Clinical medicine (London, England)
-
The value of vitamin D supplementation in the treatment or prevention of various conditions is often viewed with scepticism as a result of contradictory results of randomised trials. It is now becoming apparent that there is a pattern to these inconsistencies. A recent large trial has shown that high-dose intermittent bolus vitamin D therapy is ineffective at preventing rickets - the condition that is most unequivocally caused by vitamin D deficiency. ⋯ Meta-analyses of vitamin D supplementation in prevention of acute respiratory infection and trials in tuberculosis and other conditions also support efficacy of low dose daily maintenance rather than intermittent bolus dosing. This is particularly relevant during the current COVID-19 pandemic given the well-documented associations between COVID-19 risk and vitamin D deficiency. We would urge that clinicians take note of these findings and give strong support to widespread use of daily vitamin D supplementation.
-
Recent randomised controlled trials, such as ISCHEMIA and ORBITA, have overturned most of what we were taught in medical school about hospital procedures considered necessary for patients with stable coronary artery disease. In this article, we discuss what these trials mean for physicians and patients considering revascularisation procedures with the hope of reducing the risk of death or alleviating angina.
-
Hydrogen therapy is a very promising treatment against several diseases due to its mild attributes, high affinity and inherent biosafety. However, there is little elaboration about current hydrogen treatment in liver diseases. ⋯ Further, the article reveals ex vivo hydrogen application in liver protection. Finally, the article discusses the current and future challenges of hydrogen therapy in liver diseases, aiming to improve knowledge of hydrogen therapy and provide some insights into this burgeoning field.
-
Pressure on acute medical services in the pandemic mandated an assertive emergency department (ED) discharge policy. Given the potential for subsequent deterioration and growing appreciation of complications relating to COVID-19 infection, this follow up study was instigated to provide clinical reassurance that discharged patients had followed a safe clinical course. 199 patients discharged from the ED of our central London hospital were identified over a 20-day period at the height of the pandemic in April 2020. 44 had already reattended ED and 12 had been admitted. At 2-week telephone follow-up, 14 patients were identified who required urgent recall for assessment. ⋯ A COVID-19 follow-up clinic was therefore established to provide multi-professional review and diagnostics. 65 patients attended for this assessment. This is the first report on outcomes in COVID-19 infected patients discharged from an ED. It highlights the importance of safety-netting after discharge, the difficulty in predicting which patients might deteriorate and the need for appropriate follow up services.
-
The COVID-19 pandemic has had many ramifications on healthcare delivery and practice. As part of this, utilising biomarkers to risk stratify patients has become increasingly popular. During the COVID-19 pandemic the use of D-dimer has increased due to the evidence of COVID-19 induced thrombo-embolic disease. ⋯ Patients without COVID-19 infection were as likely to have evidence of PE as their COVID-positive counterparts. However, the sensitivity of a D-dimer was higher in COVID-positive patients at a lower D-dimer level (>1,500 μg/L, sensitivity 81%, specificity 70%) than in those without clinical, immunological or radiological evidence of COVID-19 infection (D-dimer >2,000 μg/L, sensitivity 80%, specificity 76%). These data suggest higher D-dimer thresholds should be considered for the exclusion of pulmonary emboli.