothesis is, could we design a program, would be delivered remotely, that would not require a doctor in the middle of all of these decisions and that we could scale by using lower cost resources, non-licensed healthcare coordinators or navigators and pharmacists who could follow very clear treatment algorithms to be able to identify patients and prescribe the right medicines to patients at the right time, based on their cardiovascular risk. Dr. Greg Hundley: What was your study design? And what was your study population? Dr. Benjamin Scirica: This is an active, ongoing quality improvement program where our hypothesis is that by doing this, we could improve patients' lipids and cholesterol prescriptions compared to prior. And we did some analysis and we saw that a lot of these patients had not been on optimal therapy for many years, even though they've been in our system. With the limitations of not having randomization, we identified these patients and through different clinics in the different hospitals, and would either have patients referred to us by providers or more commonly go and find them within the registries and identify the patients and contact them and have them enter our program where they would usually take somewhere between eight to 12 weeks to be actively managed, to get to their goals and then they'd enter a maintenance program. The report that we do now is that the story of the first 5,000 patients who we enrolled in our program of whom about 35% were still in management at the time we presented these ongoing results. Dr. Greg Hundley: Roughly how old were these participants? And what was the breakdown in terms of gender or sex distribution? Dr. Benjamin Scirica: We found that about 12% were over 75 years old, a little over half were female. We had 71% who are non-Hispanic Caucasian and 8% who were non-English speaking. In terms of their cardiovascular risks, about a third of the patients had established cardiovascular disease, about a quarter of the patients had diabetes and about a third had an LDL of more than 190 milligrams per deciliter, but no history of ASCVD or diabetes. And then for hypertension, we really would take anybody whom the physician felt required further blood pressure management, because their blood pressure was over 130 over 85. Dr. Greg Hundley: And what did you find? Dr. Benjamin Scirica: We found that of the 5,000 patients that we enrolled, about 4,000 were in the lipid program, a little over 1,400 we're in the hypertension program, so some patients were in both programs and in the lipid patients, in those patients who achieved maintenance, we increased lipid therapy, any lipid lowering therapy, from about 78% up to 97%. And that was predominantly through statins but we doubled the use of ezetimibe from 9% to 17%. We saw a small increase in PCSK9 inhibitor use from 1% to 3%. And if we looked at LDL reductions, it was a 52 milligram per deciliter reduction in LDL from an average LDL of a 125 down to 73 in those folks who achieved maintenance. For blood pressure, again, in those patients whom we successfully treated who are about 600 patients, we saw a 14 millimeter systolic blood pressure reduction and a seven millimeter mercury diastolic blood pressure reduction. Dr. Greg Hundley: Wow. Well Sandeep, what drew your attention to this? And then also, how do you put the context of these results with others that really are working in this wing of data science in cardiovascular medicine? Dr. Sandeep Das: Great question. We have a large body of literature that suggests that the use of these fantastic evidence based therapies like statins, like blood pressure medications is poor and we really struggle to improve those numbers. I wanted to applaud Ben and his group for really taking on, in a robust way, an important topic and subject. The other thing that really attracted me to this study, there was a hypertension expert here named Ron Victor back when I first started as a fellow. Fantastic researcher and he did a project called Colloquia called the Barbershop Project about leveraging pharmacists and barbers to improve the blood pressure control of African American men in the community. Dr. Sandeep Das: The idea is that you get out there, you got to go to where the patients are rather than expecting them to come to you. And you got to figure out ways to engage them, activate them, get them to participate in their own care. A fantastic study, but the one thing that always, we discuss that study, the thing that always jumps out is, well how do you scale it? How do you use it in a real practice? To me was also a very exciting aspect to this. The goal is to take steps to generalize from clinical trials to real world practice, because we got to get this to patients. Dr. Greg Hundley: Very nice. Well Ben, coming back to you, what do you see as next steps for your research here? And then even in the field? Dr. Benjamin Scirica: The first is, are there other disease areas we can do this in? I think the second part is how to test different techniques to try to improve the ability to scale it to broader populations and keep the cost down. And I think it is a combination of trying to find the right tools, whether they're digital or not and the right techniques to be able to activate patients, educate them, such that they are asking the question, "How come I'm not on these medicines? How come I'm not on this?" And I think we could do a lot in terms of AB testing in there. The part that I think is challenging in these healthcare studies and quality improvement studies, is that randomization would be great. How can we do it streamline? Do we need to get consent? Can it just be that approved drug A can be tested against approved drug B because there is clear equipoise. And I think by doing that, we could lower the bar for really pragmatic randomization in practice and be able to have much more rapid cycles of improvement and optimization on therapy. Dr. Greg Hundley: Very good. Sandeep, do you have anything to add? Dr. Sandeep Das: I'll echo Dr. Scirica's called arms here that we need to have a way to do this, do trials in this space pragmatically. I agree with that strongly. I did have a few thoughts on next directions. I work in a population of the urban poor of Dallas County with a lot of my clinical time and these patients have poor health literacy so I think that one question, not question but suggestion or comment to Ben and his group would be to think hard about how you would expand this to lower resource setting or to people that would be a little harder to reach. And even as sort of an aspirational goal, how do you expand it into the community? The other question that I would have is how much of this can we get by with adherence interventions? It's one thing to prescribe, but it's another thing to figure out how to get people to adhere to meds. Dr. Greg Hundley: Very nice. Well listeners, we want to thank Dr. Ben Scirica for Brigham and Women's and Dr. Sandeep Das from UT Southwestern, bringing us this really interesting research that has been providing early results of a remotely delivered pharmacist led lipid and hypertension management strategy that dramatically increased medication compliance and improved hypertension control and lipid management. Dr. Greg Hundley: On behalf of Carolyn and myself, we want to wish you a great week and we will catch you next week on the run. Dr. Greg Hundley: This program is copyright of the American Heart Association, 2021.  

In this podcast Dr. Chris Solie, an ER physician with EMPAC, and Dr. Abby Elliott, with Lakeview Clinic, cover a variety of topic areas from six journal articles. If you like to skip to the conclusion part of the article, this podcast is for you. Enjoy the podcast! Objectives:     Upon completion of this podcast, participants should be able to: Differentiate if chest pulmonary CTs are necessary when patients present with suspected venous thromboembolism (VTE). Name at least 2 benefits of nighttime antihypertensive dosing for patients. Assess when cardioversion would be deemed necessary for individuals experiencing A-fib. Identify the risks of short-term steroid use. Identify the relevance of lumbar MRI and its findings. Summarize the findings that IV contrast causing acute kidney injury is a myth. CME credit is only offered to Ridgeview Providers & Allied Health Staff for this podcast activity. Complete and submit the online evaluation form, after viewing the activity.  Upon successful completion of the evaluation, you will be e-mailed a certificate of completion within approximately 2 weeks.  You may contact the accredited provider with questions regarding this program at  rmccredentialing@ridgeviewmedical.org. Click on the following link for your CME credit: CME Evaluation: "Journal Review Day - with Drs. Chris Solie and Abby Elliott" (**If you are listening to the podcasts through iTunes on your laptop or desktop, it is not possible to link directly with the CME Evaluation for unclear reasons. We are trying to remedy this. You can, however, link to the survey through the Podcasts app on your Apple and other smart devices, as well as through Spotify, Stitcher and other podcast directory apps and on your computer browser at these websites. We apologize for the inconvenience.)  DISCLOSURE ANNOUNCEMENT  The information provided through this and all Ridgeview podcasts as well as any and all accompanying files, images, videos and documents is/are for CME/CE and other institutional learning and communication purposes only and is/are not meant to substitute for the independent medical judgment of a physician, healthcare provider or other healthcare personnel relative to diagnostic and treatment options of a specific patient's medical condition; and are property/rights of Ridgeview Medical Center & Clinics.  Any re-reproduction of any of the materials presented would be infringement of copyright laws.  It is Ridgeview's intent that any potential conflict should be identified openly so that the listeners may form their own judgments about the presentation with the full disclosure of the facts. It is not assumed any potential conflicts will have an adverse impact on these presentations. It remains for the audience to determine whether the speaker’s outside interest may reflect a possible bias, either the exposition or the conclusions presented. Ridgeview's CME planning committee members and presenter(s) have disclosed they have no significant financial relationship with a pharmaceutical company and have disclosed that no conflict of interest exists with the presentation/educational event.    SHOW NOTES: Journal Article 1: "Diagnosis of Pulmonary Embolism with d-Dimer Adjusted to Clinical Probability" PEs and DVTs can be elusive. There are rising numbers of chest pulmonary CTAs being done with lower yields. These can result in increased cost and health risks. In this study, the adjusted d-dimer was looked at to see if the number of CTs being ordered can be reduced. The Wells criteria was used to place patients into low, moderate or high clinical pretest probability for venous thromboembolism of VTE. In the podcast, "clinical pretest probability" is referred to as risk. Of the entire 2000 patients enrolled, the diagnosis of VTEW was only made in 7%. Participants that qualified as low risk numbered 1742 and 1200 of these had d-dimer less than 1000. No VTWE was found in these patients for the next 90 days. For those with a d-dimer between 500 and 999, none had a VTE at 90 days. In moderate-risk groups with d-dimer less than 500, none had VTE at 90 days. Combining low-risk patients with a d-dimer less than 1000, non of these patients had evidence of VTE at 90 days. Even in the 467 patients with a d-dimer greater than 1000, only 87 had a VTE. Moderate- or high-risk patients are not applicable for this study. According to the article, if the d-dimer is greater than 1000, and the patient is low-risk, there was a 20% incidence of VTE. While it is an impressive study, it is one peice of data and should not replace clinical gestalt and decision making when truly concerned about the presence of VTE. Journal Article 2: "Bedtime Hypertension Treatment Improves Cardiovascular Risk Reduction: The Hygia Chronotherapy Trial" HTN is difficult to manage in many patients. This was a large study out of Spain of approximately twenty thousand patients. Patients were selected to take their medication either in the AM or nighttime and 48-hour blood pressure monitoring was performed. Patients were followed for 6 years. Night time dosed patients had significantly lower cardiovascular event rates than the daytime group, as well as better blood pressure management. There is little evidence to not advise nighttime antihypertensive dosing for patients, unless there would be compliance concerns. Medications that would not be tolerated, or specific medications, like diuretics, that can disrupt sleep. This was an impressive study that demonstrates a rather simple maneuver to effect a remarkable change in cardiovascular risk. Bear in mind, diet and lifestyle may also contribute to the results, but those were not assessed in this study. Journal Article 3: "Early or Delayed Cardioversion in Recent-Onset Atrial Fibrillation" A-Fib is a common presentation in primary care practice and in Emergency Departments. In this study of early cardioversion strategy vs delayed, 437 patients, aged 18 and above, were reviewed. Necessary criteria included A-fib bit less than 36-hours and hemodynamic stability. The conclusion was that neither strategy delayed or early cardioversion was an inferior approach. A large number of patients in this study spontaneously converted to normal sinus rhythm without demonstrating higher rates of stroke. However, this study was not powered to assess risk of long-term stroke, and this remains unknown. Though based on other studies referenced today, it's known that a patient cardioverted after 12-hours of A-fib has an increased risk of stroke. Psychologically, being in A-fib can be disturbing for the individual, and remaining in A-fib is not always desirable from the patient perspective. There are also potential logistical and cost considerations with delayed approach including numerous repeat clinics and ER visits for a small number of patients. Journal Article 4: "Short-term Use of Oral Corticosteroids and Related Harms Among Adults in the United States: Population-based Cohort Study" An impressive review of three hundred thousand patients was performed. Corticosteroids were given for mostly musculoskeletal, respiratory and allergic issues. Sepsis, VTE and fracture were monitored for over a 90-day time period and statistically significant higher rates of all of these were noted. Bear in mind, this was a study without true placebo, and patients essentially compared their experience on steroids to their experience not on steroids. It should probably be followed up with a prospective trial to help further validate these concerning findings. Still, this study only looked at 3 different complications and the numbers here are pretty striking, with 205 of adults receiving steroids. There are a number of studies which have shown no evidence of benefit in the use of steroids for a variety of indications, including conditions, such as urticaria and even anaphylaxis. Journal Article 5: "No Association Between MRI Changes In The Lumbar Sone and Intensity of Pain, Quality of Life, Depressive and Anxiety Symptoms in Patients With Low Back Pain" In this study, out of Poland, patients were referred for a lumbar spine MRI by neurologists, surgeons or other specialists, but not by primary care. These MRIs were graded in the study based on criteria derived from the reading radiologists. The endpoint of the study was to compare the severity of MRI findings with the patient's self-assessment and scoring of pain, quality of life, etc. The study ultimately showed there was no correlation. However, age and BMI, and total MRI scores did correlate. Physically active patients had better scores. Learning new ways of coping with pain and helping our patients with this reality can equal a more efficient use of time and money. Per this study, medications or a reassuring MRI, does not correlate to resolution of pain. Of course, MRIs are often indicated in the setting of significant neurologic findings and emergencies, but outside of those settings, some patients may not be convinced that an MRI is not necessary. Using articles like this one can assist to better counsel patients and reduce unnecessary MRIs. Journal Article 6: "Contrast Associated Acute Kidney Injury Is A Myth: Yes" IV contract is often blamed for acute kidney injury, or AKI. It turns out, like many time honored beliefs in medicine, this is not likely the case. While attempting to research and write a paper on this subject, the investigators quickly discovered that ample data already exists that shows CIN or contrast induced nephropathy, appears to be more a myth than truth. One senior author of this paper demonstrated in a pool of thousands of patients in two other separate studies that there's no association between contrast and AKI. Another investigator who is a cardiologist demonstrated actually less incidence of AKI in a cohort of patients. So, while personal clinical experience and Gestalt should not be ignored, we also must maintain a desire to debunk dogma that is unfounded time and again in the scientific literature. With regard to AKI from IV contrast, maybe there will be a prospective randomized trial looking at this, but there seems to be a preponderance of evidence already to suggest it may not be necessary. Thanks for listening.   Sources/Links:  Kearon C, de Wit K, Parpia S, et al.  Diagnosis of Pulmonary Embolism with d-Dimer Adjusted to Clinical Probability. N Engl J Med. 2019;381(22):2125-2134. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1909159  Available:  https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa1909159?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&rfr_id=ori:rid:crossref.org&rfr_dat=cr_pub%20%200pubmed Hermida RC, Crespo JJ, Domínguez-Sardiña M, et al.   Bedtime hypertension treatment improves cardiovascular risk reduction: the Hygia Chronotherapy Trial. Eur Heart J. 2020;41(48):4565-4576. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehz754 Available: https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/41/48/4565/5602478 Pluymaekers NAHA, Dudink EAMP, Luermans JGLM, et al.   Early or Delayed Cardioversion in Recent-Onset Atrial Fibrillation. N Engl J Med. 2019;380(16):1499-1508. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1900353  Available: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1900353 Airaksinen, K. E., Grönberg, T., Nuotio, I., Nikkinen, M., Ylitalo, A., Biancari, F., & Hartikainen, J. E. (2013).  Thromboembolic Complications After Cardioversion of Acute Atrial Fibrillation. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 62 (13), 1187-1192. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2013.04.089 Waljee AK, Rogers MA, Lin P, et al.   Short term use of oral corticosteroids and related harms among adults in the United States: population based cohort study. BMJ. 2017;357:j1415. Published 2017 Apr 12. doi:10.1136/bmj.j1415 Available: https://www.bmj.com/content/357/bmj.j1415 Yao, T., Huang, Y., Chang, S., Tsai, S., Wu, A. C., & Tsai, H. (2020). Association Between Oral Corticosteroid Bursts and Severe Adverse Events. Annals of Internal Medicine, 173 (5), 325-330. doi:10.7326/m20-0432 Babińska, A., Wawrzynek, W., Czech, E., Skupiński, J., Szczygieł, J., & Łabuz-Roszak, B. (2018). No association between MRI changes in the lumbar spine and intensity of pain, quality of life, depressive and anxiety symptoms in patients with low back pain. Neurologia I Neurochirurgia Polska . doi:10.5603/pjnns.a2018.0006  Available: file:///C:/Users/E55983/Downloads/No_association_between_MRI_changes_in_the_lumbar_s.pdf Ehrmann, S., Aronson, D., & Hinson, J. S. (2018). Contrast-associated acute kidney injury is a myth: Yes. Intensive Care Medicine, 44 (1), 104-106. doi:10.1007/s00134-017-4950-6  Available: file:///C:/Users/E55983/Downloads/Ehrmann2018_Article_Contrast-associatedAcuteKidney.pdf Davenport, M. S., Perazella, M. A., Yee, J., Dillman, J. R., Fine, D., Mcdonald, R. J.,  Weinreb, J. C. (2020).   Use of Intravenous Iodinated Contrast Media in Patients with Kidney Disease: Consensus Statements from the American College of Radiology and the National Kidney Foundation. Radiology, 294 (3), 660-668. doi:10.1148/radiol.2019192094  

Herzlich willkommen bei Intradental, dem Podcast der für Ihre Praxis Wissen schafft! In dieser Folgen unterhalten sich Dr. Tomas Lang aus Essen und Dipl. stom. Michael Arnold aus Dresden über den Nutzen des DVTs in der Endodontie und wie diese Technologie sich hervorragend mit dem Operationsmikroskop ergänzt. Leider mussten wir aus Zeitgründen diese Folge vorzeitig beenden. Wir werden in Zukunft aber eine ausgedehnte Episode zu diesem Thema aufnehmen! Möchten Sie in unserer endodontischen Spezialpraxis Sirius Endo hospitieren? Dann informieren Sie sich auf unserer Webseite unter: https://www.siriusendo.de/hospitation.html Folgen Sie uns auf Instagram unter: https://www.instagram.com/siriusendo/ Da hier u.U. auch Firmen, Produkte bzw. meine Kurse genannt werden ist diese gesamte Folge sicher Werbung im juristischen Sinne. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/intradental/message

Deep vein thromboses are potentially dangerous clots in the large veins of the legs or pelvis that can break and travel to the lungs. Treatment is to take a blood thinner for at least three months. But is it safe to get back to training after this diagnosis is made? I review the evidence. Tim Crowley is a successful triathlon and strength and conditioning coach. He recently published his first book; The Powerful Triathlete and he joined me to talk about it. Lance Watson Tri Club LifeSport Coaching https://coachtube.com/course/health-fitness/the-powerful-triathlete/12408341 (The Powerful Triathlete on Coachtube) TC2 Coaching

In this episode, we sit down with Dr. Recinda Sherman, an epidemiologist, to discuss some critical questions for health, wellness and fitness professions to consider. (Time stamped questions listed below). Recording Date: 5/24/2020 Please note today's discussion focuses only on one of the avenues to explore when deciding on reopening dates and plans. Health, wellness and fitness professionals also need to weigh ethical considerations. "Do No Harm", code of ethics by profession, and the same ethical actions we would take under other circumstances where there is a possibility of comprising a client's health, still need to be considered. Disclaimer: Today's content is for entertainment purposes only and should not be taken as advice, medical or otherwise. The views of guests in each episode are solely their own. The content is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding your medical conditions or care.6:50 To start can you tell me a little about what Epidemiologists do?13:55 What are some of your favorite resources for us to easily learn the epidemiology of COVID-19?22:34 Can people who have antibodies be protected themselves from reinfection but still be carriers and spread to other? Do we know yet how long antibodies protect someone?25:43 I’ve seen research on hard surface fomites, ranging from 8 hours on chrome to 5 days on wood. But I haven’t seen any research on fabrics?28:02 I’ve seen estimates all over the place in regards to the effectiveness of cloth masks in regards to COVID-19.38:03 How dangerous is removing clothes over your head or wearing “buffs” as masks?40:54 Should curtains, rugs, lampshades and other fabric surfaces that cannot be laundered between each interaction be removed?44:44 What role do HVAC units play in the spread of droplets? (Updated: bit.ly/updatesaskanepi)48:04 If transmission is primarily coming from respiratory droplets, in careers that cannot keep a 6 foot or more distance, how does closer contact change our risk? Does amount of time matter?49:57 We are hearing that people are testing positive many weeks after diagnosed and have complications much longer than 14 days. How confident are we that the virus is contagious for only 14 days?52:53 Please note the head to toe map of COVID-19 symptoms mentioned here was mistakenly attributed to John Hopkins University. The graphic provided sources (including JHU), but did not provide any citations. As an alternative, this Washington Post article provides a body map: bit.ly/covidbodymap 55:38 Is there a possibility that COVID-19 becomes like the seasonal flu where we may have to guess the strain seasonally for an annual vaccine?58:39 How does the size and circulation of air flow in a room affect COVID-19 transmission?1:02:08 It is sometimes recommended to air rooms out between clients by opening windows and doors. Does this potentially run the risk of “kicking up” virus particles from surfaces into the air”? If you do not have a room with windows, would additional time between clients allow droplets to settle? (Updated: bit.ly/updatesaskanepi)1:05:55 What is the risk of viral shed through touching someone else’s skin? Or is it truly more about respiratory droplets due to close contact?1:09:03 Many of our surfaces are somewhere in between porous and non porous, a good example being stretch pleather covers for our tables. These are recommended to be cleaned with EPA-disinfectants but does the combination of pleather and stretch make them more susceptible to collecting germs and viruses?1:10:21 For massage, some of us practice ashiatsu or barefoot massage, where you work using their feet instead of hands. What is the risk when you are 4 to 5 ft from someone, with both wearing a mask? Is there a gravity and droplet risk of being above and below someone?1:13:12 DVTs are a contraindication in massage. Many massage therapists are concerned about asymptotic clients and the current COVID-19 induced clotting issues and that massage could dislodge clots. Can you talk a bit about what we currently know about COVID-19 clotting issues, pulmonary embolism and DIC? How common or rare is this? And how is the clotting different from typically DVT?1:16:58 From an Epidemiologists standpoint, do you feel the John Hopkins Guidance for Governors and the CDC Reopening Guidelines are reasonable ways for us to head into reopening?1:22:33 What questions are you surprised I didn’t ask? Are there other important issues we need to think closely about before we head into reopening phases?1:27:28 If massage was available today, would you make an appointment or recommend people wait? Would you visit a gym?See updates and additional questions at: bit.ly/updatesaskanepiFull transcript available by request.YouTube version with Timestamped questions at: bit.ly/askanepiFor past podcast episodes, HCTV episode and more, visit: https://novaweekendwarriors.com/podcast(c) NoVA Weekend Warriors 2020

In this episode, we sit down with Dr. Recinda Sherman, an epidemiologist, to discuss some critical questions for health, wellness and fitness professions to consider. (Time stamped questions listed below). Recording Date: 5/24/2020 Please note today's discussion focuses only on one of the avenues to explore when deciding on reopening dates and plans. Health, wellness and fitness professionals also need to weigh ethical considerations. "Do No Harm", code of ethics by profession, and the same ethical actions we would take under other circumstances where there is a possibility of comprising a client's health, still need to be considered. Disclaimer: Today's content is for entertainment purposes only and should not be taken as advice, medical or otherwise. The views of guests in each episode are solely their own. The content is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding your medical conditions or care.6:50 To start can you tell me a little about what Epidemiologists do?13:55 What are some of your favorite resources for us to easily learn the epidemiology of COVID-19?22:34 Can people who have antibodies be protected themselves from reinfection but still be carriers and spread to other? Do we know yet how long antibodies protect someone?25:43 I’ve seen research on hard surface fomites, ranging from 8 hours on chrome to 5 days on wood. But I haven’t seen any research on fabrics?28:02 I’ve seen estimates all over the place in regards to the effectiveness of cloth masks in regards to COVID-19.38:03 How dangerous is removing clothes over your head or wearing “buffs” as masks?40:54 Should curtains, rugs, lampshades and other fabric surfaces that cannot be laundered between each interaction be removed?44:44 What role do HVAC units play in the spread of droplets? (Updated: bit.ly/updatesaskanepi)48:04 If transmission is primarily coming from respiratory droplets, in careers that cannot keep a 6 foot or more distance, how does closer contact change our risk? Does amount of time matter?49:57 We are hearing that people are testing positive many weeks after diagnosed and have complications much longer than 14 days. How confident are we that the virus is contagious for only 14 days?52:53 Please note the head to toe map of COVID-19 symptoms mentioned here was mistakenly attributed to John Hopkins University. The graphic provided sources (including JHU), but did not provide any citations. As an alternative, this Washington Post article provides a body map: bit.ly/covidbodymap 55:38 Is there a possibility that COVID-19 becomes like the seasonal flu where we may have to guess the strain seasonally for an annual vaccine?58:39 How does the size and circulation of air flow in a room affect COVID-19 transmission?1:02:08 It is sometimes recommended to air rooms out between clients by opening windows and doors. Does this potentially run the risk of “kicking up” virus particles from surfaces into the air”? If you do not have a room with windows, would additional time between clients allow droplets to settle? (Updated: bit.ly/updatesaskanepi)1:05:55 What is the risk of viral shed through touching someone else’s skin? Or is it truly more about respiratory droplets due to close contact?1:09:03 Many of our surfaces are somewhere in between porous and non porous, a good example being stretch pleather covers for our tables. These are recommended to be cleaned with EPA-disinfectants but does the combination of pleather and stretch make them more susceptible to collecting germs and viruses?1:10:21 For massage, some of us practice ashiatsu or barefoot massage, where you work using their feet instead of hands. What is the risk when you are 4 to 5 ft from someone, with both wearing a mask? Is there a gravity and droplet risk of being above and below someone?1:13:12 DVTs are a contraindication in massage. Many massage therapists are concerned about asymptotic clients and the current COVID-19 induced clotting issues and that massage could dislodge clots. Can you talk a bit about what we currently know about COVID-19 clotting issues, pulmonary embolism and DIC? How common or rare is this? And how is the clotting different from typically DVT?1:16:58 From an Epidemiologists standpoint, do you feel the John Hopkins Guidance for Governors and the CDC Reopening Guidelines are reasonable ways for us to head into reopening?1:22:33 What questions are you surprised I didn’t ask? Are there other important issues we need to think closely about before we head into reopening phases?1:27:28 If massage was available today, would you make an appointment or recommend people wait? Would you visit a gym?See updates and additional questions at: bit.ly/updatesaskanepiFull transcript available by request.YouTube version with Timestamped questions at: bit.ly/askanepiFor past podcast episodes, HCTV episode and more, visit: https://novaweekendwarriors.com/podcast(c) NoVA Weekend Warriors 2020

Your daily COVID-19 LST Report: — Based on literature that suggests SARS-CoV-2 spreads more readily in cold, dry climates, researchers propose that air should be humidified to support the efficacy of the mucosal barrier. — A scoping review of 67 studies found that medical grade masks are superior to improvised masks and N95 respirators may be superior to surgical masks in the inpatient setting but have equal performance in outpatient settings. — Public health experts propose a “one house one-person” plan where only one person from a household is tested and their infection status is extrapolated to the whole household for use in making isolation recommendations in resource limited places. — Autopsies of 12 COVID-19 patients revealed deep vein thrombosis (DVTs) in 7--none of whom were suspected to have venous thromboembolism before death, highlighting the important role of COVID-19 induced coagulopathy in the disease process. — Visit COVID19LST.org for our full report with links to the articles. — Reach out to us at: contact@covid19lst.org --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/covid19lst/support

Für die 50. Podcast Folge habe ich einen Knaller für euch. Oscar von Stetten! und ja - Ihr habt richtig gehört. Oscar von Stetten lasst auch mal einen Zahn offen. Wir sprechen über Mikroskope, DVTs, Marketing, Referenten, Single Cone und Schmerzbehandlung. Wir räumen auch ein paar Vorteile aus über Fortbildungsreferenten und seine Sicht auf internationale Referenten ist sehr spannend.

Deep vein thromboses (DVTs) are clots in the blood system that can travel from the legs to the lungs, causing severe damage and even death. This week on Beyond the Abstract, Ellen and Derek are joined by John Welsh, PhD as they dive into John's recent paper on how DVTs are formed. To our surprise, Dr. Welsh discusses how current measures in the hospital to prevent DVTs may not work as well as we think they do. Finally, we talk about Dr. Welsh's company, which is currently building a device that would better solve this problem. Welsh et al. Hemodynamic regulation of perivalvular endothelial gene expression prevents deep vein thrombosis. Journal of Clinical Investigation, 2019. 129(12). PMID: 31710307.

Show Notes Jeff: Welcome back to EMplify the podcast corollary to EB Medicine’s Emergency medicine Practice. I’m Jeff Nusbaum and I’m back with Nachi Gupta. This month, we are tackling a topic for which the literature continues to rapidly change - we’re talking about the ED management of patients taking direct oral anticoagulants or DOACs, previously called novel oral anticoagulants or NOACs. Nachi: Specifically, we’ll be focusing on the use of DOACs for the indications of stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation and the treatment and prevention of recurrent venous thromboembolisms. Jeff: This month’s article was authored by Dr. Patrick Maher and Dr. Emily Taub of the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, and it was peer reviewed by Dr. Dowin Boatright from Yale, Dr. Natalie Kreitzer from the University of Cincinnati, and Dr. Isaac Tawil from the University of New Mexico. Nachi: In their quest to update the last Emergency Medicine Practice issue on this topic which was published in 2013, they reviewed over 200 articles from 2000 to present in addition to 5 systematic reviews in the cochrane database, as well as guidelines from the American Heart Association, European society of cardiology, and the american college of cardiology. Jeff: Thanks to a strong literature base, Dr’s Maher and Taub found good quality evidence regarding safety and efficacy of the DOACs in relation to warfarin and the heparin-based anticoagulants. Nachi: But do note that the literature directly comparing the DOACs is far more limited and mostly of poor quality. Show More v Jeff: Fair enough, we’ll take what we can get. Nachi: Well, I’m sure more of those studies are still coming. Jeff: Agree. Let’s get started with some basics. Not surprisingly, DOACs now account for a similar proportion of office visits for anticoagulant use as warfarin. Nachi: With huge benefits including reduced need for monitoring and a potential for reduced bleeding complications, this certainly isn’t surprising. Jeff: Though those benefits are not without challenges - most notably the lack of an effective reversal agent and the risk of unintentional overdose in patients with altered drug metabolism. Nachi: Like all things in medicine, it’s about balancing and finding an acceptable risk/benefit profile. Jeff: True. Let’s talk pathophysiology for a minute - the control of coagulation in the human body is a balance between hemorrhage and thrombosis, mediated by an extensive number of procoagulant and anticoagulant proteins. Nachi: Before the development of the DOACs, vitamin K antagonists controlled the brunt of the market. As their name suggests, they work by inhibiting the action of vitamin K, and thus reducing the production of clotting factors 2, 7, 9, and 10, and the anticoagulant proteins C and S. Jeff: Unfortunately, these agents have a narrow therapeutic window and many drug-drug interactions, and they require frequent monitoring - making them less desirable to many. Nachi: However, in 2010, the FDA approved the first DOAC, a real game-changer. The DOACs currently on the market work by one of two mechanisms - direct thrombin inhibition or factor Xa inhibition. Jeff: DOACs are currently approved for stroke prevention in nonvalvular afib, treatment of VTE, VTE prophylaxis, and reduction of major cardiovascular events in stable cardiovascular disease. Studies are underway to test their safety and efficacy in arterial and venous thromboembolism, prevention of embolic stroke in afib, ACS, cancer-associated thrombosis, upper extremity DVT, and mesenteric thrombosis. Nachi: Direct thrombin inhibitors like Dabigatran, tradename Pradaxa, was the first FDA approved DOAC. It works by directly inhibiting thrombin, or factor IIa, which is a serine protease that converts soluble fibrinogen into fibrin for clot formation. Jeff: Dabigatran comes in doses of 75 and 150 mg. The dose depends on your renal function, and, with a half-life of 12-15 hours, is taken twice daily. Note the drastically reduced half-life as compared to warfarin, which has a half-life of up to 60 hours. Nachi: The RE-LY trial for afib found that taking 150 mg of Dabigatran BID had a lower rate of stroke and systemic embolism than warfarin with a similar rate of major hemorrhage. Dabigatran also had lower rates of fatal and traumatic intracerebral hemorrhage than warfarin. Jeff: A separate RCT found similar efficacy in treating acute VTE and preventing recurrence compared with warfarin, with reduced rates of hemorrhage! Nachi: Less monitoring, less hemorrhage, similar efficacy, I’m sold!!! Jeff: Slow down, there’s lots of other great agents out there, let’s get through them all first... Nachi: Ok, so next up we have the Factor Xa inhibitors, Rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban, and betrixaban.As the name suggests, these medications work by directly inhibiting the clotting of factor Xa, which works in the clotting cascade to convert prothrombin to thrombin. Jeff: Rivaroxaban, trade name Xarelto, the second FDA approved DOAC, is used for stroke prevention in those with nonvalvular afib and VTE treatment. After taking 15 mg BID for the first 21 days, rivaroxaban is typically dosed at 20 mg daily with adjustments for reduced renal function. Nachi: The Rocket AF trial found that rivaroxaban is noninferior to warfarin for stroke and systemic embolism prevention without a significant difference in risk of major bleeding. Interestingly, GI bleeding may be higher in the rivaroxaban group, though the overall incidence was very low in both groups at about 0.4% of patients per year. Jeff: In the Einstein trial, patients with VTE were randomized to rivaroxaban or standard therapy. In the end, they reported similar rates of recurrence and bleeding outcomes for acute treatment. Continuing therapy beyond the acute period resulted in similar rates of VTE recurrence and bleeding episodes to treatment with aspirin alone. Nachi: Next we have apixaban, tradename Eliquis. Apixaban is approved for afib and the treatment of venous thromboembolism. It’s typically dosed as 10 mg BID for 7 days followed by 5 mg BID with dose reductions for the elderly and those with renal failure. Jeff: In the Aristotle trial, when compared to warfarin, apixaban was superior in preventing stroke and systemic embolism with lower mortality and bleeding. Rates of major hemorrhage-related mortality were also nearly cut in half at 30 days when compared to warfarin. Nachi: For the treatment of venous thromboembolism, the literature shows that apixaban has a similar efficacy to warfarin in preventing recurrence with less bleeding complications. Jeff: Unfortunately, with polypharmacy, there is increased risk of thromboembolic and hemorrhage risks, but this risk is similar to what is seen with warfarin. Nachi: And as compared to low molecular weight heparin, apixaban had higher bleeding rates without reducing venous thromboembolism events when used for thromboprophylaxis. It’s also been studied in acute ACS, with increased bleeding and no decrease in ischemic events. Jeff: Edoxaban is up next, approved by the FDA in 2015 for similar indications as the other Factor Xa inhibitors. It’s recommended that edoxaban be given parenterally for 5-10 days prior to starting oral treatment for VTE, which is actually similar to dabigatran. It has similar levels of VTE recurrence with fewer major bleeding episodes compared to warfarin. It has also been used with similar effects and less major bleeding for stroke prevention in afib. In the setting of cancer related DVTs specifically, as compared to low molecular weight heparin, one RCT showed lower rates of VTE but higher rates of major bleeding when compared to dalteparin. Nachi: Next we have Betrixaban, the latest Factor Xa inhibitor to be approved, back in 2017. Because it’s utility is limited to venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in mostly medically ill inpatients, it’s unlikely to be encountered by emergency physicians very frequently. Jeff: As a one sentence FYI though - note that in recent trials, betrixaban reduced the rate of VTE with equivalent rates of bleeding and reduced the rate of stroke with an increased rate of major and clinically relevant non-major bleeding as compared to enoxaparin. Nachi: Well that was a ton of information and background on the DOACs. Let’s move on to your favorite section - prehospital medicine. Jeff: Not a ton to add here this month. Perhaps, most importantly, prehospital providers should specifically ask about DOAC usage, especially in trauma, given increased rates of complications and potential need for surgery. This can help with destination selection when relevant. Interestingly, one retrospective study found limited agreement between EMS records and hospital documentation on current DOAC usage. Nachi: Extremely important to identify DOAC use early. Once the patient arrives in the ED, you can begin your focused history and physical. Make sure to get the name, dose, and time of last administration of any DOAC. Pay particular attention to the med list and the presence of CKD which could point to altered DOAC metabolism. Jeff: In terms of the physical and initial work up - let the sites of bleeding or potential sites of bleeding guide your work up. And don’t forget about the rectal exam, which potentially has some added value here - since DOACs increase the risk of GI bleeding. Nachi: Pretty straight forward history and physical, let’s talk diagnostic studies. Jeff: First up is CT. There are no clear cut guidelines here, so Drs. Maher and Taub had to rely on observational studies and expert opinion. Remember, most standard guidelines and tools, like the canadian and nexus criteria, are less accurate in anticoagulated patients, so they shouldn’t be applied. Instead, most studies recommend a low threshold for head imaging, even with minor trauma, in the setting of DOAC use. Nachi: That is so important that it’s worth repeating. Definitely have a low threshold to CT the head for even minor head trauma patients on DOACs. Basically, if you’re on anticoagulation, and you made it to the ED for anything remotely related to your head, you probably win a spin. Jeff: I suspect you are not alone with that stance... There is, however, much more debate about the utility of follow up imaging and admission after a NEGATIVE scan. Nachi: Wait, is that a thing I should routinely be doing? Jeff: Well there’s not great data here, but in one observational study of 1180 patients on either antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy, a half a percent of them had positive findings 12 hours later, and importantly none required surgical intervention. Nachi: Certainly reassuring. And for those with positive initial imaging, the authors recommend repeat imaging within 4-6 hours in consultation with neurosurgical services or even earlier in cases of unexpected clinical decline. Jeff: Interestingly, though only a small retrospective study of 156 patients, one study found markedly reduced mortality, 4.9% vs 20.8% in those on DOACs vs warfarin with traumatic intracranial hemorrhage. Nachi: Hmm that actually surprises me a bit with the ease of reversibility of warfarin. Jeff: And we’ll get to that in a few minutes. But next we should talk about ultrasound. As always with trauma, guidelines recommend a FAST exam in the setting of blunt abdominal trauma. The only thing to be aware of here is that you should have an increased index of suspicion for bleeding, especially in hidden sites like the retroperitoneum. Nachi: And just as with traumatic head bleeds, a small observational study of those with blunt abdominal trauma found 8% vs 30% mortality for those on DOACs vs warfarin, respectively. Jeff: That is simply shocking! Let’s also talk lab studies. Hemoglobin and platelet counts should be obtained as part of the standard trauma work up. Assessing renal function via creatinine is also important, especially for those on agents which are renally excreted. Nachi: Though you can, in theory, test for plasma DOAC concentrations, such tests are not routinely indicated as levels don’t correspond to bleeding outcomes. DOAC levels may be indicated in certain specific situations, such as while treating life-threatening bleeding, development of venous thromboembolism despite compliance with DOAC therapy, and treating patients at risk for bleeding because of an overdose. Jeff: In terms of those who require surgery while on a DOAC - if urgent or emergent, the DOAC will need to be empirically reversed. For all others, the recommendation is to wait a half life or even multiple half-lives, if possible, in lieu of level testing. Nachi: Coagulation tests are up next. Routine PT and PTT levels do not help assess DOACs, as abnormalities on either test can suggest the presence of a DOAC, but the values should not be interpreted as reliable measures of either therapeutic or supratherapeutic clinical anticoagulant effect. Jeff: Dabigatran may cause prolongation of both the PT and the PTT, but the overall correlation is poor. In addition, FXa inhibitors may elevate PT in a weakly concentration dependent manner, but this may only be helpful if anti-fXa levels are unavailable. Nachi: Which is a perfect segway into our next test - anti-factor Xa level activity. Direct measurements of the anti-Fxa effect demonstrates a strong linear correlation with plasma concentrations of these agents, but the anticoagulant effect does not necessarily follow the same linear fashion. Jeff: Some labs may even have an anti-FXa effect measurement calibrated specifically to the factor 10a inhibitors. Nachi: While measuring thrombin time is not routinely recommended, the result of thrombin time or dilute thrombin time does correlate well with dabigatran concentrations across normal ranges. Jeff: And lastly, we have the Ecarin clotting time. Ecarin is an enzyme that cleaves prothrombin to an active intermediate that can be inhibited by dabigatran in the same way as thrombin. The ECT is useful for measuring dabigatran concentration - it’s not useful for testing for FXa inhibitors. A normal ECT value could be used to exclude the presence of dabigatran. Nachi: So I think that rounds out testing. Let’s move into the treatment section. Jeff: For all agents, regardless of the DOAC, the initial resuscitation follows the standard principles of hemorrhage control and trauma resuscitation. Tourniquet application, direct pressure, endoscopy for GI bleeds, etc... should all be used as needed. And most importantly, for airway bleeding, pericardial bleeding, CNS bleeding, and those with hemodynamic instability or overt bleeding, those with a 2 point drop in their hemoglobin, and those requiring 2 or more units of pRBC - they all should be considered to have serious, life threatening bleeds. This patient population definitely requires reversal agents, which we’re getting to in a minute. Nachi: A type and screen should also be sent with the plan to follow standard transfusion guidelines, with the goal of a hemoglobin level of 7, understanding that in the setting of an active bleed, the hemoglobin level will not truly be representative. Jeff: Interestingly, in the overdose literature that’s out there, bleeding episodes appear to be rare - occurring in just 5% of DOAC overdose cases. Nachi: Finally, onto the section we’ve all been waiting for. Let’s talk specific reversal agents. Praxbind is up first. Jeff: Idarucizumab or Praxbind, is the reversal agent of choice for dabigatran (which is also called pradaxa). According to data from the RE-LY trial, it reverses dabigatran up to the 99th percentile of levels measured in the trial. Nachi: And praxbind should be given in two 2.5 g IV boluses 15 minutes apart to completely reverse the effects of dabigatran. Jeff: As you would expect given this data, guidelines for DOAC reversal recommend it in major life-threatening bleeding events for patients on dabigatran. Nachi: Next up is recombinant coagulation factor Xa (brand name Andexxa), which was approved in 2018 for the FXa inhibitors. This recombinant factor has a decoy receptor for the FXa agents, thus eliminating their anticoagulant effects. Jeff: Recombinant factor Xa is given in either high or low dose infusions. High dose infusions for those on rivaroxaban doses of >10 mg or apixaban doses >5 mg within the last 8 hours and for unknown doses and unknown time of administration. Low dose infusions should be used for those with smaller doses within the last 8 hours or for last doses taken beyond 8 hours. Nachi: In one trial of 352 patients, recombinant factor Xa given as an IV bolus and 2 hour infusion was highly effective at normalizing anti-FXa levels. 82% of the assessed patients at 12 hours achieved hemostasis, but there were also thrombotic events in 10% of the patients at 30 days. Jeff: And reported thrombotic events aren’t the only downside. Though the literature isn’t clear, there may be limited use of recombinant factor Xa outside of the time of the continuous infusion, and even worse, there may be rebound of anti-Fxa levels and anticoagulant effect. And lastly, the cost is SUBSTANTIAL. Nachi: Is there really a cost threshold for stopping life threatening bleeding…? Jeff: Touche, but that means we need to save it for specific times and consider other options out there. Since this has only been around for a year or so, let’s let the literature play out on this too... Nachi: And that perfectly takes us into our next topic, which is nonspecific reversal agents, starting with prothrombin complex concentrate, also called PCC. Jeff: PCC is FDA approved for rapid reversal of vitamin K antagonist-related hemorrhagic events and is now being used off label for DOAC reversal. Nachi: PCC comes in 3 and 4 factor varieties. 3-factor PCC contains factors 2, 9, 10 and trace amounts of factor 7. 4 factor PCC contains factors 2, 9 10, as well as purified factor 7 and proteins C and S. Jeff: Both also contain trace amounts of heparin so can’t be given to someone with a history of HIT. Nachi: PCC works by overwhelming the inhibitor agent by increasing the concentration of upstream clotting factors. It has been shown, in healthy volunteers, to normalize PT abnormalities and bleeding times, and to achieve effective bleeding control in patients on rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban with major bleeding events. Jeff: In small studies looking at various end points, 4 factor PCC has been shown to be superior to 3 factor PCC. Nachi: Currently it’s given via weight-based dosing, but there is interest in studying a fixed-dose to decrease both time to medication administration and cost of reversal. Jeff: Guidelines currently recommend 4F PCC over 3F PCC, if available, for the management of factor Xa inhibitor induced bleeding, with studies showing an effectiveness of nearly 70%. As a result, 4F PCC has become an agent of choice for rapid reversal of FXa inhibitors during major bleeding events. Nachi: Next we have activated PCC (trade name FEIBA). This is essentially 4Factor PCC with a modified factor 7. Though traditionally saved for bleeding reversal in hemophiliacs, aPCC is now being studied in DOAC induced bleeding. Though early studies are promising, aPCC should not be used over 4factor PCC routinely as of now but may be used if 4Factor PCC is not available. Jeff: Next we have recombinant factor 7a (trade name novoseven). This works by activating factors 9 and 10 resulting in rapid increase in thrombin. Studies have shown that it may reverse the effect of dabigatran, at the expense of increased risk of thrombosis. As such, it should not be used as long as other agents are available. Nachi: Fresh Frozen Plasma is the last agent to discuss in this section. Not a lot to say here - FFP is not recommended for reversal of any of the DOACs. It may be given as a part of of a balanced massive transfusion resuscitation, but otherwise, at this time, there doesn’t seem to be a clear role. Jeff: Let’s move on to adjunct therapies, of which we have 3 to discuss. Nachi: First is activated charcoal. Only weak evidence exists here - but, according to expert recommendations, there may be a role for DOAC ingestions within 2 hours of presentations. Jeff: Perhaps more useful than charcoal is our next adjunct - tranexamic acid or TXA. TXA is a synthetic lysine analogue with antifibrinolytic activity through reversible binding of plasmin. CRASH-2 is the main trial to know here. CRASH-2 demonstrated reduced mortality if given within 3 hours in trauma patients. There is very limited data with respect to TXA and DOACs specifically, so continue to administer TXA as part of your standard trauma protocol without modification if the patient is on a DOAC, as it’s likely helpful based on what data we have. Nachi: Next is vitamin K - there is no data to support routine use of vitamin K in those taking DOACs - save that for those on vitamin K antagonists. Jeff: Also, worth mentioning here is the importance of hematology input in developing hospital-wide protocols for reversal agents, especially if availability of certain agents is limited. Nachi: Let’s talk about some special circumstances and populations as they relate to DOACs. Patients with mechanical heart valves were excluded from the major DOAC trials. And of note, a trial of dabigatran in mechanical valve patients was stopped early because of bleeding and thromboembolic events. As such, the American College of Cardiology state that DOACs are reasonable for afib with native valve disease. Jeff: DOACs should be used with caution for pregnant, breastfeeding, and pediatric patients. A case series of 233 pregnancies that occurred among patients on a DOAC reported high rates of miscarriage. Nachi: Patients with renal impairment are particularly concerning as all DOACs are dependent to some degree on renal elimination. Current guidelines from the Anticoagulation Forum recommend avoiding dabigatran and rivaroxaban for patients with CrCL < 30 and avoiding edoxaban and betrixaban for patients with CrCl < 15. Jeff: A 2017 Cochrane review noted similar efficacy without increased risk of major bleeding when using DOACs in those with egfr > 30 (that’s ckd3b or better) when compared to patients with normal renal function and limited evidence for safety below this estimated GFR. Nachi: Of course, dosing with renal impairment will be different. We won’t go into the details of that here as you will probably discuss this directly with your pharmacist. Jeff: We should mention, however, that reversal of the anticoagulant in the setting of renal impairment for your major bleeding patient is exactly the same as we already outlined. Nachi: Let’s move on to some controversies and cutting-edge topics. The first one is a pretty big topic and that is treatment for ischemic stroke patients taking DOACs. Jeff: Safety and efficacy of tPA or endovascular therapy for patients on DOACs continues to be debated. Current guidelines do not recommend tPA if the last DOAC dose was within the past 48 hours, unless lab testing specific to these agents shows normal results. Nachi: Specifically, the American Heart Association suggests that INR and PTT be normal in all cases. ECT and TT should be tested for dabigatran. And calibrated anti-FXa level testing be normal for FXa inhibitors. Jeff: The AHA registry actually included 251 patients who received tpa while on DOACs, which along with cohort analysis of 26 ROCKET-AF trial patients, suggest the risk of intracranial hemorrhage is similar to patients on warfarin with INR < 1.7 and to patients not on any anticoagulation who received tpa. However, given the retrospective nature of this data, we cannot exclude the possibility of increased risk of adverse events with tpa given to patients on DOACs. Nachi: Endovascular thrombectomy also has not been studied in large numbers for patients on DOACs. Current recommendations are to discuss with your stroke team. IV lysis or endovascular thrombectomy may be considered for select patients on DOACs. Always include the patient and family in shared decision making here. Jeff: There are also some scoring systems for bleeding risk to discuss briefly. The HAS-BLED has been used to determine bleeding risk in afib patients taking warfarin. The ORBIT score was validated in a cohort that included patients on DOACs and is similarly easy to use, and notably does not require INR values. Nachi: There is also the ABC score which has demonstrated slightly better prediction characteristics for bleeding risk, but it requires high-sensitivity troponin, limiting its practical use. Jeff: We won’t say more about the scoring tools here, but would recommend that you head over to MD Calc, where you can find them and use them in your practice. Nachi: Let’s also comment on the practicality of hemodialysis for removal of the DOACs. Multiple small case series have shown successful removal of dabigatran, given its small size and low protein binding. On the other hand, the FXa inhibitors are less amenable to removal in this way because of their higher protein binding. Jeff: Worth mentioning here also - dialysis catheters if placed should be in compressible areas in case bleeding occurs. The role of hemodialysis for overdose may be limited now that the specific reversal agent, praxbind, exists. Nachi: In terms of cutting-edge tests, we have viscoelastic testing like thromboelastography and rotational thromboelastometry. Several studies have examined the utility of viscoelastic testing to detect presence of DOACs with varying results. Prolongation of clotting times here does appear to correlate with concentration, but these tests haven’t emerged as a gold standard yet. Jeff: Also, for cutting edge, we should mention ciraparantag. And if you’ve been listening patiently and just thinking to yourself why can’t there be one reversal agent to reverse everything, this may be the solution. Ciraparantag (or aripazine) is a universal anticoagulant reversal agent that may have a role in all DOACs and heparins. It binds and inactivates all of these agents and it doesn’t appear to have a procoagulant effect. Nachi: Clinical trials for ciraparantag have shown rapid and durable reversal of edoxaban, but further trials and FDA approval are still needed. Jeff: We’ve covered a ton of material so far. As we near the end of this episode, let’s talk disposition. Nachi: First, we have those already on DOACs - I think it goes without saying that any patient who receives pharmacological reversal of coagulopathy for major bleeding needs to be admitted, likely to the ICU. Jeff: Next we have those that we are considering starting a DOAC, for example in someone with newly diagnosed VTE, or patients with an appropriate CHADS-VASC with newly diagnosed non-valvular afib. Nachi: With respect to venous thromboembolism, both dabigatran and edoxaban require a 5 day bridge with heparin, whereas apixaban and rivaroxaban do not. The latter is not only easier on the patient but also offers potential cost savings with low risk of hemorrhagic complications. Jeff: For patients with newly diagnosed DVT / PE, both the American and British Thoracic Society, as well as ACEP, recommend using either the pulmonary embolism severity index, aka PESI, or the simplified PESI or the Hestia criteria to risk stratify patients with PE. The low risk group is potentially appropriate for discharge home on anticoagulation. This strategy reduces hospital days and costs with otherwise similar outcomes - total win all around. Nachi: Definitely a great opportunity for some shared decision making since data here is fairly sparse. This is also a great place to have institutional policies, which could support this practice and also ensure rapid outpatient follow up. Jeff: If you are going to consider ED discharge after starting a DOAC - there isn’t great data supporting one over another. You’ll have to consider patient insurance, cost, dosing schedules, and patient / caregiver preferences. Vitamin K antagonists should also be discussed as there is lots of data to support their safety outcomes, not to mention that they are often far cheaper…. As an interesting aside - I recently diagnosed a DVT/PE in an Amish gentleman who came to the ED by horse - that was some complicated decision making with respect to balancing the potentially prohibitive cost of DOACs with the massive inconvenience of frequently checking INRs after a 5 mile horseback ride into town... Nachi: Nice opportunity for shared decision making… Jeff: Lastly, we have those patients who are higher risk for bleeding. Though I’d personally be quite uneasy in this population, if you are to start a DOAC, consider apixaban or edoxaban, which likely have lower risk of major bleeding. Nachi: So that’s it for the new material for this month’s issue. Certainly, an important topic as the frequency of DOAC use continues to rise given their clear advantages for both patients and providers. However, despite their outpatient ease of use, it definitely complicates our lives in the ED with no easy way to evaluate their anticoagulant effect and costly reversal options. Hopefully all our hospitals have developed or will soon develop guidelines for both managing ongoing bleeding with reversal agents and for collaborative discharges with appropriate follow up resources for those we send home on a DOAC. Jeff: Absolutely. Let’s wrap up with some the highest yield points and clinical pearls Nachi: Dabigatran works by direct thrombin inhibition, whereas rivaroxaban, apixaban, edoxaban, and betrixaban all work by Factor Xa inhibition. Jeff: The DOACs have a much shorter half-life than warfarin. Nachi: Prehospital care providers should ask all patients about their use of anticoagulants. Jeff: Have a low threshold to order a head CT in patients with mild head trauma if they are on DOACs. Nachi: For positive head CT findings or high suspicion of significant injury, order a repeat head CT in 4 to 6 hours and discuss with neurosurgery. Jeff: Have a lower threshold to conduct a FAST exam for blunt abdominal trauma patients on DOACs. Nachi: Assessment of renal function is important with regards to all DOACs. Jeff: While actual plasma concentrations of DOACs can be measured, these do not correspond to bleeding outcomes and should not be ordered routinely. Nachi: The DOACs may cause mild prolongation of PT and PTT. Jeff: Idarucizumab (Praxbind®) is an antibody to dabigatran. For dabigatran reversal, administer two 2.5g IV boluses 15 minutes apart. Reversal is rapid and does not cause prothrombotic effects. Nachi: Recombinant FXa can be used to reverse the FXa inhibitors. This works as a decoy receptor for the FXa agents. Jeff: Vitamin K and FFP are not recommended for reversal of DOACs. Nachi: Consider activated charcoal to remove DOACs ingested within the last two hours in the setting of life-threatening hemorrhages in patient’s on DOACs. Jeff: Hemodialysis can effectively remove dabigatran, but this is not true for the FXa inhibitors. Nachi: 4F-PCC has been shown to be effective in reversing the effects of the FXa inhibitors. This is thought to be due to overwhelming the inhibitor agent by increased concentrations of upstream clotting factors. Jeff: tPA is contraindicated in acute ischemic stroke if a DOAC dose was administered within the last 48 hours, unless certain laboratory testing criteria are met. Nachi: Emergency clinicians should consider initiating DOACs in the ED for patients with new onset nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, DVT, or PE that is in a low-risk group. Jeff: So that wraps up Episode 31! Nachi: As always, additional materials are available on our website for Emergency Medicine Practice subscribers. If you’re not a subscriber, consider joining today. You can find out more at ebmedicine.net/subscribe. Subscribers get in-depth articles on hundreds of emergency medicine topics, concise summaries of the articles, calculators and risk scores, and CME credit. You’ll also get enhanced access to the podcast, including any images and tables mentioned. PA’s and NP’s - make sure to use the code APP4 at checkout to save 50%. Jeff: And the address for this month’s cme credit is www.ebmedicine.net/E0819, so head over there to get your CME credit. As always, the [DING SOUND] you heard throughout the episode corresponds to the answers to the CME questions. Lastly, be sure to find us on iTunes and rate us or leave comments there. You can also email us directly at EMplify@ebmedicine.net with any comments or suggestions. Talk to you next month!

DVTs (deep vein thromboses) are a serious risk for hospitalized patients and can cause fatal complications. In this nurse's guide to DVTs, learn the signs and symptoms of a DVT, how they are treated and how nurses play a key role in their prevention. If you enjoy this podcast and find it a helpful way to review or study, please be so kind as to leave us a review and rating. This helps boost our rankings in the podcast searches and helps other listeners find the show! Plus, your feedback is invaluable to helping keep the topics relevant and the show as awesome as possible. Many thanks to all of you for making this podcast so successful...you're the best!! Read more about DVTs: https://www.straightanursingstudent.com/dvt-nursing-interventions/

Joe shares another riveting story about his health and his second DVT.  This week you get to see the gallows humor that Joe and his family use to cope.  Plus we get to hear about some sexy new things this that Joe gets to (has to) wear.  Plus, Jake talks about a mild sunburn he received. Then we rate hate from listeners on their health issues.

How to determine the difference in the 2 and what comes of the situation.

DVTs are an issue find out more with this new podcast..

We have a big #FridayReview coming in with everything from book reviews, to research, to the debut of my brand new @equilibrium_nutrition Daily Foundational Protocols! Our book/product review of the week is one that is centered around the actual science of how powerful the mind can be in manipulating the results you get in your life... And in our "in the news" research piece I reveal how TRT hormone replacement has been falling over the past few years (for good reason). Plus, we have another study on a specific "superfood" that at 100-200mg daily helps with DVTs and blood clots... Finally, we're wrapping up with our lab result of the week and explaining what alkaline phosphatase means on your blood work and why a high (or low) level can spell disaster for your health... Tune into today's #CabralConcept 1078 for all the details - Enjoy the show! - - -   Show Notes & Resources: http://StephenCabral.com/1078 - - - Dr. Cabral's New Book, The Rain Barrel Effect https://amzn.to/2H0W7Ge - - - Join the Community & Get Your Questions Answered: http://CabralSupportGroup.com - - -   Dr. Cabral’s Most Popular Supplements: > “The Dr. Cabral Daily Protocol” (This is what Dr. Cabral does every day!) - - - > Dr. Cabral Detox  (The fastest way to get well, lose weight, and feel great!) - - - > Daily Nutritional Support Shake  (#1 “All-in-One recommendation in my practice) - - - > Daily Fruit & Vegetables Blend  (22 organic fruit & vegetables “greens powder”) - - - > CBD Oil  (Full-spectrum, 3rd part-tested & organically grown) - - - > Candida/Bacterial Overgrowth, Leaky Gut, Parasite & Speciality Supplement Packages - - - > See All Supplements: https://equilibriumnutrition.com/collections/supplements  - - -   Dr. Cabral’s Most Popular At-Home Lab Tests: > Hair Tissue Mineral Analysis (Test for mineral imbalances & heavy metal toxicity) - - - > Organic Acids Test (Test for 75 biomarkers including yeast & bacterial gut overgrowth, as well as vitamin levels) - - - > Thyroid + Adrenal + Hormone Test  (Discover your complete thyroid, adrenal, hormone, vitamin D & insulin levels) - - - > Adrenal + Hormone Test (Run your adrenal & hormone levels) - - - > Food Sensitivity Test (Find out your hidden food sensitivities) - - - > Omega-3 Test (Discover your levels of inflammation related to your omega-6 to omega-3 levels) - - - > Stool Test (Use this test to uncover any bacterial, h. Pylori, or parasite overgrowth) - - - > Genetic Test (Use the #1 lab test to unlocking your DNA and what it means in terms of wellness, weight loss & anti-aging) - - - > Dr. Cabral’s “Big 5” Lab Tests (This package includes the 5 labs Dr. Cabral recommends all people run in his private practice) - - - > View all Functional Medicine lab tests (View all Functional Medicine lab tests you can do right at home for you and your family!)

Joe discovers new reasons to hate Waze.  Plus Joe gripes about the side effects of being prone to DVTs.  Finally, Joe pretty much loses it when he finds out an upcoming trip will be complicated in a totally unnecessary fashion.  Plus Joe rates listener hate on driving.  

This week we have an unexpected topic as Joe tells the story of his latest visit to the ER and shares his experience with his DVT.  Joe goes on to hate a couple of related things and outs CVS for sucking as bad as they do.  Plus, Joe rates a grab bag of istener hate, because this was suppose to be a grab bag episode.

From Wikepedia: Deep vein thrombosis (DVT), is the formation of a blood clot in a deep vein, most commonly the legs. Symptoms may include pain, swelling, redness, or warmth of the affected area. About half of cases have no symptoms. Complications may include pulmonary embolism, as a result of detachment of a clot which travels to the lungs, and post-thrombotic syndrome. Risk factors include recent surgery, cancer, trauma, lack of movement, obesity, smoking, hormonal birth control, pregnancy and the period following birth, antiphospholipid syndrome, and certain genetic conditions. Genetic factors include deficiencies of antithrombin, protein C, and protein S, and factor V Leiden mutation. The underlying mechanism typically involves some combination of decreased blood flow rate, increased tendency to clot, and injury to the blood vessel wall. Individuals suspected of having DVT may be assessed using a clinical prediction rule such as the Wells score. A D-dimer test may also be used to assist with excluding the diagnosis or to signal a need for further testing. Diagnosis is most commonly confirmed by ultrasound of the suspected veins. Together, DVT and pulmonary embolism are known as venous thromboembolism (VTE). Anticoagulation (blood thinners) is the standard treatment. Typical medications include low-molecular-weight heparin, warfarin, or a direct oral anticoagulant. Wearing graduated compression stockings may reduce the risk of post-thrombotic syndrome. Prevention may include early and frequent walking, calf exercises, aspirin, anticoagulants, graduated compression stockings, or intermittent pneumatic compression. The rate of DVTs increases from childhood to old age; in adulthood, about one in 1000 adults are affected per year. About 5% of people are affected by a VTE at some point in time.  

Over half of all blood clots are acquired during hospitalisation, particularly for surgery, so prevention is key. Deep vein thromboses - DVTs - typically occur in the veins of the leg and central to prevention is the need to assess individual risk, while taking steps like special stockings, leg massagers and anticoagulant "blood thinning" drugs to mitigate them. But there are concerns in some quarters - particularly among orthopaedic surgeons - that the drive to protect patients against clots has exposed them to risks of bleeding and that the pendulum has swung too far the other way. Three leading specialists discuss the issues. And iron deficiency, a very common problem, but what is the best way to treat it? New research from Switzerland unexpectedly suggests that giving less iron, less frequently, leads to more absorption. Plus, what's in a doctor's bag?

Host Ryan Stanton, MD, FACEP and Arthur Jey, MD discuss a new program to educate patients on blood clots, pulmonary emboli, DVTs and other diagnoses.

This Episode covers Chapter 88 (or 78 in 9th edition) of Rosen's Emergency Medicine. PE and DVT. Jeff Kline wrote this chapter, so you knows its a gooder!    List 8 DDx for DVT Describe management of superficial thrombophlebitis + isolated calf thrombosis How is the d-dimer test used in the diagnosis of DVT? List 8 causes of an elevated D-dimer What are the Wells criteria for DVT? Describe how to use this score. Describe diagnostic approach of suspected DVT How is a proximal lower limb DVT managed? What are the common causes of upper limb DVT? How are upper limb DVTs managed? List 10 classic risk factors for PE What are the classifications of PE? List 4 ECG + 2 CXR findings consistent with PE What are the Wells criteria for PE? Describe how to use this score. What is the PERC rule? How is it used? Which imaging tests can be used to diagnose PE? List advantages and disadvantages of each. List indications for thrombolysis in PE, what is the risk of ICH? What are the absolute and relative contraindications for thrombolysis List markers of poor prognosis in patients with PE.   Wisecracks:   What is phlegmasia cerulea dolens? How is it managed?       Which patients should have an IVC filter?       What about PE/DVT in pregnancy?       What is the cause of hypoxia in patients with PE? What causes chest pain? What causes hypotension?       What is Paget-Schroetter Syndrome?      

This Episode covers Chapter 88 (or 78 in 9th edition) of Rosen's Emergency Medicine. PE and DVT. Jeff Kline wrote this chapter, so you knows its a gooder!    List 8 DDx for DVT Describe management of superficial thrombophlebitis + isolated calf thrombosis How is the d-dimer test used in the diagnosis of DVT? List 8 causes of an elevated D-dimer What are the Wells criteria for DVT? Describe how to use this score. Describe diagnostic approach of suspected DVT How is a proximal lower limb DVT managed? What are the common causes of upper limb DVT? How are upper limb DVTs managed? List 10 classic risk factors for PE What are the classifications of PE? List 4 ECG + 2 CXR findings consistent with PE What are the Wells criteria for PE? Describe how to use this score. What is the PERC rule? How is it used? Which imaging tests can be used to diagnose PE? List advantages and disadvantages of each. List indications for thrombolysis in PE, what is the risk of ICH? What are the absolute and relative contraindications for thrombolysis List markers of poor prognosis in patients with PE.   Wisecracks:   What is phlegmasia cerulea dolens? How is it managed?       Which patients should have an IVC filter?       What about PE/DVT in pregnancy?       What is the cause of hypoxia in patients with PE? What causes chest pain? What causes hypotension?       What is Paget-Schroetter Syndrome?      

Author: Samuel Killian M.D. Educational Pearls: Lower extremity DVTs are extremely common. There are more left lower extremity DVT due to anatomical variation. May-Thurner Syndrome is a form of anatomical variation in which the left iliac artery compresses the left iliac vein. Anticoagulation may not be sufficient to treat those with May-Thurner syndrome - endovascular stenting may be needed Patients with with recurrent LLE DVT, especially those in whom anticoagulation fails, should be referred to a specialist. References: Peters M, Syed RK, Katz M, et al. May-Thurner syndrome: a not so uncommon cause of a common condition. Proceedings (Baylor University Medical Center). 2012;25(3):231-233. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3377287/

You know the drill.  Patient with leg pain…..possible DVT.  Scan it yourself.  You’ve done the scan.  You know the 10-minute teaching article showing that the two point compression scan is enough.  But is it?  There have been articles that show we miss a significant proportion when we only scan these two points or regions, and now we’ve got a big ED study showing this.  Is it OK to miss 6% of DVTs?  Let’s discuss. Next episode, we’ll demonstrate exactly our approach and then talk about some crazy stuff like PW, augmentation, etc.  Stay Tuned! Follow us:  @ultrasoundpod Learn with us:  www.ultrasoundleadershipacademy.com Register:  Yellowstone Course, DevelopingEM Cuba Course, Atlantis CME Bahamas Course FREE Introduction to Bedside Ultrasound eBook: Volume 1 Volume 2 One Minute Ultrasound Smartphone App for iOS One Minute Ultrasound Smartphone App for Android