User login
Assessing Outcomes Between Risperidone Microspheres and Paliperidone Palmitate Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotics Among Veterans
Medication nonadherence is common with oral antipsychotic formulations, resulting in relapse, increased morbidity, and more frequent psychiatric hospitalization.1-7 Psychiatric hospitalization and illness decompensation is costly to health care systems and leads to reduced quality of life for veterans and families.6,7 Long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIAs) were developed to enhance antipsychotic adherence and improve patient outcomes, including reduced psychiatric hospitalization.8-12
Little outcomes data exist comparing LAIAs, including biweekly risperidone microspheres and monthly paliperidone palmitate.10-13 Risperidone microspheres require a 3-week oral crossover and are administered every 2 weeks, whereas paliperidone palmitate does not require an oral crossover and is administered every 4 weeks. The paliperidone palmitate loading regimen replaces an oral crossover.
The primary objective of this study was to compare the number of psychiatric hospitalizations between veterans administered risperidone microspheres and those on paliperidone palmitate pre- and post-LAIA initiation. Secondary objectives were to assess rehospitalization rates between patients taking risperidone microspheres and paliperidone palmitate, reduction in pre- and posthospitalization rates with LAIAs, and medication adherence.
Methods
This observational study with a retrospective cohort design was conducted at the Veterans Affairs Loma Linda Healthcare System (VALLHS) in California. We examined veterans who were initiated on LAIAs risperidone microspheres or paliperidone palmitate from January 01, 2016 through December 31, 2018. Veterans who were aged ≥ 18 years and received ≥ 2 injections of either risperidone microspheres or paliperidone palmitate during the study period were included. Veterans were excluded if they had received < 2 doses of either LAIA, received the LAIA outside of the review period, were nonadherent to risperidone crossover if they received risperidone microspheres, or transferred their care to another facility. At VALLHS, LAIA injections are administered by a nurse, and veterans must travel to the facility to receive the injections.
Extracted patient chart elements included participant demographics; diagnoses; comorbid alcohol, nicotine, opioid, or other substance use; duration on LAIA; psychiatric hospitalizations pre- and postinitiation of the LAIA; medication adherence; and medication discontinuation based on clinician documentation and clinic orders (Table 1).
Nonadherence to LAIA was defined as missing an injection by > 3 days for risperidone microspheres and > 7 days for paliperidone palmitate. This time frame was based on pharmacokinetic information listed in the products’ package inserts.14,15 Nonadherence to oral risperidone crossover with risperidone microspheres was defined as ≤ 80% of days covered.
Data Analysis
Patient demographics were analyzed using descriptive statistics and experimental comparisons between the risperidone microspheres and paliperidone palmitate groups to assess baseline differences between groups. Psychiatric hospitalizations pre- and post-LAIA were analyzed with parallel group (between veterans–independent groups) and pre-post (within veterans–dependent groups) designs. Index hospitalizations were examined for a period equivalent to the length of time veterans were on the LAIA. Psychiatric rehospitalization rates were analyzed for patients who had index hospitalizations and were rehospitalized for any period when they were receiving the LAIA. Incidences of pre- and post-LAIA hospitalizations were calculated in 100 person-years.
Parallel-group analysis was analyzed using the χ2 and Mann-Whitney U tests. Pre-post analyses were analyzed using the Wilcoxon rank sum test. P was set at < .05 for statistical significance.
Results
We screened 111 veterans, and 97 were included in this study (risperidone microspheres, 44; paliperidone palmitate, 53). Mean (SD) age was 46 (13.8) years, 92% were male, 38% were White, 94% were diagnosed with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder, and 11% were homeless. Substance use was documented as 52% for nicotine products, 40% for alcohol, 31% for cannabis, 27% for methamphetamine, 7% for cocaine, and 3% for opioids. Cannabis, methamphetamine, cocaine, and opioid use were based on clinician documentation and listed as active diagnoses at the time of LAIA initiation. Statistical significance was found in index hospitalizations P = .009) and history of cocaine use disorder (6.8% vs 7.5%, P < .001).
Veterans administered risperidone microspheres had fewer mean (SD) post-LAIA hospitalizations (0.4 [1.0] vs 0.9 [1.5]; P = .02) and were less likely to be rehospitalized (22.7% vs 47.2%, P = .01) compared with paliperidone palmitate. However, veterans taking risperidone microspheres had a shorter mean (SD) treatment duration (41.6 [40.2] vs 58.2 [45.7] weeks, P = .04) compared with paliperidone palmitate, mainly because patients switched to a different LAIA or oral antipsychotic. No differences were detected in nonadherence and discontinuation between risperidone microspheres and paliperidone palmitate. All veterans in the risperidone microspheres group adhered to oral risperidone crossover with an average 87.8% days covered (Table 2).
The average maintenance dose of risperidone microspheres was 42 mg every 2 weeks and 153 mg every 4 weeks for paliperidone palmitate.
Across the sample, 84% of veterans had a previous psychiatric hospitalization, although veterans initiated on risperidone microspheres had significantly higher mean (SD) index hospitalizations than those started on paliperidone palmitate (3.2 [2.6] risperidone microspheres vs 2.1 [1.9] paliperidone palmitate, P = .009). Both groups had significant decreases in mean (SD) hospitalizations (3.2 [2.6] to 0.4 [1.0], risperidone microspheres vs 2.1 [1.9] to 0.9 [1.5] paliperidone palmitate). The risperidone microspheres group had a larger decrease in mean (SD) hospitalizations post-LAIA (2.8 [2.9] risperidone microspheres vs 1.3 [1.7] paliperidone palmitate, P = .001) (Table 3).
Differences in incidence per 100 person-years between pre- and post-LAIA hospitalizations were larger in risperidone microspheres users than in paliperidone palmitate (73.8 vs 33.7, P = .01) (Figure). No differences between risperidone microspheres and paliperidone palmitate were detected when looking at incidence pre-LAIA (102.2 vs 75.8, P = .22) and post-LAIA (28.4 vs 42.1, P = .38) separately.
Thirty veterans in the risperidone microspheres group discontinued LAIA: 11 were nonadherent, 5 experienced adverse effects (AEs), and 14 discontinued due to inconvenience. Among 33 veterans in the paliperidone palmitate group who discontinued the LAIA, 15 were nonadherent, 11 experienced AEs, 4 stopped due to of inconvenience, and 3 switched to a less frequently administered LAIA. The most common AEs reported were injection site reactions, cholinergic AEs (salivation, lacrimation, urination), orthostasis, and weight gain.
Discussion
The main finding of this study was that initiation of LAIAs significantly reduced hospitalizations. Veterans taking risperidone microspheres had higher index hospitalizations and lower posttreatment hospitalizations compared with paliperidone palmitate. We found that patients initiated on risperidone microspheres had more hospitalizations before use of a LAIA than those initiated on paliperidone palmitate. Risperidone microspheres reduced the number of hospitalization post-LAIA significantly more than paliperidone palmitate. We also found that veterans taking risperidone microspheres were on the medication for less mean (SD) time than those on paliperidone palmitate (41.6 [40.2] vs 58.2 [45.7] weeks; P = .04).
To our knowledge, this is one of the few studies that compared outcomes of psychiatric hospitalizations, medication adherence, and treatment discontinuation between risperidone microspheres and paliperidone palmitate, specifically in a veteran population.16-19 Limosin and colleagues aimed to compare length of stay during the initial hospitalization, rehospitalization risk, and treatment duration between risperidone microspheres and paliperidone palmitate in patients with schizophrenia.16 These researchers detected no differences in initial hospitalization duration and time to rehospitalization between risperidone microspheres and paliperidone palmitate.16 The study revealed a more favorable trend in time to discontinuation for paliperidone palmitate, but switching between LAIAs might have confounded the data.16 The authors note that their study lacked power, and patients on paliperidone palmitate had significantly more nonpsychiatric comorbidities.16 Joshi and colleagues looked at adherence, medication discontinuation, hospitalization rates, emergency department visits, and hospitalization costs between risperidone microspheres and paliperidone palmitate in patients identified in Truven MarketScan Commercial, Medicare Supplemental, and Medicaid Multi-State insurance databases.17 The authors found paliperidone palmitate to be superior in all objectives with better adherence, lower discontinuation rates, less likelihood of hospitalization, fewer emergency department visits, and lower hospitalization costs compared with risperidone microspheres.17 Korell and colleagues aimed to establish reference ranges for plasma concentrations of risperidone and paliperidone among adherent patients.18
The researchers established reference ranges for risperidone and paliperidone plasma concentrations that represented expected variability within a population and were derived from population pharmacokinetic models.18 Gopal and colleagues conducted a post hoc comparison between paliperidone palmitate and oral risperidone during initiation of long-acting injectable risperidone in patients with acute schizophrenia.19 The researchers found that during the first month after initiating long-acting injectable risperidone, paliperidone palmitate without oral supplementation had similar efficacy and safety to oral risperidone among these patients.19
LAIAs can create a steadier drug plasma concentration compared with oral antipsychotics and do not need to be taken daily. These agents improve adherence by reducing the frequency of medication administrations.20-24 Assessing nonadherence is easier with LAIAs by counting missed injections compared with oral antipsychotics that require calculation of percentage of days covered.25
The results in our study are somewhat unexpected in part because of the close relationship between risperidone and paliperidone. Risperidone is converted to paliperidone (9-OH-risperidone) via hepatic cytochrome P450 2D6. Although the molecules do not have identical pharmacologic profiles, it is accepted that they are similar enough that risperidone can establish oral tolerability when transitioning therapy to paliperidone palmitate and vice versa.24 Although the active moiety in risperidone microspheres and paliperidone palmitate is similar, the dosing interval for risperidone microspheres is 2 weeks compared with 4 weeks with paliperidone palmitate. One potential explanation as to why veterans started on risperidone microspheres experienced better outcomes is because they had twice as many office visits with the health care team. Facility procedures dictate veterans receive the LAIA at an on-site clinic. During the visits, a licensed vocational nurse administers the injection and monitors the patient for 15 to 30 minutes afterward.
Despite new LAIAs coming to market, high-quality data examining potential differences in treatment outcomes among agents are limited. This is problematic for clinicians who want to optimize care by understanding how administration schedules or other aspects of LAIA use could modify treatment outcomes. Our results suggest that an advantage might exist in selecting an agent with a more frequent administration schedule, at least initially. This could allow for close monitoring and regular therapeutic contact, which could improve short-term outcomes. This conclusion is supported by meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, and conceptual articles conducted by Wehring and colleagues, Berwaerts and colleagues, and Parellada and colleagues, respectively, who examined patients on different LAIAs and contact with health care professionals as part of their research.26-28 These researchers concluded that patients who had regular contact with a health care professional had better outcomes when initiated on a LAIA.26-28
Limitations
There are several limitations in this study. Retrospective and observational methods introduce risks of bias and confounding variables. Sample size might have limited statistical power to detect differences. Veterans might have had undocumented pre- or posthospitalizations at other institutions, which was not accounted for and lack of rehospitalization is not conclusive of a positive outcome. Institutions could improve on our study and help to fill gaps in comparative data by conducting larger analyses over longer periods and including more LAIA agents.
Conclusions
Although veterans that were administered risperidone microspheres had a shorter treatment duration, they were less likely to be rehospitalized, had a fewer mean number of post-LAIA hospitalizations, and had a larger difference in incidence in 100 person-years compared with veterans on paliperidone palmitate. Nonadherence and discontinuation rates were comparable between risperidone microspheres and paliperidone palmitate. Future studies could aim to further clarify differences in outcomes among agents or administration schedules.
1. Lehman AF, Lieberman JA, Dixon LB, et al; American Psychiatric Association Steering Committee on Practice Guidelines. Practice guideline for the treatment of patients with schizophrenia, second edition. Am J Psychiatry. 2004;161(suppl 2):1-56.
2. Lieberman JA, Stroup TS, McEvoy JP, et al; Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) Investigators. Effectiveness of antipsychotic drugs in patients with chronic schizophrenia. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(12):1209-1223. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa051688
3. Swartz MS, Stroup TS, McEvoy JP, et al. What CATIE found: results from the schizophrenia trial. Psychiatr Serv. 2008;59(5):500-506. doi:10.1176/ps.2008.59.5.500
4. Haywood TW, Kravitz HM, Grossman LS, Cavanaugh JL Jr, Davis JM, Lewis DA. Predicting the “revolving door” phenomenon among patients with schizophrenic, schizoaffective, and affective disorders. Am J Psychiatry. 1995;152(6):856-561. doi:10.1176/ajp.152.6.856
5. Morken G, Widen JH, Grawe RW. Non-adherence to antipsychotic medication, relapse and rehospitalisation in recent-onset schizophrenia. BMC Psychiatry. 2008;8:32. doi:10.1186/1471-244X-8-32
6. Weiden PJ, Kozma C, Grogg A, Locklear J. Partial compliance and risk of rehospitalization among California Medicaid patients with schizophrenia. Psychiatr Serv. 2004;55(8):886-891. doi:10.1176/appi.ps.55.8.886
7. Gilmer TP, Dolder CR, Lacro JP, et al. Adherence to treatment with antipsychotic medication and health care costs among Medicaid beneficiaries with schizophrenia. Am J Psychiatry. 2004;161(4):692-699. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.161.4.692
8. Lafeuille MH, Dean J, Carter V, et al. Systematic review of long-acting injectables versus oral atypical antipsychotics on hospitalization in schizophrenia. Curr Med Res Opin. 2014;30(8):1643-1655. doi:10.1185/03007995.2014.915211
9. Yu W, Wagner TH, Chen S, Barnett PG. Average cost of VA rehabilitation, mental health, and long-term hospital stays. Med Care Res Rev. 2003;60(3 suppl):40S-53S. doi:10.1177/1077558703256724
10. Duncan EJ, Woolson SL, Hamer RM. Treatment compliance in veterans administration schizophrenia spectrum patients treated with risperidone long-acting injectable. Int Clin Psychopharmacol. 2012;27(5):283-290. doi:10.1097/YIC.0b013e328354b534
11. Romstadt N, Wonson E. Outcomes comparison of long-acting injectable antipsychotic initiation in treatment-naïve veterans in the inpatient versus outpatient setting. Ment Health Clin. 2018;8(1):24-27. doi:10.9740/mhc.2018.01.024
12. Dimitropoulos E, Drogemuller L, Wong K. Evaluation of concurrent oral and long-acting injectable antipsychotic prescribing at the Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Health Care System. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2017;37(5):605-608. doi:10.1097/JCP.0000000000000755
13. Marcus SC, Zummo J, Pettit AR, Stoddard J, Doshi JA. Antipsychotic adherence and rehospitalization in schizophrenia patients receiving oral versus long-acting injectable antipsychotics following hospital discharge. J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2015;21(9):754-768. doi:10.18553/jmcp.2015.21.9.754
14. Risperdal Consta. Package insert. Janssen Pharmaceutical; 2007.
15. Invega Sustenna. Package insert. Janssen Pharmaceutical; 2009.
16. Limosin F, Belhadi D, Comet D, et al. Comparison of paliperidone palmitate and risperidone long-acting injection in schizophrenic patients: results from a multicenter retrospective cohort study in France. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2018;38(1):19-26. doi:10.1097/JCP.0000000000000827
17. Joshi K, Pan X, Wang R, Yang E, Benson C. Healthcare resource utilization of second-generation long-acting injectable antipsychotics in schizophrenia: risperidone versus paliperidone palmitate. Curr Med Res Opin. 2016;32(11):1873-1881. doi: 10.1080/03007995.2016.1219706
18. Korell J, Green B, Remmerie B, Vermeulen A. Determination of plasma concentration reference ranges for risperidone and paliperidone. CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol. 2017;6(9):589-595. doi:10.1002/psp4.12217
19. Gopal S, Pandina G, Lane R, et al. A post-hoc comparison of paliperidone palmitate to oral risperidone during initiation of long-acting risperidone injection in patients with acute schizophrenia. Innov Clin Neurosci. 2011;8(8):26-33.
20. Marcus SC, Zummo J, Pettit AR, Stoddard J, Doshi JA. Antipsychotic adherence and rehospitalization in schizophrenia patients receiving oral versus long-acting injectable antipsychotics following hospital discharge. J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2015;21(9):754-768. doi:10.18553/jmcp.2015.21.9.754
21. Romstadt N, Wonson E. Outcomes comparison of long-acting injectable antipsychotic initiation in treatment-naïve veterans in the inpatient versus outpatient setting. Ment Health Clin. 2018;8(1):24-27. doi:10.9740/mhc.2018.01.024
22. Green AI, Brunette MF, Dawson R, et al. Long-acting injectable vs oral risperidone for schizophrenia and co-occurring alcohol use disorder: a randomized trial. J Clin Psychiatry. 2015;76(10):1359-1365. doi:10.4088/JCP.13m08838
23. Rezansoff SN, Moniruzzaman A, Fazel S, Procyshyn R, Somers JM. Adherence to antipsychotic medication among homeless adults in Vancouver, Canada: a 15-year retrospective cohort study. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2016;51(12):1623-1632. doi:10.1007/s00127-016-1259-7
24. Castillo EG, Stroup TS. Effectiveness of long-acting injectable antipsychotics: a clinical perspective. Evid Based Ment Health. 2015;18(2):36-39. doi:10.1136/eb-2015-102086
25. Marder SR. Overview of partial compliance. J Clin Psychiatry. 2003;64 (suppl 16):3-9.
26. Wehring HJ, Thedford S, Koola M, Kelly DL. Patient and health care provider perspectives on long acting injectable antipsychotics in schizophrenia and the introduction of olanzapine long-acting injection. J Cent Nerv Syst Dis. 2011;2011(3):107-123. doi:10.4137/JCNSD.S4091
27. Berwaerts J, Liu Y, Gopal S, et al. Efficacy and safety of the 3-month formulation of paliperidone palmitate vs placebo for relapse prevention of schizophrenia: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Psychiatry. 2015;72(8):830-839. doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2015.0241
28. Parellada E, Bioque M. Barriers to the use of long-acting injectable antipsychotics in the management of schizophrenia. CNS Drugs. 2016;30(8):689-701. doi:10.1007/s40263-016-0350-7
Medication nonadherence is common with oral antipsychotic formulations, resulting in relapse, increased morbidity, and more frequent psychiatric hospitalization.1-7 Psychiatric hospitalization and illness decompensation is costly to health care systems and leads to reduced quality of life for veterans and families.6,7 Long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIAs) were developed to enhance antipsychotic adherence and improve patient outcomes, including reduced psychiatric hospitalization.8-12
Little outcomes data exist comparing LAIAs, including biweekly risperidone microspheres and monthly paliperidone palmitate.10-13 Risperidone microspheres require a 3-week oral crossover and are administered every 2 weeks, whereas paliperidone palmitate does not require an oral crossover and is administered every 4 weeks. The paliperidone palmitate loading regimen replaces an oral crossover.
The primary objective of this study was to compare the number of psychiatric hospitalizations between veterans administered risperidone microspheres and those on paliperidone palmitate pre- and post-LAIA initiation. Secondary objectives were to assess rehospitalization rates between patients taking risperidone microspheres and paliperidone palmitate, reduction in pre- and posthospitalization rates with LAIAs, and medication adherence.
Methods
This observational study with a retrospective cohort design was conducted at the Veterans Affairs Loma Linda Healthcare System (VALLHS) in California. We examined veterans who were initiated on LAIAs risperidone microspheres or paliperidone palmitate from January 01, 2016 through December 31, 2018. Veterans who were aged ≥ 18 years and received ≥ 2 injections of either risperidone microspheres or paliperidone palmitate during the study period were included. Veterans were excluded if they had received < 2 doses of either LAIA, received the LAIA outside of the review period, were nonadherent to risperidone crossover if they received risperidone microspheres, or transferred their care to another facility. At VALLHS, LAIA injections are administered by a nurse, and veterans must travel to the facility to receive the injections.
Extracted patient chart elements included participant demographics; diagnoses; comorbid alcohol, nicotine, opioid, or other substance use; duration on LAIA; psychiatric hospitalizations pre- and postinitiation of the LAIA; medication adherence; and medication discontinuation based on clinician documentation and clinic orders (Table 1).
Nonadherence to LAIA was defined as missing an injection by > 3 days for risperidone microspheres and > 7 days for paliperidone palmitate. This time frame was based on pharmacokinetic information listed in the products’ package inserts.14,15 Nonadherence to oral risperidone crossover with risperidone microspheres was defined as ≤ 80% of days covered.
Data Analysis
Patient demographics were analyzed using descriptive statistics and experimental comparisons between the risperidone microspheres and paliperidone palmitate groups to assess baseline differences between groups. Psychiatric hospitalizations pre- and post-LAIA were analyzed with parallel group (between veterans–independent groups) and pre-post (within veterans–dependent groups) designs. Index hospitalizations were examined for a period equivalent to the length of time veterans were on the LAIA. Psychiatric rehospitalization rates were analyzed for patients who had index hospitalizations and were rehospitalized for any period when they were receiving the LAIA. Incidences of pre- and post-LAIA hospitalizations were calculated in 100 person-years.
Parallel-group analysis was analyzed using the χ2 and Mann-Whitney U tests. Pre-post analyses were analyzed using the Wilcoxon rank sum test. P was set at < .05 for statistical significance.
Results
We screened 111 veterans, and 97 were included in this study (risperidone microspheres, 44; paliperidone palmitate, 53). Mean (SD) age was 46 (13.8) years, 92% were male, 38% were White, 94% were diagnosed with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder, and 11% were homeless. Substance use was documented as 52% for nicotine products, 40% for alcohol, 31% for cannabis, 27% for methamphetamine, 7% for cocaine, and 3% for opioids. Cannabis, methamphetamine, cocaine, and opioid use were based on clinician documentation and listed as active diagnoses at the time of LAIA initiation. Statistical significance was found in index hospitalizations P = .009) and history of cocaine use disorder (6.8% vs 7.5%, P < .001).
Veterans administered risperidone microspheres had fewer mean (SD) post-LAIA hospitalizations (0.4 [1.0] vs 0.9 [1.5]; P = .02) and were less likely to be rehospitalized (22.7% vs 47.2%, P = .01) compared with paliperidone palmitate. However, veterans taking risperidone microspheres had a shorter mean (SD) treatment duration (41.6 [40.2] vs 58.2 [45.7] weeks, P = .04) compared with paliperidone palmitate, mainly because patients switched to a different LAIA or oral antipsychotic. No differences were detected in nonadherence and discontinuation between risperidone microspheres and paliperidone palmitate. All veterans in the risperidone microspheres group adhered to oral risperidone crossover with an average 87.8% days covered (Table 2).
The average maintenance dose of risperidone microspheres was 42 mg every 2 weeks and 153 mg every 4 weeks for paliperidone palmitate.
Across the sample, 84% of veterans had a previous psychiatric hospitalization, although veterans initiated on risperidone microspheres had significantly higher mean (SD) index hospitalizations than those started on paliperidone palmitate (3.2 [2.6] risperidone microspheres vs 2.1 [1.9] paliperidone palmitate, P = .009). Both groups had significant decreases in mean (SD) hospitalizations (3.2 [2.6] to 0.4 [1.0], risperidone microspheres vs 2.1 [1.9] to 0.9 [1.5] paliperidone palmitate). The risperidone microspheres group had a larger decrease in mean (SD) hospitalizations post-LAIA (2.8 [2.9] risperidone microspheres vs 1.3 [1.7] paliperidone palmitate, P = .001) (Table 3).
Differences in incidence per 100 person-years between pre- and post-LAIA hospitalizations were larger in risperidone microspheres users than in paliperidone palmitate (73.8 vs 33.7, P = .01) (Figure). No differences between risperidone microspheres and paliperidone palmitate were detected when looking at incidence pre-LAIA (102.2 vs 75.8, P = .22) and post-LAIA (28.4 vs 42.1, P = .38) separately.
Thirty veterans in the risperidone microspheres group discontinued LAIA: 11 were nonadherent, 5 experienced adverse effects (AEs), and 14 discontinued due to inconvenience. Among 33 veterans in the paliperidone palmitate group who discontinued the LAIA, 15 were nonadherent, 11 experienced AEs, 4 stopped due to of inconvenience, and 3 switched to a less frequently administered LAIA. The most common AEs reported were injection site reactions, cholinergic AEs (salivation, lacrimation, urination), orthostasis, and weight gain.
Discussion
The main finding of this study was that initiation of LAIAs significantly reduced hospitalizations. Veterans taking risperidone microspheres had higher index hospitalizations and lower posttreatment hospitalizations compared with paliperidone palmitate. We found that patients initiated on risperidone microspheres had more hospitalizations before use of a LAIA than those initiated on paliperidone palmitate. Risperidone microspheres reduced the number of hospitalization post-LAIA significantly more than paliperidone palmitate. We also found that veterans taking risperidone microspheres were on the medication for less mean (SD) time than those on paliperidone palmitate (41.6 [40.2] vs 58.2 [45.7] weeks; P = .04).
To our knowledge, this is one of the few studies that compared outcomes of psychiatric hospitalizations, medication adherence, and treatment discontinuation between risperidone microspheres and paliperidone palmitate, specifically in a veteran population.16-19 Limosin and colleagues aimed to compare length of stay during the initial hospitalization, rehospitalization risk, and treatment duration between risperidone microspheres and paliperidone palmitate in patients with schizophrenia.16 These researchers detected no differences in initial hospitalization duration and time to rehospitalization between risperidone microspheres and paliperidone palmitate.16 The study revealed a more favorable trend in time to discontinuation for paliperidone palmitate, but switching between LAIAs might have confounded the data.16 The authors note that their study lacked power, and patients on paliperidone palmitate had significantly more nonpsychiatric comorbidities.16 Joshi and colleagues looked at adherence, medication discontinuation, hospitalization rates, emergency department visits, and hospitalization costs between risperidone microspheres and paliperidone palmitate in patients identified in Truven MarketScan Commercial, Medicare Supplemental, and Medicaid Multi-State insurance databases.17 The authors found paliperidone palmitate to be superior in all objectives with better adherence, lower discontinuation rates, less likelihood of hospitalization, fewer emergency department visits, and lower hospitalization costs compared with risperidone microspheres.17 Korell and colleagues aimed to establish reference ranges for plasma concentrations of risperidone and paliperidone among adherent patients.18
The researchers established reference ranges for risperidone and paliperidone plasma concentrations that represented expected variability within a population and were derived from population pharmacokinetic models.18 Gopal and colleagues conducted a post hoc comparison between paliperidone palmitate and oral risperidone during initiation of long-acting injectable risperidone in patients with acute schizophrenia.19 The researchers found that during the first month after initiating long-acting injectable risperidone, paliperidone palmitate without oral supplementation had similar efficacy and safety to oral risperidone among these patients.19
LAIAs can create a steadier drug plasma concentration compared with oral antipsychotics and do not need to be taken daily. These agents improve adherence by reducing the frequency of medication administrations.20-24 Assessing nonadherence is easier with LAIAs by counting missed injections compared with oral antipsychotics that require calculation of percentage of days covered.25
The results in our study are somewhat unexpected in part because of the close relationship between risperidone and paliperidone. Risperidone is converted to paliperidone (9-OH-risperidone) via hepatic cytochrome P450 2D6. Although the molecules do not have identical pharmacologic profiles, it is accepted that they are similar enough that risperidone can establish oral tolerability when transitioning therapy to paliperidone palmitate and vice versa.24 Although the active moiety in risperidone microspheres and paliperidone palmitate is similar, the dosing interval for risperidone microspheres is 2 weeks compared with 4 weeks with paliperidone palmitate. One potential explanation as to why veterans started on risperidone microspheres experienced better outcomes is because they had twice as many office visits with the health care team. Facility procedures dictate veterans receive the LAIA at an on-site clinic. During the visits, a licensed vocational nurse administers the injection and monitors the patient for 15 to 30 minutes afterward.
Despite new LAIAs coming to market, high-quality data examining potential differences in treatment outcomes among agents are limited. This is problematic for clinicians who want to optimize care by understanding how administration schedules or other aspects of LAIA use could modify treatment outcomes. Our results suggest that an advantage might exist in selecting an agent with a more frequent administration schedule, at least initially. This could allow for close monitoring and regular therapeutic contact, which could improve short-term outcomes. This conclusion is supported by meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, and conceptual articles conducted by Wehring and colleagues, Berwaerts and colleagues, and Parellada and colleagues, respectively, who examined patients on different LAIAs and contact with health care professionals as part of their research.26-28 These researchers concluded that patients who had regular contact with a health care professional had better outcomes when initiated on a LAIA.26-28
Limitations
There are several limitations in this study. Retrospective and observational methods introduce risks of bias and confounding variables. Sample size might have limited statistical power to detect differences. Veterans might have had undocumented pre- or posthospitalizations at other institutions, which was not accounted for and lack of rehospitalization is not conclusive of a positive outcome. Institutions could improve on our study and help to fill gaps in comparative data by conducting larger analyses over longer periods and including more LAIA agents.
Conclusions
Although veterans that were administered risperidone microspheres had a shorter treatment duration, they were less likely to be rehospitalized, had a fewer mean number of post-LAIA hospitalizations, and had a larger difference in incidence in 100 person-years compared with veterans on paliperidone palmitate. Nonadherence and discontinuation rates were comparable between risperidone microspheres and paliperidone palmitate. Future studies could aim to further clarify differences in outcomes among agents or administration schedules.
Medication nonadherence is common with oral antipsychotic formulations, resulting in relapse, increased morbidity, and more frequent psychiatric hospitalization.1-7 Psychiatric hospitalization and illness decompensation is costly to health care systems and leads to reduced quality of life for veterans and families.6,7 Long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIAs) were developed to enhance antipsychotic adherence and improve patient outcomes, including reduced psychiatric hospitalization.8-12
Little outcomes data exist comparing LAIAs, including biweekly risperidone microspheres and monthly paliperidone palmitate.10-13 Risperidone microspheres require a 3-week oral crossover and are administered every 2 weeks, whereas paliperidone palmitate does not require an oral crossover and is administered every 4 weeks. The paliperidone palmitate loading regimen replaces an oral crossover.
The primary objective of this study was to compare the number of psychiatric hospitalizations between veterans administered risperidone microspheres and those on paliperidone palmitate pre- and post-LAIA initiation. Secondary objectives were to assess rehospitalization rates between patients taking risperidone microspheres and paliperidone palmitate, reduction in pre- and posthospitalization rates with LAIAs, and medication adherence.
Methods
This observational study with a retrospective cohort design was conducted at the Veterans Affairs Loma Linda Healthcare System (VALLHS) in California. We examined veterans who were initiated on LAIAs risperidone microspheres or paliperidone palmitate from January 01, 2016 through December 31, 2018. Veterans who were aged ≥ 18 years and received ≥ 2 injections of either risperidone microspheres or paliperidone palmitate during the study period were included. Veterans were excluded if they had received < 2 doses of either LAIA, received the LAIA outside of the review period, were nonadherent to risperidone crossover if they received risperidone microspheres, or transferred their care to another facility. At VALLHS, LAIA injections are administered by a nurse, and veterans must travel to the facility to receive the injections.
Extracted patient chart elements included participant demographics; diagnoses; comorbid alcohol, nicotine, opioid, or other substance use; duration on LAIA; psychiatric hospitalizations pre- and postinitiation of the LAIA; medication adherence; and medication discontinuation based on clinician documentation and clinic orders (Table 1).
Nonadherence to LAIA was defined as missing an injection by > 3 days for risperidone microspheres and > 7 days for paliperidone palmitate. This time frame was based on pharmacokinetic information listed in the products’ package inserts.14,15 Nonadherence to oral risperidone crossover with risperidone microspheres was defined as ≤ 80% of days covered.
Data Analysis
Patient demographics were analyzed using descriptive statistics and experimental comparisons between the risperidone microspheres and paliperidone palmitate groups to assess baseline differences between groups. Psychiatric hospitalizations pre- and post-LAIA were analyzed with parallel group (between veterans–independent groups) and pre-post (within veterans–dependent groups) designs. Index hospitalizations were examined for a period equivalent to the length of time veterans were on the LAIA. Psychiatric rehospitalization rates were analyzed for patients who had index hospitalizations and were rehospitalized for any period when they were receiving the LAIA. Incidences of pre- and post-LAIA hospitalizations were calculated in 100 person-years.
Parallel-group analysis was analyzed using the χ2 and Mann-Whitney U tests. Pre-post analyses were analyzed using the Wilcoxon rank sum test. P was set at < .05 for statistical significance.
Results
We screened 111 veterans, and 97 were included in this study (risperidone microspheres, 44; paliperidone palmitate, 53). Mean (SD) age was 46 (13.8) years, 92% were male, 38% were White, 94% were diagnosed with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder, and 11% were homeless. Substance use was documented as 52% for nicotine products, 40% for alcohol, 31% for cannabis, 27% for methamphetamine, 7% for cocaine, and 3% for opioids. Cannabis, methamphetamine, cocaine, and opioid use were based on clinician documentation and listed as active diagnoses at the time of LAIA initiation. Statistical significance was found in index hospitalizations P = .009) and history of cocaine use disorder (6.8% vs 7.5%, P < .001).
Veterans administered risperidone microspheres had fewer mean (SD) post-LAIA hospitalizations (0.4 [1.0] vs 0.9 [1.5]; P = .02) and were less likely to be rehospitalized (22.7% vs 47.2%, P = .01) compared with paliperidone palmitate. However, veterans taking risperidone microspheres had a shorter mean (SD) treatment duration (41.6 [40.2] vs 58.2 [45.7] weeks, P = .04) compared with paliperidone palmitate, mainly because patients switched to a different LAIA or oral antipsychotic. No differences were detected in nonadherence and discontinuation between risperidone microspheres and paliperidone palmitate. All veterans in the risperidone microspheres group adhered to oral risperidone crossover with an average 87.8% days covered (Table 2).
The average maintenance dose of risperidone microspheres was 42 mg every 2 weeks and 153 mg every 4 weeks for paliperidone palmitate.
Across the sample, 84% of veterans had a previous psychiatric hospitalization, although veterans initiated on risperidone microspheres had significantly higher mean (SD) index hospitalizations than those started on paliperidone palmitate (3.2 [2.6] risperidone microspheres vs 2.1 [1.9] paliperidone palmitate, P = .009). Both groups had significant decreases in mean (SD) hospitalizations (3.2 [2.6] to 0.4 [1.0], risperidone microspheres vs 2.1 [1.9] to 0.9 [1.5] paliperidone palmitate). The risperidone microspheres group had a larger decrease in mean (SD) hospitalizations post-LAIA (2.8 [2.9] risperidone microspheres vs 1.3 [1.7] paliperidone palmitate, P = .001) (Table 3).
Differences in incidence per 100 person-years between pre- and post-LAIA hospitalizations were larger in risperidone microspheres users than in paliperidone palmitate (73.8 vs 33.7, P = .01) (Figure). No differences between risperidone microspheres and paliperidone palmitate were detected when looking at incidence pre-LAIA (102.2 vs 75.8, P = .22) and post-LAIA (28.4 vs 42.1, P = .38) separately.
Thirty veterans in the risperidone microspheres group discontinued LAIA: 11 were nonadherent, 5 experienced adverse effects (AEs), and 14 discontinued due to inconvenience. Among 33 veterans in the paliperidone palmitate group who discontinued the LAIA, 15 were nonadherent, 11 experienced AEs, 4 stopped due to of inconvenience, and 3 switched to a less frequently administered LAIA. The most common AEs reported were injection site reactions, cholinergic AEs (salivation, lacrimation, urination), orthostasis, and weight gain.
Discussion
The main finding of this study was that initiation of LAIAs significantly reduced hospitalizations. Veterans taking risperidone microspheres had higher index hospitalizations and lower posttreatment hospitalizations compared with paliperidone palmitate. We found that patients initiated on risperidone microspheres had more hospitalizations before use of a LAIA than those initiated on paliperidone palmitate. Risperidone microspheres reduced the number of hospitalization post-LAIA significantly more than paliperidone palmitate. We also found that veterans taking risperidone microspheres were on the medication for less mean (SD) time than those on paliperidone palmitate (41.6 [40.2] vs 58.2 [45.7] weeks; P = .04).
To our knowledge, this is one of the few studies that compared outcomes of psychiatric hospitalizations, medication adherence, and treatment discontinuation between risperidone microspheres and paliperidone palmitate, specifically in a veteran population.16-19 Limosin and colleagues aimed to compare length of stay during the initial hospitalization, rehospitalization risk, and treatment duration between risperidone microspheres and paliperidone palmitate in patients with schizophrenia.16 These researchers detected no differences in initial hospitalization duration and time to rehospitalization between risperidone microspheres and paliperidone palmitate.16 The study revealed a more favorable trend in time to discontinuation for paliperidone palmitate, but switching between LAIAs might have confounded the data.16 The authors note that their study lacked power, and patients on paliperidone palmitate had significantly more nonpsychiatric comorbidities.16 Joshi and colleagues looked at adherence, medication discontinuation, hospitalization rates, emergency department visits, and hospitalization costs between risperidone microspheres and paliperidone palmitate in patients identified in Truven MarketScan Commercial, Medicare Supplemental, and Medicaid Multi-State insurance databases.17 The authors found paliperidone palmitate to be superior in all objectives with better adherence, lower discontinuation rates, less likelihood of hospitalization, fewer emergency department visits, and lower hospitalization costs compared with risperidone microspheres.17 Korell and colleagues aimed to establish reference ranges for plasma concentrations of risperidone and paliperidone among adherent patients.18
The researchers established reference ranges for risperidone and paliperidone plasma concentrations that represented expected variability within a population and were derived from population pharmacokinetic models.18 Gopal and colleagues conducted a post hoc comparison between paliperidone palmitate and oral risperidone during initiation of long-acting injectable risperidone in patients with acute schizophrenia.19 The researchers found that during the first month after initiating long-acting injectable risperidone, paliperidone palmitate without oral supplementation had similar efficacy and safety to oral risperidone among these patients.19
LAIAs can create a steadier drug plasma concentration compared with oral antipsychotics and do not need to be taken daily. These agents improve adherence by reducing the frequency of medication administrations.20-24 Assessing nonadherence is easier with LAIAs by counting missed injections compared with oral antipsychotics that require calculation of percentage of days covered.25
The results in our study are somewhat unexpected in part because of the close relationship between risperidone and paliperidone. Risperidone is converted to paliperidone (9-OH-risperidone) via hepatic cytochrome P450 2D6. Although the molecules do not have identical pharmacologic profiles, it is accepted that they are similar enough that risperidone can establish oral tolerability when transitioning therapy to paliperidone palmitate and vice versa.24 Although the active moiety in risperidone microspheres and paliperidone palmitate is similar, the dosing interval for risperidone microspheres is 2 weeks compared with 4 weeks with paliperidone palmitate. One potential explanation as to why veterans started on risperidone microspheres experienced better outcomes is because they had twice as many office visits with the health care team. Facility procedures dictate veterans receive the LAIA at an on-site clinic. During the visits, a licensed vocational nurse administers the injection and monitors the patient for 15 to 30 minutes afterward.
Despite new LAIAs coming to market, high-quality data examining potential differences in treatment outcomes among agents are limited. This is problematic for clinicians who want to optimize care by understanding how administration schedules or other aspects of LAIA use could modify treatment outcomes. Our results suggest that an advantage might exist in selecting an agent with a more frequent administration schedule, at least initially. This could allow for close monitoring and regular therapeutic contact, which could improve short-term outcomes. This conclusion is supported by meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, and conceptual articles conducted by Wehring and colleagues, Berwaerts and colleagues, and Parellada and colleagues, respectively, who examined patients on different LAIAs and contact with health care professionals as part of their research.26-28 These researchers concluded that patients who had regular contact with a health care professional had better outcomes when initiated on a LAIA.26-28
Limitations
There are several limitations in this study. Retrospective and observational methods introduce risks of bias and confounding variables. Sample size might have limited statistical power to detect differences. Veterans might have had undocumented pre- or posthospitalizations at other institutions, which was not accounted for and lack of rehospitalization is not conclusive of a positive outcome. Institutions could improve on our study and help to fill gaps in comparative data by conducting larger analyses over longer periods and including more LAIA agents.
Conclusions
Although veterans that were administered risperidone microspheres had a shorter treatment duration, they were less likely to be rehospitalized, had a fewer mean number of post-LAIA hospitalizations, and had a larger difference in incidence in 100 person-years compared with veterans on paliperidone palmitate. Nonadherence and discontinuation rates were comparable between risperidone microspheres and paliperidone palmitate. Future studies could aim to further clarify differences in outcomes among agents or administration schedules.
1. Lehman AF, Lieberman JA, Dixon LB, et al; American Psychiatric Association Steering Committee on Practice Guidelines. Practice guideline for the treatment of patients with schizophrenia, second edition. Am J Psychiatry. 2004;161(suppl 2):1-56.
2. Lieberman JA, Stroup TS, McEvoy JP, et al; Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) Investigators. Effectiveness of antipsychotic drugs in patients with chronic schizophrenia. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(12):1209-1223. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa051688
3. Swartz MS, Stroup TS, McEvoy JP, et al. What CATIE found: results from the schizophrenia trial. Psychiatr Serv. 2008;59(5):500-506. doi:10.1176/ps.2008.59.5.500
4. Haywood TW, Kravitz HM, Grossman LS, Cavanaugh JL Jr, Davis JM, Lewis DA. Predicting the “revolving door” phenomenon among patients with schizophrenic, schizoaffective, and affective disorders. Am J Psychiatry. 1995;152(6):856-561. doi:10.1176/ajp.152.6.856
5. Morken G, Widen JH, Grawe RW. Non-adherence to antipsychotic medication, relapse and rehospitalisation in recent-onset schizophrenia. BMC Psychiatry. 2008;8:32. doi:10.1186/1471-244X-8-32
6. Weiden PJ, Kozma C, Grogg A, Locklear J. Partial compliance and risk of rehospitalization among California Medicaid patients with schizophrenia. Psychiatr Serv. 2004;55(8):886-891. doi:10.1176/appi.ps.55.8.886
7. Gilmer TP, Dolder CR, Lacro JP, et al. Adherence to treatment with antipsychotic medication and health care costs among Medicaid beneficiaries with schizophrenia. Am J Psychiatry. 2004;161(4):692-699. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.161.4.692
8. Lafeuille MH, Dean J, Carter V, et al. Systematic review of long-acting injectables versus oral atypical antipsychotics on hospitalization in schizophrenia. Curr Med Res Opin. 2014;30(8):1643-1655. doi:10.1185/03007995.2014.915211
9. Yu W, Wagner TH, Chen S, Barnett PG. Average cost of VA rehabilitation, mental health, and long-term hospital stays. Med Care Res Rev. 2003;60(3 suppl):40S-53S. doi:10.1177/1077558703256724
10. Duncan EJ, Woolson SL, Hamer RM. Treatment compliance in veterans administration schizophrenia spectrum patients treated with risperidone long-acting injectable. Int Clin Psychopharmacol. 2012;27(5):283-290. doi:10.1097/YIC.0b013e328354b534
11. Romstadt N, Wonson E. Outcomes comparison of long-acting injectable antipsychotic initiation in treatment-naïve veterans in the inpatient versus outpatient setting. Ment Health Clin. 2018;8(1):24-27. doi:10.9740/mhc.2018.01.024
12. Dimitropoulos E, Drogemuller L, Wong K. Evaluation of concurrent oral and long-acting injectable antipsychotic prescribing at the Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Health Care System. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2017;37(5):605-608. doi:10.1097/JCP.0000000000000755
13. Marcus SC, Zummo J, Pettit AR, Stoddard J, Doshi JA. Antipsychotic adherence and rehospitalization in schizophrenia patients receiving oral versus long-acting injectable antipsychotics following hospital discharge. J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2015;21(9):754-768. doi:10.18553/jmcp.2015.21.9.754
14. Risperdal Consta. Package insert. Janssen Pharmaceutical; 2007.
15. Invega Sustenna. Package insert. Janssen Pharmaceutical; 2009.
16. Limosin F, Belhadi D, Comet D, et al. Comparison of paliperidone palmitate and risperidone long-acting injection in schizophrenic patients: results from a multicenter retrospective cohort study in France. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2018;38(1):19-26. doi:10.1097/JCP.0000000000000827
17. Joshi K, Pan X, Wang R, Yang E, Benson C. Healthcare resource utilization of second-generation long-acting injectable antipsychotics in schizophrenia: risperidone versus paliperidone palmitate. Curr Med Res Opin. 2016;32(11):1873-1881. doi: 10.1080/03007995.2016.1219706
18. Korell J, Green B, Remmerie B, Vermeulen A. Determination of plasma concentration reference ranges for risperidone and paliperidone. CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol. 2017;6(9):589-595. doi:10.1002/psp4.12217
19. Gopal S, Pandina G, Lane R, et al. A post-hoc comparison of paliperidone palmitate to oral risperidone during initiation of long-acting risperidone injection in patients with acute schizophrenia. Innov Clin Neurosci. 2011;8(8):26-33.
20. Marcus SC, Zummo J, Pettit AR, Stoddard J, Doshi JA. Antipsychotic adherence and rehospitalization in schizophrenia patients receiving oral versus long-acting injectable antipsychotics following hospital discharge. J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2015;21(9):754-768. doi:10.18553/jmcp.2015.21.9.754
21. Romstadt N, Wonson E. Outcomes comparison of long-acting injectable antipsychotic initiation in treatment-naïve veterans in the inpatient versus outpatient setting. Ment Health Clin. 2018;8(1):24-27. doi:10.9740/mhc.2018.01.024
22. Green AI, Brunette MF, Dawson R, et al. Long-acting injectable vs oral risperidone for schizophrenia and co-occurring alcohol use disorder: a randomized trial. J Clin Psychiatry. 2015;76(10):1359-1365. doi:10.4088/JCP.13m08838
23. Rezansoff SN, Moniruzzaman A, Fazel S, Procyshyn R, Somers JM. Adherence to antipsychotic medication among homeless adults in Vancouver, Canada: a 15-year retrospective cohort study. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2016;51(12):1623-1632. doi:10.1007/s00127-016-1259-7
24. Castillo EG, Stroup TS. Effectiveness of long-acting injectable antipsychotics: a clinical perspective. Evid Based Ment Health. 2015;18(2):36-39. doi:10.1136/eb-2015-102086
25. Marder SR. Overview of partial compliance. J Clin Psychiatry. 2003;64 (suppl 16):3-9.
26. Wehring HJ, Thedford S, Koola M, Kelly DL. Patient and health care provider perspectives on long acting injectable antipsychotics in schizophrenia and the introduction of olanzapine long-acting injection. J Cent Nerv Syst Dis. 2011;2011(3):107-123. doi:10.4137/JCNSD.S4091
27. Berwaerts J, Liu Y, Gopal S, et al. Efficacy and safety of the 3-month formulation of paliperidone palmitate vs placebo for relapse prevention of schizophrenia: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Psychiatry. 2015;72(8):830-839. doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2015.0241
28. Parellada E, Bioque M. Barriers to the use of long-acting injectable antipsychotics in the management of schizophrenia. CNS Drugs. 2016;30(8):689-701. doi:10.1007/s40263-016-0350-7
1. Lehman AF, Lieberman JA, Dixon LB, et al; American Psychiatric Association Steering Committee on Practice Guidelines. Practice guideline for the treatment of patients with schizophrenia, second edition. Am J Psychiatry. 2004;161(suppl 2):1-56.
2. Lieberman JA, Stroup TS, McEvoy JP, et al; Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) Investigators. Effectiveness of antipsychotic drugs in patients with chronic schizophrenia. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(12):1209-1223. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa051688
3. Swartz MS, Stroup TS, McEvoy JP, et al. What CATIE found: results from the schizophrenia trial. Psychiatr Serv. 2008;59(5):500-506. doi:10.1176/ps.2008.59.5.500
4. Haywood TW, Kravitz HM, Grossman LS, Cavanaugh JL Jr, Davis JM, Lewis DA. Predicting the “revolving door” phenomenon among patients with schizophrenic, schizoaffective, and affective disorders. Am J Psychiatry. 1995;152(6):856-561. doi:10.1176/ajp.152.6.856
5. Morken G, Widen JH, Grawe RW. Non-adherence to antipsychotic medication, relapse and rehospitalisation in recent-onset schizophrenia. BMC Psychiatry. 2008;8:32. doi:10.1186/1471-244X-8-32
6. Weiden PJ, Kozma C, Grogg A, Locklear J. Partial compliance and risk of rehospitalization among California Medicaid patients with schizophrenia. Psychiatr Serv. 2004;55(8):886-891. doi:10.1176/appi.ps.55.8.886
7. Gilmer TP, Dolder CR, Lacro JP, et al. Adherence to treatment with antipsychotic medication and health care costs among Medicaid beneficiaries with schizophrenia. Am J Psychiatry. 2004;161(4):692-699. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.161.4.692
8. Lafeuille MH, Dean J, Carter V, et al. Systematic review of long-acting injectables versus oral atypical antipsychotics on hospitalization in schizophrenia. Curr Med Res Opin. 2014;30(8):1643-1655. doi:10.1185/03007995.2014.915211
9. Yu W, Wagner TH, Chen S, Barnett PG. Average cost of VA rehabilitation, mental health, and long-term hospital stays. Med Care Res Rev. 2003;60(3 suppl):40S-53S. doi:10.1177/1077558703256724
10. Duncan EJ, Woolson SL, Hamer RM. Treatment compliance in veterans administration schizophrenia spectrum patients treated with risperidone long-acting injectable. Int Clin Psychopharmacol. 2012;27(5):283-290. doi:10.1097/YIC.0b013e328354b534
11. Romstadt N, Wonson E. Outcomes comparison of long-acting injectable antipsychotic initiation in treatment-naïve veterans in the inpatient versus outpatient setting. Ment Health Clin. 2018;8(1):24-27. doi:10.9740/mhc.2018.01.024
12. Dimitropoulos E, Drogemuller L, Wong K. Evaluation of concurrent oral and long-acting injectable antipsychotic prescribing at the Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Health Care System. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2017;37(5):605-608. doi:10.1097/JCP.0000000000000755
13. Marcus SC, Zummo J, Pettit AR, Stoddard J, Doshi JA. Antipsychotic adherence and rehospitalization in schizophrenia patients receiving oral versus long-acting injectable antipsychotics following hospital discharge. J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2015;21(9):754-768. doi:10.18553/jmcp.2015.21.9.754
14. Risperdal Consta. Package insert. Janssen Pharmaceutical; 2007.
15. Invega Sustenna. Package insert. Janssen Pharmaceutical; 2009.
16. Limosin F, Belhadi D, Comet D, et al. Comparison of paliperidone palmitate and risperidone long-acting injection in schizophrenic patients: results from a multicenter retrospective cohort study in France. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2018;38(1):19-26. doi:10.1097/JCP.0000000000000827
17. Joshi K, Pan X, Wang R, Yang E, Benson C. Healthcare resource utilization of second-generation long-acting injectable antipsychotics in schizophrenia: risperidone versus paliperidone palmitate. Curr Med Res Opin. 2016;32(11):1873-1881. doi: 10.1080/03007995.2016.1219706
18. Korell J, Green B, Remmerie B, Vermeulen A. Determination of plasma concentration reference ranges for risperidone and paliperidone. CPT Pharmacometrics Syst Pharmacol. 2017;6(9):589-595. doi:10.1002/psp4.12217
19. Gopal S, Pandina G, Lane R, et al. A post-hoc comparison of paliperidone palmitate to oral risperidone during initiation of long-acting risperidone injection in patients with acute schizophrenia. Innov Clin Neurosci. 2011;8(8):26-33.
20. Marcus SC, Zummo J, Pettit AR, Stoddard J, Doshi JA. Antipsychotic adherence and rehospitalization in schizophrenia patients receiving oral versus long-acting injectable antipsychotics following hospital discharge. J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2015;21(9):754-768. doi:10.18553/jmcp.2015.21.9.754
21. Romstadt N, Wonson E. Outcomes comparison of long-acting injectable antipsychotic initiation in treatment-naïve veterans in the inpatient versus outpatient setting. Ment Health Clin. 2018;8(1):24-27. doi:10.9740/mhc.2018.01.024
22. Green AI, Brunette MF, Dawson R, et al. Long-acting injectable vs oral risperidone for schizophrenia and co-occurring alcohol use disorder: a randomized trial. J Clin Psychiatry. 2015;76(10):1359-1365. doi:10.4088/JCP.13m08838
23. Rezansoff SN, Moniruzzaman A, Fazel S, Procyshyn R, Somers JM. Adherence to antipsychotic medication among homeless adults in Vancouver, Canada: a 15-year retrospective cohort study. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2016;51(12):1623-1632. doi:10.1007/s00127-016-1259-7
24. Castillo EG, Stroup TS. Effectiveness of long-acting injectable antipsychotics: a clinical perspective. Evid Based Ment Health. 2015;18(2):36-39. doi:10.1136/eb-2015-102086
25. Marder SR. Overview of partial compliance. J Clin Psychiatry. 2003;64 (suppl 16):3-9.
26. Wehring HJ, Thedford S, Koola M, Kelly DL. Patient and health care provider perspectives on long acting injectable antipsychotics in schizophrenia and the introduction of olanzapine long-acting injection. J Cent Nerv Syst Dis. 2011;2011(3):107-123. doi:10.4137/JCNSD.S4091
27. Berwaerts J, Liu Y, Gopal S, et al. Efficacy and safety of the 3-month formulation of paliperidone palmitate vs placebo for relapse prevention of schizophrenia: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Psychiatry. 2015;72(8):830-839. doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2015.0241
28. Parellada E, Bioque M. Barriers to the use of long-acting injectable antipsychotics in the management of schizophrenia. CNS Drugs. 2016;30(8):689-701. doi:10.1007/s40263-016-0350-7
Cisplatin-Induced Acute Kidney Injury and Renal Salt Wasting Syndrome
A treatment strategy that incorporates both water restrictions and sodium supplementation may be appropriate when differentiating between diagnoses of renal salt wasting syndrome and syndrome of inappropriate antidiuretic hormone secretion.
Cisplatin is a potent antineoplastic agent derived from platinum and commonly used in the treatment of head and neck, bladder, ovarian, and testicular malignancies.1,2 Approximately 20% of all cancer patients are prescribed platinum-based chemotherapeutics.3 Although considered highly effective, cisplatin is also a dose-dependent nephrotoxin, inducing apoptosis in the proximal tubules of the nephron and reducing glomerular filtration rate. This nephron injury leads to inflammation and reduced medullary blood flow, causing further ischemic damage to the tubular cells.4 Given that the proximal tubule reabsorbs 67% of all sodium, cisplatin-induced nephron injuries can also lead to hyponatremia.5
The primary mechanisms of hyponatremia following cisplatin chemotherapy are syndrome of inappropriate antidiuretic hormone secretion (SIADH) and renal salt wasting syndrome (RSWS). Though these diagnoses have similar presentations, the treatment recommendations are different due to pathophysiologic differences. Fluid restriction is the hallmark of SIADH treatment, while increased sodium intake remains the hallmark of RSWS treatment.6 This patient presented with a combination of cisplatin-induced acute kidney injury (AKI) and hyponatremia secondary to RSWS. While RSWS and AKI are known complications of cisplatin chemotherapy, the combination is underreported in the literature. Therefore, this case report highlights the combination of these cisplatin-induced complications, emphasizes the clinical challenges in differentiating SIADH from RSWS, especially in the presence of a concomitant AKI, and suggests a treatment approach during diagnostic uncertainty.
Case Presentation
A 71-year-old man with a medical history of squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the left neck on cycle 1, day 8 of cisplatin-based chemotherapy and ongoing radiation therapy (720 cGy of 6300 cGy), lung adenocarcinoma status postresection, and hyperlipidemia presented to the emergency department (ED) at the request of his oncologist for abnormal laboratory values. In the ED, his metabolic panel showed a 131-mmol/L serum sodium, 3.3 mmol/L potassium, 83 mmol/L chloride, 29 mmol/L bicarbonate, 61 mg/dL blood urea nitrogen (BUN), and 8.8 mg/dL creatinine (baseline, 0.9 mg/dL). The patient reported throbbing headaches, persistent nausea, and multiple episodes of nonbloody emesis for several days that he attributed to his chemotherapy. He noted decreased urination without discomfort or changes in color or odor and no fatigue, fevers, chills, hematuria, flank, abdominal pain, thirst, or polydipsia. He reported no toxic ingestions or IV drug use. The patient had no relevant family history or additional social history. His outpatient medications included 10 mg cetirizine, 8 mg ondansetron, and 81 mg aspirin. On initial examination, his 137/66 mm Hg blood pressure was mildly elevated. The physical examination findings were notable for a 5-cm mass in the left neck that was firm and irregularly-shaped. His physical examination was otherwise unremarkable. He was admitted to the inpatient medicine service for an AKI complicated by symptomatic hyponatremia.
Investigations
We evaluated the patient’s AKI based on treatment responsiveness, imaging, and laboratory testing. Renal and bladder ultrasound showed no evidence of hydronephrosis or obstruction. He had a benign urinalysis with microscopy absent for protein, blood, ketones, leukocyte esterase, nitrites, and cellular casts. His urine pH was 5.5 (reference range, 5.0-9.0) and specific gravity was 1.011 (reference range, 1.005-1.030). His urine electrolytes revealed 45-mmol/L urine sodium (reference range, 40-220), 33-mmol/L urine chloride (reference range, 110-250), 10-mmol/L urine potassium (reference range, 25-120), 106.7-mg/dL urine creatinine (reference range, 10-400) and a calculated 2.7% fractional excretion of sodium (FENa) and 22.0-mEq/L elevated urine anion gap. As a fluid challenge, he was treated with IV 0.9% sodium chloride at 100-125 mL/h, receiving 3 liters over the first 48 hours of his hospitalization. His creatinine peaked at 9.2 mg/dL and stabilized before improving later in his hospitalization (Figure 1). The patient initially had oliguria (< 0.5 mL/kg/h), which slowly improved over his hospital course. Unfortunately, due to multiple system and clinical factors, accurate inputs and outputs were not adequately maintained during his hospitalization.
We evaluated hyponatremia with a combination of serum and urine laboratory tests. In addition to urine electrolytes, the initial evaluation focused on trending his clinical trajectory. We repeated a basic metabolic panel every 4 to 6 hours. He had 278-mOsm/kg serum osmolality (reference range, 285-295) with an effective 217-mOsm/kg serum tonicity. His urine osmolality was 270.5 mOsm/kg.
Despite administering 462 mEq sodium via crystalloid, his sodium worsened over the first 48 hours, reaching a nadir at 125 mmol/L on hospital day 3 (Figure 2). While he continued to appear euvolemic on physical examination, his blood pressure became difficult to control with 160- to 180-mm Hg systolic blood pressure readings. His thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) was normal and aldosterone was low (4 ng/dL). Additional urine studies, including a 24-hour urine sample, were collected for further evaluation. His urine uric acid was 140 mg/d (reference range, 120-820); his serum uric acid level was 8.2 mg/dL (reference range, 3.0-9.0). His 24-hour urine creatinine was 0.57 g/d (reference range, 0.50-2.15) and uric acid to creatinine ratio was 246 mg/g (reference range, 60-580). His serum creatinine collected from the same day as his 24-hour urine sample was 7.3 mg/dL. His fractional excretion of uric acid (FEurate) was 21.9%.
Differential Diagnosis
The patient’s recent administration of cisplatin raised clinical suspicion of cisplatin-induced AKI. To avoid premature diagnostic closure, we used a systematic approach for thinking about our patient’s AKI, considering prerenal, intrarenal, and postrenal etiologies. The unremarkable renal and bladder ultrasound made a postrenal etiology unlikely. The patient’s 2.7% FENa in the absence of a diuretic, limited responsiveness to crystalloid fluid resuscitation, 7.5 serum BUN/creatinine ratio, and 270.5 mOsm/kg urine osmolality suggested an intrarenal etiology, which can be further divided into problems with glomeruli, tubules, small vessels, or interstitial space. The patient’s normal urinary microscopy with no evidence of protein, blood, ketones, leukocyte esterase, nitrites, or cellular casts made a glomerular etiology less likely. The acute onset and lack of additional systemic features, other than hypertension, made a vascular etiology less likely. A tubular etiology, such as acute tubular necrosis (ATN), was highest on the differential and was followed by an interstitial etiology, such as acute interstitial nephritis (AIN).
Patients with drug-induced AIN commonly present with signs and symptoms of an allergic-type reaction, including fever, rash, hematuria, pyuria, and costovertebral angle tenderness. The patient lacked these symptoms. However, cisplatin is known to cause ATN in up to 20-30% of patients.7 Therefore, despite the lack of the classic muddy-brown, granular casts on urine microscopy, cisplatin-induced ATN remained the most likely etiology of his AKI. Moreover, ATN can cause hyponatremia. ATN is characterized by 3 phases: initiation, maintenance, and recovery phases.8 Hyponatremia occurs during the recovery phase, typically starting weeks after renal insult and associated with high urine output and diuresis. This patient presented 1 week after injury and had persistent oliguria, making ATN an unlikely culprit of his hyponatremia.
Our patient presented with hypotonic hyponatremia with a 131 mmol/L initial sodium level and an < 280 mOsm/kg effective serum osmolality, or serum tonicity. The serum tonicity is equivalent to the difference between the measured serum osmolality and the BUN. In the setting of profound AKI, this adjustment is essential for correctly categorizing a patient’s hyponatremia as hyper-, iso-, or hypotonic. The differential diagnosis for this patient’s hypotonic hyponatremia included dilutional effects of hypervolemia, SIADH, hyperthyroidism, adrenal insufficiency, and RSWS. The patient’s volume examination, lack of predisposing comorbidities or suggestive biomarkers, and > 20 mmol/L urinary sodium made hypervolemia unlikely. His urinary osmolality and specific gravity made primary polydipsia unlikely. We worked up his hyponatremia according to a diagnostic algorithm (eAppendix available at doi:10.12788/fp.0198).
The patient had a 217 mOsm/kg serum tonicity and a 270.5 mOsm/kg urine osmolality, consistent with impaired water excretion. His presentation, TSH, and concordant decrease in sodium and potassium made an endocrine etiology of his hyponatremia less likely. In hindsight, a serum cortisol would have been beneficial to more completely exclude adrenal insufficiency. His urine sodium was elevated at 45 mmol/L, raising concern for RSWS or SIADH. The FEurate helped to distinguish between SIADH and RSWS. While FEurate is often elevated in both SIADH and RSWS initially, the FEurate normalizes in SIADH with normalization of the serum sodium. The ideal cutoff for posthyponatremia correction FEurate is debated; however, a FEurate value after sodium correction < 11% suggests SIADH while a value > 11% suggests RSWS.9 Our patient’s FEurate following the sodium correction (serum sodium 134 mmol/L) was 21.9%, most suggestive of RSWS.
Treatment
Upon admission, initial treatment focused on resolving the patient’s AKI. The oncology team discontinued the cisplatin-based chemotherapy. His medication dosages were adjusted for his renal function and additional nephrotoxins avoided. In consultation, the nephrology service recommended 100 mL/h fluid resuscitation. After the patient received 3 L of 0.9% sodium chloride, his creatinine showed limited improvement and his sodium worsened, trending from 131 mmol/L to a nadir of 125 mmol/L. We initiated oral free-water restriction while continuing IV infusion of 0.9% sodium chloride at 125 mL/h.
We further augmented his sodium intake with 1-g sodium chloride tablets with each meal. By hospital day 6, the patient’s serum sodium, BUN, and creatinine improved to 130 mEq/L, 50 mg/dL, and 7.7 mg/dL, respectively. We then discontinued the oral sodium chloride tablets, fluid restriction, and IV fluids in a stepwise fashion prior to discharge. At discharge, the patient’s serum sodium was 136 mEq/L and creatinine, 4.8 mg/dL. The patient’s clinical course was complicated by symptomatic hypertension with systolic blood pressures about 180 mm Hg, requiring intermittent IV hydralazine, which was transitioned to daily nifedipine. Concerned that fluid resuscitation contributed to his hypertension, the patient also received several doses of furosemide. At time of discharge, the patient remained hypertensive and was discharged with nifedipine 90 mg daily.
Outcome and Follow-up
The patient has remained stable clinically since discharge. One week after discharge, his serum sodium and creatinine were 138 mmol/L and 3.8 mg/dL, respectively. More than 1 month after discharge, his sodium remains in the reference range and his creatinine was stable at about 3.5 mg/dL. He continues to follow-up with nephrology, oncology, and radiation oncology. He has restarted chemotherapy with a carboplatin-based regimen without recurrence of hyponatremia or AKI. His blood pressure has gradually improved to the point where he no longer requires nifedipine.
Discussion
The US Food and Drug Administration first approved the use of cisplatin, an alkylating agent that inhibits DNA replication, in 1978 for the treatment of testicular cancer.10 Since its approval, cisplatin has increased in popularity and is now considered one of the most effective antineoplastic agents for the treatment of solid tumors.1 Unfortunately, cisplatin has a well-documented adverse effect profile that includes neurotoxicity, gastrointestinal toxicity, nephrotoxicity, and ototoxicity.4 Despite frequent nephrotoxicity, cisplatin only occasionally causes hyponatremia and rarely causes RSWS, a known but potentially fatal complication. Moreover, the combination of AKI and RSWS is unique. Our patient presented with the unique combination of AKI and hyponatremia, most consistent with RSWS, likely precipitated from cisplatin chemotherapy. Through this case, we review cisplatin-associated electrolyte abnormalities, highlight the challenge of differentiating SIADH and RSWS, and suggest a treatment approach for hyponatremia during the period of diagnostic uncertainty.
Blachley and colleagues first discussed renal and electrolyte disturbances, specifically magnesium wasting, secondary to cisplatin use in 1981. In 1984, Kurtzberg and colleagues noted salt wasting in 2 patients receiving cisplatin therapy. The authors suggested that cisplatin inhibits solute transport in the thick ascending limb, causing clinically significant electrolyte abnormalities, coining the term cisplatin-induced salt wasting.11
The prevalence of cisplatin-induced salt wasting is unclear and likely underreported. In 1988, Hutchinson and colleagues conducted a prospective cohort study and noted 10% of patients (n = 70) developed RSWS at some point over 18 months of cisplatin therapy—a higher rate than previously estimated.12 In 1992, another prospective cohort study evaluated the adverse effects of 47 patients with non-small cell lung cancer treated with cisplatin and reported hyponatremia in 43% of its 93 courses of chemotherapy. The authors did not report the etiology of these hyponatremia cases.13 Given the diagnostic challenge, RSWS may be underrepresented as a confirmed etiology of hyponatremia in cisplatin treatment.
Hyponatremia from cisplatin may present as either SIADH or RSWS, complicating treatment decisions. Both conditions lead to hypotonic hyponatremia with urine osmolality > 100 mOSm/kg and urine sodium levels > 40 mmol/L. However, pathophysiology behind SIADH and RSWS is different. In RSWS, proximal tubule damage causes hyponatremia, decreasing sodium reabsorption, and leading to impaired concentration gradient in every segment of the nephron. As a result, RSWS can lead to profound hyponatremia. Treatment typically consists of increasing sodium intake to correct serum sodium with salt tablets and hypertonic sodium chloride while treating the underlying etiology, in our case removing the offending agent, and waiting for proximal tubule function to recover.6 On the other hand, in SIADH, elevated antidiuretic hormone (ADH) increases water reabsorption in the collecting duct, which has no impact on concentration gradients of the other nephron segments.14 Free-water restriction is the hallmark of SIADH treatment. Severe SIADH may require sodium repletion and/or the initiation of vaptans, ADH antagonists that competitively inhibit V2 receptors in the collecting duct to prevent water reabsorption.15
Our patient had an uncertain etiology of his hyponatremia throughout most of his treatment course, complicating our treatment decision-making. Initially, his measured serum osmolality was 278 mOsm/kg; however, his effective tonicity was lower. His AKI elevated his BUN, which in turnrequired us to calculate his serum tonicity (217 mOsm/kg) that was consistent with hypotonic hyponatremia. His elevated urine osmolality and urine sodium levels made SIADH and RSWS the most likely etiologies of his hyponatremia. To confirm the etiology, we waited for correction of his serum sodium. Therefore, we treated him with a combination of sodium repletion with 0.9% sodium chloride (154 mEq/L), hypertonic relative to his serum sodium, sodium chloride tablets, and free-water restriction. In this approach, we attempted to harmonize the treatment strategies for both SIADH and RSWS and effectively corrected his serum sodium. We evaluated his response to our treatment with a basic metabolic panel every 6 to 8 hours. Had his serum sodium decreased < 120 mmol/L, we planned to transfer the patient to the intensive care unit for 3% sodium chloride and/or intensification of his fluid restriction. A significant worsening of his hyponatremia would have strongly suggested hyponatremia secondary to SIADH since isotonic saline can worsen hyponatremia due to increased free-water reabsorption in the collecting duct.16
To differentiate between SIADH and RSWS, we relied on the FEurate after sodium correction. Multiple case reports from Japan have characterized the distinction between the processes through FEurate and serum uric acid. While the optimal cut-off values for FEurate require additional investigation, values < 11% after serum sodium correction suggests SIADH, while a value > 11% suggests RSWS.17 Prior cases have also emphasized serum hypouricemia as a distinguishing characteristic in RSWS. However, our case illustrates that serum hypouricemia is less reliable in the setting of AKI. Due to his severe AKI, our patient could not efficiently clear uric acid, likely contributing to his hyperuricemia.
Ultimately, our patient had an FEurate > 20%, which was suggestive of RSWS. Nevertheless, we recognize limitations and confounders in our diagnosis and have reflected on our diagnostic and management choices. First, the sensitivity and specificity of postsodium correction FEurate is unknown. Tracking the change in FEurate with our interventions would have increased our diagnostic utility, as suggested by Maesaka and colleagues.14 Second, our patient’s serum sodium was still at the lower end of the reference range after treatment, which may decrease the specificity of FEurate. Third, a plasma ADH collected during the initial phase of symptomatic hyponatremia would have helped differentiate between SIADH and RSWS.
Other diagnostic tests that could have excluded alternative diagnoses with even greater certainty include plasma adrenocorticotropic hormone, B-type natriuretic peptide, renin, cortisol, and thyroid function tests. From a practical standpoint, these laboratory results (excluding thyroid function test and brain natriuretic peptide) would have taken several weeks to result at our institution, limiting their clinical utility. Similarly, FEurate also has limited clinical utility, requiring effective treatment as part of the diagnostic test. Therefore, we recommend focusing on optimal treatment for hyponatremia of uncertain etiology, especially where SIADH and RSWS are the leading diagnoses.
Conclusions
We described a rare case of concomitant cisplatin-induced severe AKI and RSWS. We have emphasized the diagnostic challenge of distinguishing between SIADH and RSWS, especially with concomitant AKI, and have acknowledged that optimal treatment relies on accurate differentiation. However, differentiation may not be clinically feasible. Therefore, we suggest a treatment strategy that incorporates both free-water restriction and sodium supplementation via IV and/or oral administration.
1. Dasari S, Tchounwou PB. Cisplatin in cancer therapy: molecular mechanisms of action. Eur J Pharmacol. 2014;740:364-378. doi:10.1016/j.ejphar.2014.07.025
2. Holditch SJ, Brown CN, Lombardi AM, Nguyen KN, Edelstein CL. Recent advances in models, mechanisms, biomarkers, and interventions in cisplatin-induced acute kidney injury. Int J Mol Sci. 2019;20(12):3011. Published 2019 Jun 20. doi:10.3390/ijms20123011
3. National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute. The “accidental” cure—platinum-based treatment for cancer: the discovery of cisplatin. Published May 30, 2014. Accessed November 10, 2021. https://www.cancer.gov/research/progress/discovery/cisplatin
4. Ozkok A, Edelstein CL. Pathophysiology of cisplatin-induced acute kidney injury. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:967826. doi:10.1155/2014/967826
5. Palmer LG, Schnermann J. Integrated control of Na transport along the nephron. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2015;10(4):676-687. doi:10.2215/CJN.12391213
6. Bitew S, Imbriano L, Miyawaki N, Fishbane S, Maesaka JK. More on renal salt wasting without cerebral disease: response to saline infusion. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2009;4(2):309-315. doi:10.2215/CJN.02740608
7. Shirali AC, Perazella MA. Tubulointerstitial injury associated with chemotherapeutic agents. Adv Chronic Kidney Dis. 2014;21(1):56-63. doi:10.1053/j.ackd.2013.06.010
8. Agrawal M, Swartz R. Acute renal failure [published correction appears in Am Fam Physician 2001 Feb 1;63(3):445]. Am Fam Physician. 2000;61(7):2077-2088.
9. Milionis HJ, Liamis GL, Elisaf MS. The hyponatremic patient: a systematic approach to laboratory diagnosis. CMAJ. 2002;166(8):1056-1062.
10. Monneret C. Platinum anticancer drugs. From serendipity to rational design. Ann Pharm Fr. 2011;69(6):286-295. doi:10.1016/j.pharma.2011.10.001
11. Kurtzberg J, Dennis VW, Kinney TR. Cisplatinum-induced renal salt wasting. Med Pediatr Oncol. 1984;12(2):150-154. doi:10.1002/mpo.2950120219
12. Hutchison FN, Perez EA, Gandara DR, Lawrence HJ, Kaysen GA. Renal salt wasting in patients treated with cisplatin. Ann Intern Med. 1988;108(1):21-25. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-108-1-21
13. Lee YK, Shin DM. Renal salt wasting in patients treated with high-dose cisplatin, etoposide, and mitomycin in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Korean J Intern Med. 1992;7(2):118-121. doi:10.3904/kjim.1992.7.2.118
14. Maesaka JK, Imbriano L, Mattana J, Gallagher D, Bade N, Sharif S. Differentiating SIADH from cerebral/renal salt wasting: failure of the volume approach and need for a new approach to hyponatremia. J Clin Med. 2014;3(4):1373-1385. Published 2014 Dec 8. doi:10.3390/jcm3041373
15. Palmer BF. The role of v2 receptor antagonists in the treatment of hyponatremia. Electrolyte Blood Press. 2013;11(1):1-8. doi:10.5049/EBP.2013.11.1.1
16. Verbalis JG, Goldsmith SR, Greenberg A, Schrier RW, Sterns RH. Hyponatremia treatment guidelines 2007: expert panel recommendations. Am J Med. 2007;120(11 Suppl 1):S1-S21. doi:10.1016/j.amjmed.2007.09.001
17. Maesaka JK, Imbriano LJ, Miyawaki N. High prevalence of renal salt wasting without cerebral disease as cause of hyponatremia in general medical wards. Am J Med Sci. 2018;356(1):15-22. doi:10.1016/j.amjms.2018.03.02
A treatment strategy that incorporates both water restrictions and sodium supplementation may be appropriate when differentiating between diagnoses of renal salt wasting syndrome and syndrome of inappropriate antidiuretic hormone secretion.
A treatment strategy that incorporates both water restrictions and sodium supplementation may be appropriate when differentiating between diagnoses of renal salt wasting syndrome and syndrome of inappropriate antidiuretic hormone secretion.
Cisplatin is a potent antineoplastic agent derived from platinum and commonly used in the treatment of head and neck, bladder, ovarian, and testicular malignancies.1,2 Approximately 20% of all cancer patients are prescribed platinum-based chemotherapeutics.3 Although considered highly effective, cisplatin is also a dose-dependent nephrotoxin, inducing apoptosis in the proximal tubules of the nephron and reducing glomerular filtration rate. This nephron injury leads to inflammation and reduced medullary blood flow, causing further ischemic damage to the tubular cells.4 Given that the proximal tubule reabsorbs 67% of all sodium, cisplatin-induced nephron injuries can also lead to hyponatremia.5
The primary mechanisms of hyponatremia following cisplatin chemotherapy are syndrome of inappropriate antidiuretic hormone secretion (SIADH) and renal salt wasting syndrome (RSWS). Though these diagnoses have similar presentations, the treatment recommendations are different due to pathophysiologic differences. Fluid restriction is the hallmark of SIADH treatment, while increased sodium intake remains the hallmark of RSWS treatment.6 This patient presented with a combination of cisplatin-induced acute kidney injury (AKI) and hyponatremia secondary to RSWS. While RSWS and AKI are known complications of cisplatin chemotherapy, the combination is underreported in the literature. Therefore, this case report highlights the combination of these cisplatin-induced complications, emphasizes the clinical challenges in differentiating SIADH from RSWS, especially in the presence of a concomitant AKI, and suggests a treatment approach during diagnostic uncertainty.
Case Presentation
A 71-year-old man with a medical history of squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the left neck on cycle 1, day 8 of cisplatin-based chemotherapy and ongoing radiation therapy (720 cGy of 6300 cGy), lung adenocarcinoma status postresection, and hyperlipidemia presented to the emergency department (ED) at the request of his oncologist for abnormal laboratory values. In the ED, his metabolic panel showed a 131-mmol/L serum sodium, 3.3 mmol/L potassium, 83 mmol/L chloride, 29 mmol/L bicarbonate, 61 mg/dL blood urea nitrogen (BUN), and 8.8 mg/dL creatinine (baseline, 0.9 mg/dL). The patient reported throbbing headaches, persistent nausea, and multiple episodes of nonbloody emesis for several days that he attributed to his chemotherapy. He noted decreased urination without discomfort or changes in color or odor and no fatigue, fevers, chills, hematuria, flank, abdominal pain, thirst, or polydipsia. He reported no toxic ingestions or IV drug use. The patient had no relevant family history or additional social history. His outpatient medications included 10 mg cetirizine, 8 mg ondansetron, and 81 mg aspirin. On initial examination, his 137/66 mm Hg blood pressure was mildly elevated. The physical examination findings were notable for a 5-cm mass in the left neck that was firm and irregularly-shaped. His physical examination was otherwise unremarkable. He was admitted to the inpatient medicine service for an AKI complicated by symptomatic hyponatremia.
Investigations
We evaluated the patient’s AKI based on treatment responsiveness, imaging, and laboratory testing. Renal and bladder ultrasound showed no evidence of hydronephrosis or obstruction. He had a benign urinalysis with microscopy absent for protein, blood, ketones, leukocyte esterase, nitrites, and cellular casts. His urine pH was 5.5 (reference range, 5.0-9.0) and specific gravity was 1.011 (reference range, 1.005-1.030). His urine electrolytes revealed 45-mmol/L urine sodium (reference range, 40-220), 33-mmol/L urine chloride (reference range, 110-250), 10-mmol/L urine potassium (reference range, 25-120), 106.7-mg/dL urine creatinine (reference range, 10-400) and a calculated 2.7% fractional excretion of sodium (FENa) and 22.0-mEq/L elevated urine anion gap. As a fluid challenge, he was treated with IV 0.9% sodium chloride at 100-125 mL/h, receiving 3 liters over the first 48 hours of his hospitalization. His creatinine peaked at 9.2 mg/dL and stabilized before improving later in his hospitalization (Figure 1). The patient initially had oliguria (< 0.5 mL/kg/h), which slowly improved over his hospital course. Unfortunately, due to multiple system and clinical factors, accurate inputs and outputs were not adequately maintained during his hospitalization.
We evaluated hyponatremia with a combination of serum and urine laboratory tests. In addition to urine electrolytes, the initial evaluation focused on trending his clinical trajectory. We repeated a basic metabolic panel every 4 to 6 hours. He had 278-mOsm/kg serum osmolality (reference range, 285-295) with an effective 217-mOsm/kg serum tonicity. His urine osmolality was 270.5 mOsm/kg.
Despite administering 462 mEq sodium via crystalloid, his sodium worsened over the first 48 hours, reaching a nadir at 125 mmol/L on hospital day 3 (Figure 2). While he continued to appear euvolemic on physical examination, his blood pressure became difficult to control with 160- to 180-mm Hg systolic blood pressure readings. His thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) was normal and aldosterone was low (4 ng/dL). Additional urine studies, including a 24-hour urine sample, were collected for further evaluation. His urine uric acid was 140 mg/d (reference range, 120-820); his serum uric acid level was 8.2 mg/dL (reference range, 3.0-9.0). His 24-hour urine creatinine was 0.57 g/d (reference range, 0.50-2.15) and uric acid to creatinine ratio was 246 mg/g (reference range, 60-580). His serum creatinine collected from the same day as his 24-hour urine sample was 7.3 mg/dL. His fractional excretion of uric acid (FEurate) was 21.9%.
Differential Diagnosis
The patient’s recent administration of cisplatin raised clinical suspicion of cisplatin-induced AKI. To avoid premature diagnostic closure, we used a systematic approach for thinking about our patient’s AKI, considering prerenal, intrarenal, and postrenal etiologies. The unremarkable renal and bladder ultrasound made a postrenal etiology unlikely. The patient’s 2.7% FENa in the absence of a diuretic, limited responsiveness to crystalloid fluid resuscitation, 7.5 serum BUN/creatinine ratio, and 270.5 mOsm/kg urine osmolality suggested an intrarenal etiology, which can be further divided into problems with glomeruli, tubules, small vessels, or interstitial space. The patient’s normal urinary microscopy with no evidence of protein, blood, ketones, leukocyte esterase, nitrites, or cellular casts made a glomerular etiology less likely. The acute onset and lack of additional systemic features, other than hypertension, made a vascular etiology less likely. A tubular etiology, such as acute tubular necrosis (ATN), was highest on the differential and was followed by an interstitial etiology, such as acute interstitial nephritis (AIN).
Patients with drug-induced AIN commonly present with signs and symptoms of an allergic-type reaction, including fever, rash, hematuria, pyuria, and costovertebral angle tenderness. The patient lacked these symptoms. However, cisplatin is known to cause ATN in up to 20-30% of patients.7 Therefore, despite the lack of the classic muddy-brown, granular casts on urine microscopy, cisplatin-induced ATN remained the most likely etiology of his AKI. Moreover, ATN can cause hyponatremia. ATN is characterized by 3 phases: initiation, maintenance, and recovery phases.8 Hyponatremia occurs during the recovery phase, typically starting weeks after renal insult and associated with high urine output and diuresis. This patient presented 1 week after injury and had persistent oliguria, making ATN an unlikely culprit of his hyponatremia.
Our patient presented with hypotonic hyponatremia with a 131 mmol/L initial sodium level and an < 280 mOsm/kg effective serum osmolality, or serum tonicity. The serum tonicity is equivalent to the difference between the measured serum osmolality and the BUN. In the setting of profound AKI, this adjustment is essential for correctly categorizing a patient’s hyponatremia as hyper-, iso-, or hypotonic. The differential diagnosis for this patient’s hypotonic hyponatremia included dilutional effects of hypervolemia, SIADH, hyperthyroidism, adrenal insufficiency, and RSWS. The patient’s volume examination, lack of predisposing comorbidities or suggestive biomarkers, and > 20 mmol/L urinary sodium made hypervolemia unlikely. His urinary osmolality and specific gravity made primary polydipsia unlikely. We worked up his hyponatremia according to a diagnostic algorithm (eAppendix available at doi:10.12788/fp.0198).
The patient had a 217 mOsm/kg serum tonicity and a 270.5 mOsm/kg urine osmolality, consistent with impaired water excretion. His presentation, TSH, and concordant decrease in sodium and potassium made an endocrine etiology of his hyponatremia less likely. In hindsight, a serum cortisol would have been beneficial to more completely exclude adrenal insufficiency. His urine sodium was elevated at 45 mmol/L, raising concern for RSWS or SIADH. The FEurate helped to distinguish between SIADH and RSWS. While FEurate is often elevated in both SIADH and RSWS initially, the FEurate normalizes in SIADH with normalization of the serum sodium. The ideal cutoff for posthyponatremia correction FEurate is debated; however, a FEurate value after sodium correction < 11% suggests SIADH while a value > 11% suggests RSWS.9 Our patient’s FEurate following the sodium correction (serum sodium 134 mmol/L) was 21.9%, most suggestive of RSWS.
Treatment
Upon admission, initial treatment focused on resolving the patient’s AKI. The oncology team discontinued the cisplatin-based chemotherapy. His medication dosages were adjusted for his renal function and additional nephrotoxins avoided. In consultation, the nephrology service recommended 100 mL/h fluid resuscitation. After the patient received 3 L of 0.9% sodium chloride, his creatinine showed limited improvement and his sodium worsened, trending from 131 mmol/L to a nadir of 125 mmol/L. We initiated oral free-water restriction while continuing IV infusion of 0.9% sodium chloride at 125 mL/h.
We further augmented his sodium intake with 1-g sodium chloride tablets with each meal. By hospital day 6, the patient’s serum sodium, BUN, and creatinine improved to 130 mEq/L, 50 mg/dL, and 7.7 mg/dL, respectively. We then discontinued the oral sodium chloride tablets, fluid restriction, and IV fluids in a stepwise fashion prior to discharge. At discharge, the patient’s serum sodium was 136 mEq/L and creatinine, 4.8 mg/dL. The patient’s clinical course was complicated by symptomatic hypertension with systolic blood pressures about 180 mm Hg, requiring intermittent IV hydralazine, which was transitioned to daily nifedipine. Concerned that fluid resuscitation contributed to his hypertension, the patient also received several doses of furosemide. At time of discharge, the patient remained hypertensive and was discharged with nifedipine 90 mg daily.
Outcome and Follow-up
The patient has remained stable clinically since discharge. One week after discharge, his serum sodium and creatinine were 138 mmol/L and 3.8 mg/dL, respectively. More than 1 month after discharge, his sodium remains in the reference range and his creatinine was stable at about 3.5 mg/dL. He continues to follow-up with nephrology, oncology, and radiation oncology. He has restarted chemotherapy with a carboplatin-based regimen without recurrence of hyponatremia or AKI. His blood pressure has gradually improved to the point where he no longer requires nifedipine.
Discussion
The US Food and Drug Administration first approved the use of cisplatin, an alkylating agent that inhibits DNA replication, in 1978 for the treatment of testicular cancer.10 Since its approval, cisplatin has increased in popularity and is now considered one of the most effective antineoplastic agents for the treatment of solid tumors.1 Unfortunately, cisplatin has a well-documented adverse effect profile that includes neurotoxicity, gastrointestinal toxicity, nephrotoxicity, and ototoxicity.4 Despite frequent nephrotoxicity, cisplatin only occasionally causes hyponatremia and rarely causes RSWS, a known but potentially fatal complication. Moreover, the combination of AKI and RSWS is unique. Our patient presented with the unique combination of AKI and hyponatremia, most consistent with RSWS, likely precipitated from cisplatin chemotherapy. Through this case, we review cisplatin-associated electrolyte abnormalities, highlight the challenge of differentiating SIADH and RSWS, and suggest a treatment approach for hyponatremia during the period of diagnostic uncertainty.
Blachley and colleagues first discussed renal and electrolyte disturbances, specifically magnesium wasting, secondary to cisplatin use in 1981. In 1984, Kurtzberg and colleagues noted salt wasting in 2 patients receiving cisplatin therapy. The authors suggested that cisplatin inhibits solute transport in the thick ascending limb, causing clinically significant electrolyte abnormalities, coining the term cisplatin-induced salt wasting.11
The prevalence of cisplatin-induced salt wasting is unclear and likely underreported. In 1988, Hutchinson and colleagues conducted a prospective cohort study and noted 10% of patients (n = 70) developed RSWS at some point over 18 months of cisplatin therapy—a higher rate than previously estimated.12 In 1992, another prospective cohort study evaluated the adverse effects of 47 patients with non-small cell lung cancer treated with cisplatin and reported hyponatremia in 43% of its 93 courses of chemotherapy. The authors did not report the etiology of these hyponatremia cases.13 Given the diagnostic challenge, RSWS may be underrepresented as a confirmed etiology of hyponatremia in cisplatin treatment.
Hyponatremia from cisplatin may present as either SIADH or RSWS, complicating treatment decisions. Both conditions lead to hypotonic hyponatremia with urine osmolality > 100 mOSm/kg and urine sodium levels > 40 mmol/L. However, pathophysiology behind SIADH and RSWS is different. In RSWS, proximal tubule damage causes hyponatremia, decreasing sodium reabsorption, and leading to impaired concentration gradient in every segment of the nephron. As a result, RSWS can lead to profound hyponatremia. Treatment typically consists of increasing sodium intake to correct serum sodium with salt tablets and hypertonic sodium chloride while treating the underlying etiology, in our case removing the offending agent, and waiting for proximal tubule function to recover.6 On the other hand, in SIADH, elevated antidiuretic hormone (ADH) increases water reabsorption in the collecting duct, which has no impact on concentration gradients of the other nephron segments.14 Free-water restriction is the hallmark of SIADH treatment. Severe SIADH may require sodium repletion and/or the initiation of vaptans, ADH antagonists that competitively inhibit V2 receptors in the collecting duct to prevent water reabsorption.15
Our patient had an uncertain etiology of his hyponatremia throughout most of his treatment course, complicating our treatment decision-making. Initially, his measured serum osmolality was 278 mOsm/kg; however, his effective tonicity was lower. His AKI elevated his BUN, which in turnrequired us to calculate his serum tonicity (217 mOsm/kg) that was consistent with hypotonic hyponatremia. His elevated urine osmolality and urine sodium levels made SIADH and RSWS the most likely etiologies of his hyponatremia. To confirm the etiology, we waited for correction of his serum sodium. Therefore, we treated him with a combination of sodium repletion with 0.9% sodium chloride (154 mEq/L), hypertonic relative to his serum sodium, sodium chloride tablets, and free-water restriction. In this approach, we attempted to harmonize the treatment strategies for both SIADH and RSWS and effectively corrected his serum sodium. We evaluated his response to our treatment with a basic metabolic panel every 6 to 8 hours. Had his serum sodium decreased < 120 mmol/L, we planned to transfer the patient to the intensive care unit for 3% sodium chloride and/or intensification of his fluid restriction. A significant worsening of his hyponatremia would have strongly suggested hyponatremia secondary to SIADH since isotonic saline can worsen hyponatremia due to increased free-water reabsorption in the collecting duct.16
To differentiate between SIADH and RSWS, we relied on the FEurate after sodium correction. Multiple case reports from Japan have characterized the distinction between the processes through FEurate and serum uric acid. While the optimal cut-off values for FEurate require additional investigation, values < 11% after serum sodium correction suggests SIADH, while a value > 11% suggests RSWS.17 Prior cases have also emphasized serum hypouricemia as a distinguishing characteristic in RSWS. However, our case illustrates that serum hypouricemia is less reliable in the setting of AKI. Due to his severe AKI, our patient could not efficiently clear uric acid, likely contributing to his hyperuricemia.
Ultimately, our patient had an FEurate > 20%, which was suggestive of RSWS. Nevertheless, we recognize limitations and confounders in our diagnosis and have reflected on our diagnostic and management choices. First, the sensitivity and specificity of postsodium correction FEurate is unknown. Tracking the change in FEurate with our interventions would have increased our diagnostic utility, as suggested by Maesaka and colleagues.14 Second, our patient’s serum sodium was still at the lower end of the reference range after treatment, which may decrease the specificity of FEurate. Third, a plasma ADH collected during the initial phase of symptomatic hyponatremia would have helped differentiate between SIADH and RSWS.
Other diagnostic tests that could have excluded alternative diagnoses with even greater certainty include plasma adrenocorticotropic hormone, B-type natriuretic peptide, renin, cortisol, and thyroid function tests. From a practical standpoint, these laboratory results (excluding thyroid function test and brain natriuretic peptide) would have taken several weeks to result at our institution, limiting their clinical utility. Similarly, FEurate also has limited clinical utility, requiring effective treatment as part of the diagnostic test. Therefore, we recommend focusing on optimal treatment for hyponatremia of uncertain etiology, especially where SIADH and RSWS are the leading diagnoses.
Conclusions
We described a rare case of concomitant cisplatin-induced severe AKI and RSWS. We have emphasized the diagnostic challenge of distinguishing between SIADH and RSWS, especially with concomitant AKI, and have acknowledged that optimal treatment relies on accurate differentiation. However, differentiation may not be clinically feasible. Therefore, we suggest a treatment strategy that incorporates both free-water restriction and sodium supplementation via IV and/or oral administration.
Cisplatin is a potent antineoplastic agent derived from platinum and commonly used in the treatment of head and neck, bladder, ovarian, and testicular malignancies.1,2 Approximately 20% of all cancer patients are prescribed platinum-based chemotherapeutics.3 Although considered highly effective, cisplatin is also a dose-dependent nephrotoxin, inducing apoptosis in the proximal tubules of the nephron and reducing glomerular filtration rate. This nephron injury leads to inflammation and reduced medullary blood flow, causing further ischemic damage to the tubular cells.4 Given that the proximal tubule reabsorbs 67% of all sodium, cisplatin-induced nephron injuries can also lead to hyponatremia.5
The primary mechanisms of hyponatremia following cisplatin chemotherapy are syndrome of inappropriate antidiuretic hormone secretion (SIADH) and renal salt wasting syndrome (RSWS). Though these diagnoses have similar presentations, the treatment recommendations are different due to pathophysiologic differences. Fluid restriction is the hallmark of SIADH treatment, while increased sodium intake remains the hallmark of RSWS treatment.6 This patient presented with a combination of cisplatin-induced acute kidney injury (AKI) and hyponatremia secondary to RSWS. While RSWS and AKI are known complications of cisplatin chemotherapy, the combination is underreported in the literature. Therefore, this case report highlights the combination of these cisplatin-induced complications, emphasizes the clinical challenges in differentiating SIADH from RSWS, especially in the presence of a concomitant AKI, and suggests a treatment approach during diagnostic uncertainty.
Case Presentation
A 71-year-old man with a medical history of squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the left neck on cycle 1, day 8 of cisplatin-based chemotherapy and ongoing radiation therapy (720 cGy of 6300 cGy), lung adenocarcinoma status postresection, and hyperlipidemia presented to the emergency department (ED) at the request of his oncologist for abnormal laboratory values. In the ED, his metabolic panel showed a 131-mmol/L serum sodium, 3.3 mmol/L potassium, 83 mmol/L chloride, 29 mmol/L bicarbonate, 61 mg/dL blood urea nitrogen (BUN), and 8.8 mg/dL creatinine (baseline, 0.9 mg/dL). The patient reported throbbing headaches, persistent nausea, and multiple episodes of nonbloody emesis for several days that he attributed to his chemotherapy. He noted decreased urination without discomfort or changes in color or odor and no fatigue, fevers, chills, hematuria, flank, abdominal pain, thirst, or polydipsia. He reported no toxic ingestions or IV drug use. The patient had no relevant family history or additional social history. His outpatient medications included 10 mg cetirizine, 8 mg ondansetron, and 81 mg aspirin. On initial examination, his 137/66 mm Hg blood pressure was mildly elevated. The physical examination findings were notable for a 5-cm mass in the left neck that was firm and irregularly-shaped. His physical examination was otherwise unremarkable. He was admitted to the inpatient medicine service for an AKI complicated by symptomatic hyponatremia.
Investigations
We evaluated the patient’s AKI based on treatment responsiveness, imaging, and laboratory testing. Renal and bladder ultrasound showed no evidence of hydronephrosis or obstruction. He had a benign urinalysis with microscopy absent for protein, blood, ketones, leukocyte esterase, nitrites, and cellular casts. His urine pH was 5.5 (reference range, 5.0-9.0) and specific gravity was 1.011 (reference range, 1.005-1.030). His urine electrolytes revealed 45-mmol/L urine sodium (reference range, 40-220), 33-mmol/L urine chloride (reference range, 110-250), 10-mmol/L urine potassium (reference range, 25-120), 106.7-mg/dL urine creatinine (reference range, 10-400) and a calculated 2.7% fractional excretion of sodium (FENa) and 22.0-mEq/L elevated urine anion gap. As a fluid challenge, he was treated with IV 0.9% sodium chloride at 100-125 mL/h, receiving 3 liters over the first 48 hours of his hospitalization. His creatinine peaked at 9.2 mg/dL and stabilized before improving later in his hospitalization (Figure 1). The patient initially had oliguria (< 0.5 mL/kg/h), which slowly improved over his hospital course. Unfortunately, due to multiple system and clinical factors, accurate inputs and outputs were not adequately maintained during his hospitalization.
We evaluated hyponatremia with a combination of serum and urine laboratory tests. In addition to urine electrolytes, the initial evaluation focused on trending his clinical trajectory. We repeated a basic metabolic panel every 4 to 6 hours. He had 278-mOsm/kg serum osmolality (reference range, 285-295) with an effective 217-mOsm/kg serum tonicity. His urine osmolality was 270.5 mOsm/kg.
Despite administering 462 mEq sodium via crystalloid, his sodium worsened over the first 48 hours, reaching a nadir at 125 mmol/L on hospital day 3 (Figure 2). While he continued to appear euvolemic on physical examination, his blood pressure became difficult to control with 160- to 180-mm Hg systolic blood pressure readings. His thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) was normal and aldosterone was low (4 ng/dL). Additional urine studies, including a 24-hour urine sample, were collected for further evaluation. His urine uric acid was 140 mg/d (reference range, 120-820); his serum uric acid level was 8.2 mg/dL (reference range, 3.0-9.0). His 24-hour urine creatinine was 0.57 g/d (reference range, 0.50-2.15) and uric acid to creatinine ratio was 246 mg/g (reference range, 60-580). His serum creatinine collected from the same day as his 24-hour urine sample was 7.3 mg/dL. His fractional excretion of uric acid (FEurate) was 21.9%.
Differential Diagnosis
The patient’s recent administration of cisplatin raised clinical suspicion of cisplatin-induced AKI. To avoid premature diagnostic closure, we used a systematic approach for thinking about our patient’s AKI, considering prerenal, intrarenal, and postrenal etiologies. The unremarkable renal and bladder ultrasound made a postrenal etiology unlikely. The patient’s 2.7% FENa in the absence of a diuretic, limited responsiveness to crystalloid fluid resuscitation, 7.5 serum BUN/creatinine ratio, and 270.5 mOsm/kg urine osmolality suggested an intrarenal etiology, which can be further divided into problems with glomeruli, tubules, small vessels, or interstitial space. The patient’s normal urinary microscopy with no evidence of protein, blood, ketones, leukocyte esterase, nitrites, or cellular casts made a glomerular etiology less likely. The acute onset and lack of additional systemic features, other than hypertension, made a vascular etiology less likely. A tubular etiology, such as acute tubular necrosis (ATN), was highest on the differential and was followed by an interstitial etiology, such as acute interstitial nephritis (AIN).
Patients with drug-induced AIN commonly present with signs and symptoms of an allergic-type reaction, including fever, rash, hematuria, pyuria, and costovertebral angle tenderness. The patient lacked these symptoms. However, cisplatin is known to cause ATN in up to 20-30% of patients.7 Therefore, despite the lack of the classic muddy-brown, granular casts on urine microscopy, cisplatin-induced ATN remained the most likely etiology of his AKI. Moreover, ATN can cause hyponatremia. ATN is characterized by 3 phases: initiation, maintenance, and recovery phases.8 Hyponatremia occurs during the recovery phase, typically starting weeks after renal insult and associated with high urine output and diuresis. This patient presented 1 week after injury and had persistent oliguria, making ATN an unlikely culprit of his hyponatremia.
Our patient presented with hypotonic hyponatremia with a 131 mmol/L initial sodium level and an < 280 mOsm/kg effective serum osmolality, or serum tonicity. The serum tonicity is equivalent to the difference between the measured serum osmolality and the BUN. In the setting of profound AKI, this adjustment is essential for correctly categorizing a patient’s hyponatremia as hyper-, iso-, or hypotonic. The differential diagnosis for this patient’s hypotonic hyponatremia included dilutional effects of hypervolemia, SIADH, hyperthyroidism, adrenal insufficiency, and RSWS. The patient’s volume examination, lack of predisposing comorbidities or suggestive biomarkers, and > 20 mmol/L urinary sodium made hypervolemia unlikely. His urinary osmolality and specific gravity made primary polydipsia unlikely. We worked up his hyponatremia according to a diagnostic algorithm (eAppendix available at doi:10.12788/fp.0198).
The patient had a 217 mOsm/kg serum tonicity and a 270.5 mOsm/kg urine osmolality, consistent with impaired water excretion. His presentation, TSH, and concordant decrease in sodium and potassium made an endocrine etiology of his hyponatremia less likely. In hindsight, a serum cortisol would have been beneficial to more completely exclude adrenal insufficiency. His urine sodium was elevated at 45 mmol/L, raising concern for RSWS or SIADH. The FEurate helped to distinguish between SIADH and RSWS. While FEurate is often elevated in both SIADH and RSWS initially, the FEurate normalizes in SIADH with normalization of the serum sodium. The ideal cutoff for posthyponatremia correction FEurate is debated; however, a FEurate value after sodium correction < 11% suggests SIADH while a value > 11% suggests RSWS.9 Our patient’s FEurate following the sodium correction (serum sodium 134 mmol/L) was 21.9%, most suggestive of RSWS.
Treatment
Upon admission, initial treatment focused on resolving the patient’s AKI. The oncology team discontinued the cisplatin-based chemotherapy. His medication dosages were adjusted for his renal function and additional nephrotoxins avoided. In consultation, the nephrology service recommended 100 mL/h fluid resuscitation. After the patient received 3 L of 0.9% sodium chloride, his creatinine showed limited improvement and his sodium worsened, trending from 131 mmol/L to a nadir of 125 mmol/L. We initiated oral free-water restriction while continuing IV infusion of 0.9% sodium chloride at 125 mL/h.
We further augmented his sodium intake with 1-g sodium chloride tablets with each meal. By hospital day 6, the patient’s serum sodium, BUN, and creatinine improved to 130 mEq/L, 50 mg/dL, and 7.7 mg/dL, respectively. We then discontinued the oral sodium chloride tablets, fluid restriction, and IV fluids in a stepwise fashion prior to discharge. At discharge, the patient’s serum sodium was 136 mEq/L and creatinine, 4.8 mg/dL. The patient’s clinical course was complicated by symptomatic hypertension with systolic blood pressures about 180 mm Hg, requiring intermittent IV hydralazine, which was transitioned to daily nifedipine. Concerned that fluid resuscitation contributed to his hypertension, the patient also received several doses of furosemide. At time of discharge, the patient remained hypertensive and was discharged with nifedipine 90 mg daily.
Outcome and Follow-up
The patient has remained stable clinically since discharge. One week after discharge, his serum sodium and creatinine were 138 mmol/L and 3.8 mg/dL, respectively. More than 1 month after discharge, his sodium remains in the reference range and his creatinine was stable at about 3.5 mg/dL. He continues to follow-up with nephrology, oncology, and radiation oncology. He has restarted chemotherapy with a carboplatin-based regimen without recurrence of hyponatremia or AKI. His blood pressure has gradually improved to the point where he no longer requires nifedipine.
Discussion
The US Food and Drug Administration first approved the use of cisplatin, an alkylating agent that inhibits DNA replication, in 1978 for the treatment of testicular cancer.10 Since its approval, cisplatin has increased in popularity and is now considered one of the most effective antineoplastic agents for the treatment of solid tumors.1 Unfortunately, cisplatin has a well-documented adverse effect profile that includes neurotoxicity, gastrointestinal toxicity, nephrotoxicity, and ototoxicity.4 Despite frequent nephrotoxicity, cisplatin only occasionally causes hyponatremia and rarely causes RSWS, a known but potentially fatal complication. Moreover, the combination of AKI and RSWS is unique. Our patient presented with the unique combination of AKI and hyponatremia, most consistent with RSWS, likely precipitated from cisplatin chemotherapy. Through this case, we review cisplatin-associated electrolyte abnormalities, highlight the challenge of differentiating SIADH and RSWS, and suggest a treatment approach for hyponatremia during the period of diagnostic uncertainty.
Blachley and colleagues first discussed renal and electrolyte disturbances, specifically magnesium wasting, secondary to cisplatin use in 1981. In 1984, Kurtzberg and colleagues noted salt wasting in 2 patients receiving cisplatin therapy. The authors suggested that cisplatin inhibits solute transport in the thick ascending limb, causing clinically significant electrolyte abnormalities, coining the term cisplatin-induced salt wasting.11
The prevalence of cisplatin-induced salt wasting is unclear and likely underreported. In 1988, Hutchinson and colleagues conducted a prospective cohort study and noted 10% of patients (n = 70) developed RSWS at some point over 18 months of cisplatin therapy—a higher rate than previously estimated.12 In 1992, another prospective cohort study evaluated the adverse effects of 47 patients with non-small cell lung cancer treated with cisplatin and reported hyponatremia in 43% of its 93 courses of chemotherapy. The authors did not report the etiology of these hyponatremia cases.13 Given the diagnostic challenge, RSWS may be underrepresented as a confirmed etiology of hyponatremia in cisplatin treatment.
Hyponatremia from cisplatin may present as either SIADH or RSWS, complicating treatment decisions. Both conditions lead to hypotonic hyponatremia with urine osmolality > 100 mOSm/kg and urine sodium levels > 40 mmol/L. However, pathophysiology behind SIADH and RSWS is different. In RSWS, proximal tubule damage causes hyponatremia, decreasing sodium reabsorption, and leading to impaired concentration gradient in every segment of the nephron. As a result, RSWS can lead to profound hyponatremia. Treatment typically consists of increasing sodium intake to correct serum sodium with salt tablets and hypertonic sodium chloride while treating the underlying etiology, in our case removing the offending agent, and waiting for proximal tubule function to recover.6 On the other hand, in SIADH, elevated antidiuretic hormone (ADH) increases water reabsorption in the collecting duct, which has no impact on concentration gradients of the other nephron segments.14 Free-water restriction is the hallmark of SIADH treatment. Severe SIADH may require sodium repletion and/or the initiation of vaptans, ADH antagonists that competitively inhibit V2 receptors in the collecting duct to prevent water reabsorption.15
Our patient had an uncertain etiology of his hyponatremia throughout most of his treatment course, complicating our treatment decision-making. Initially, his measured serum osmolality was 278 mOsm/kg; however, his effective tonicity was lower. His AKI elevated his BUN, which in turnrequired us to calculate his serum tonicity (217 mOsm/kg) that was consistent with hypotonic hyponatremia. His elevated urine osmolality and urine sodium levels made SIADH and RSWS the most likely etiologies of his hyponatremia. To confirm the etiology, we waited for correction of his serum sodium. Therefore, we treated him with a combination of sodium repletion with 0.9% sodium chloride (154 mEq/L), hypertonic relative to his serum sodium, sodium chloride tablets, and free-water restriction. In this approach, we attempted to harmonize the treatment strategies for both SIADH and RSWS and effectively corrected his serum sodium. We evaluated his response to our treatment with a basic metabolic panel every 6 to 8 hours. Had his serum sodium decreased < 120 mmol/L, we planned to transfer the patient to the intensive care unit for 3% sodium chloride and/or intensification of his fluid restriction. A significant worsening of his hyponatremia would have strongly suggested hyponatremia secondary to SIADH since isotonic saline can worsen hyponatremia due to increased free-water reabsorption in the collecting duct.16
To differentiate between SIADH and RSWS, we relied on the FEurate after sodium correction. Multiple case reports from Japan have characterized the distinction between the processes through FEurate and serum uric acid. While the optimal cut-off values for FEurate require additional investigation, values < 11% after serum sodium correction suggests SIADH, while a value > 11% suggests RSWS.17 Prior cases have also emphasized serum hypouricemia as a distinguishing characteristic in RSWS. However, our case illustrates that serum hypouricemia is less reliable in the setting of AKI. Due to his severe AKI, our patient could not efficiently clear uric acid, likely contributing to his hyperuricemia.
Ultimately, our patient had an FEurate > 20%, which was suggestive of RSWS. Nevertheless, we recognize limitations and confounders in our diagnosis and have reflected on our diagnostic and management choices. First, the sensitivity and specificity of postsodium correction FEurate is unknown. Tracking the change in FEurate with our interventions would have increased our diagnostic utility, as suggested by Maesaka and colleagues.14 Second, our patient’s serum sodium was still at the lower end of the reference range after treatment, which may decrease the specificity of FEurate. Third, a plasma ADH collected during the initial phase of symptomatic hyponatremia would have helped differentiate between SIADH and RSWS.
Other diagnostic tests that could have excluded alternative diagnoses with even greater certainty include plasma adrenocorticotropic hormone, B-type natriuretic peptide, renin, cortisol, and thyroid function tests. From a practical standpoint, these laboratory results (excluding thyroid function test and brain natriuretic peptide) would have taken several weeks to result at our institution, limiting their clinical utility. Similarly, FEurate also has limited clinical utility, requiring effective treatment as part of the diagnostic test. Therefore, we recommend focusing on optimal treatment for hyponatremia of uncertain etiology, especially where SIADH and RSWS are the leading diagnoses.
Conclusions
We described a rare case of concomitant cisplatin-induced severe AKI and RSWS. We have emphasized the diagnostic challenge of distinguishing between SIADH and RSWS, especially with concomitant AKI, and have acknowledged that optimal treatment relies on accurate differentiation. However, differentiation may not be clinically feasible. Therefore, we suggest a treatment strategy that incorporates both free-water restriction and sodium supplementation via IV and/or oral administration.
1. Dasari S, Tchounwou PB. Cisplatin in cancer therapy: molecular mechanisms of action. Eur J Pharmacol. 2014;740:364-378. doi:10.1016/j.ejphar.2014.07.025
2. Holditch SJ, Brown CN, Lombardi AM, Nguyen KN, Edelstein CL. Recent advances in models, mechanisms, biomarkers, and interventions in cisplatin-induced acute kidney injury. Int J Mol Sci. 2019;20(12):3011. Published 2019 Jun 20. doi:10.3390/ijms20123011
3. National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute. The “accidental” cure—platinum-based treatment for cancer: the discovery of cisplatin. Published May 30, 2014. Accessed November 10, 2021. https://www.cancer.gov/research/progress/discovery/cisplatin
4. Ozkok A, Edelstein CL. Pathophysiology of cisplatin-induced acute kidney injury. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:967826. doi:10.1155/2014/967826
5. Palmer LG, Schnermann J. Integrated control of Na transport along the nephron. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2015;10(4):676-687. doi:10.2215/CJN.12391213
6. Bitew S, Imbriano L, Miyawaki N, Fishbane S, Maesaka JK. More on renal salt wasting without cerebral disease: response to saline infusion. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2009;4(2):309-315. doi:10.2215/CJN.02740608
7. Shirali AC, Perazella MA. Tubulointerstitial injury associated with chemotherapeutic agents. Adv Chronic Kidney Dis. 2014;21(1):56-63. doi:10.1053/j.ackd.2013.06.010
8. Agrawal M, Swartz R. Acute renal failure [published correction appears in Am Fam Physician 2001 Feb 1;63(3):445]. Am Fam Physician. 2000;61(7):2077-2088.
9. Milionis HJ, Liamis GL, Elisaf MS. The hyponatremic patient: a systematic approach to laboratory diagnosis. CMAJ. 2002;166(8):1056-1062.
10. Monneret C. Platinum anticancer drugs. From serendipity to rational design. Ann Pharm Fr. 2011;69(6):286-295. doi:10.1016/j.pharma.2011.10.001
11. Kurtzberg J, Dennis VW, Kinney TR. Cisplatinum-induced renal salt wasting. Med Pediatr Oncol. 1984;12(2):150-154. doi:10.1002/mpo.2950120219
12. Hutchison FN, Perez EA, Gandara DR, Lawrence HJ, Kaysen GA. Renal salt wasting in patients treated with cisplatin. Ann Intern Med. 1988;108(1):21-25. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-108-1-21
13. Lee YK, Shin DM. Renal salt wasting in patients treated with high-dose cisplatin, etoposide, and mitomycin in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Korean J Intern Med. 1992;7(2):118-121. doi:10.3904/kjim.1992.7.2.118
14. Maesaka JK, Imbriano L, Mattana J, Gallagher D, Bade N, Sharif S. Differentiating SIADH from cerebral/renal salt wasting: failure of the volume approach and need for a new approach to hyponatremia. J Clin Med. 2014;3(4):1373-1385. Published 2014 Dec 8. doi:10.3390/jcm3041373
15. Palmer BF. The role of v2 receptor antagonists in the treatment of hyponatremia. Electrolyte Blood Press. 2013;11(1):1-8. doi:10.5049/EBP.2013.11.1.1
16. Verbalis JG, Goldsmith SR, Greenberg A, Schrier RW, Sterns RH. Hyponatremia treatment guidelines 2007: expert panel recommendations. Am J Med. 2007;120(11 Suppl 1):S1-S21. doi:10.1016/j.amjmed.2007.09.001
17. Maesaka JK, Imbriano LJ, Miyawaki N. High prevalence of renal salt wasting without cerebral disease as cause of hyponatremia in general medical wards. Am J Med Sci. 2018;356(1):15-22. doi:10.1016/j.amjms.2018.03.02
1. Dasari S, Tchounwou PB. Cisplatin in cancer therapy: molecular mechanisms of action. Eur J Pharmacol. 2014;740:364-378. doi:10.1016/j.ejphar.2014.07.025
2. Holditch SJ, Brown CN, Lombardi AM, Nguyen KN, Edelstein CL. Recent advances in models, mechanisms, biomarkers, and interventions in cisplatin-induced acute kidney injury. Int J Mol Sci. 2019;20(12):3011. Published 2019 Jun 20. doi:10.3390/ijms20123011
3. National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute. The “accidental” cure—platinum-based treatment for cancer: the discovery of cisplatin. Published May 30, 2014. Accessed November 10, 2021. https://www.cancer.gov/research/progress/discovery/cisplatin
4. Ozkok A, Edelstein CL. Pathophysiology of cisplatin-induced acute kidney injury. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:967826. doi:10.1155/2014/967826
5. Palmer LG, Schnermann J. Integrated control of Na transport along the nephron. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2015;10(4):676-687. doi:10.2215/CJN.12391213
6. Bitew S, Imbriano L, Miyawaki N, Fishbane S, Maesaka JK. More on renal salt wasting without cerebral disease: response to saline infusion. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2009;4(2):309-315. doi:10.2215/CJN.02740608
7. Shirali AC, Perazella MA. Tubulointerstitial injury associated with chemotherapeutic agents. Adv Chronic Kidney Dis. 2014;21(1):56-63. doi:10.1053/j.ackd.2013.06.010
8. Agrawal M, Swartz R. Acute renal failure [published correction appears in Am Fam Physician 2001 Feb 1;63(3):445]. Am Fam Physician. 2000;61(7):2077-2088.
9. Milionis HJ, Liamis GL, Elisaf MS. The hyponatremic patient: a systematic approach to laboratory diagnosis. CMAJ. 2002;166(8):1056-1062.
10. Monneret C. Platinum anticancer drugs. From serendipity to rational design. Ann Pharm Fr. 2011;69(6):286-295. doi:10.1016/j.pharma.2011.10.001
11. Kurtzberg J, Dennis VW, Kinney TR. Cisplatinum-induced renal salt wasting. Med Pediatr Oncol. 1984;12(2):150-154. doi:10.1002/mpo.2950120219
12. Hutchison FN, Perez EA, Gandara DR, Lawrence HJ, Kaysen GA. Renal salt wasting in patients treated with cisplatin. Ann Intern Med. 1988;108(1):21-25. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-108-1-21
13. Lee YK, Shin DM. Renal salt wasting in patients treated with high-dose cisplatin, etoposide, and mitomycin in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Korean J Intern Med. 1992;7(2):118-121. doi:10.3904/kjim.1992.7.2.118
14. Maesaka JK, Imbriano L, Mattana J, Gallagher D, Bade N, Sharif S. Differentiating SIADH from cerebral/renal salt wasting: failure of the volume approach and need for a new approach to hyponatremia. J Clin Med. 2014;3(4):1373-1385. Published 2014 Dec 8. doi:10.3390/jcm3041373
15. Palmer BF. The role of v2 receptor antagonists in the treatment of hyponatremia. Electrolyte Blood Press. 2013;11(1):1-8. doi:10.5049/EBP.2013.11.1.1
16. Verbalis JG, Goldsmith SR, Greenberg A, Schrier RW, Sterns RH. Hyponatremia treatment guidelines 2007: expert panel recommendations. Am J Med. 2007;120(11 Suppl 1):S1-S21. doi:10.1016/j.amjmed.2007.09.001
17. Maesaka JK, Imbriano LJ, Miyawaki N. High prevalence of renal salt wasting without cerebral disease as cause of hyponatremia in general medical wards. Am J Med Sci. 2018;356(1):15-22. doi:10.1016/j.amjms.2018.03.02
Multimodal Pain Management With Adductor Canal Block Decreases Opioid Consumption Following Total Knee Arthroplasty
Ease of access to opioids in the perioperative period is a risk factor for opioid misuse and has been identified as a strong risk factor for heroin use.1,2 Three-quarters of today’s heroin users were introduced to opioids through prescription medications.2 The United States accounts for about 80% of the global opioid supply consumption, and deaths from opioid overdose are increasing: 70,630 deaths in 2019 alone.3,4
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has called for changes in opioid prescribing. The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) also has published an information statement with strategies to decrease opioid misuse and abuse.5,6 Arthroplasty surgeons have recently focused on decreasing use of opioids in total knee arthroplasty (TKA), a procedure traditionally associated with high levels of opioid consumption and historical reliance on opioid monotherapy for postoperative analgesia.7,8 From a clinical perspective, prolonged postoperative opioid use contributes to poorer surgical outcomes due to increased risk of complications, including stiffness, infection, and revision TKA.9
Multimodal pain regimens are increasingly being used to control postoperative pain as data supports their efficacy.10,11 Previous studies have found that simultaneous modulation of multiple pain pathways decreases narcotics consumption and improves patient outcomes.12,13 Along with other adjuvant therapies, peripheral nerve blocks, such as adductor canal block (ACB) and femoral nerve block (FNB), have been used to decrease postoperative pain.14 Studies have shown that ACB has fewer complications and shorter functional recovery times compared with FNB.15,16 The distribution of the ACB excludes the femoral nerve, thus preserving greater quadriceps strength while providing equivalent levels of analgesia compared with FNB.15,17,18 The ACB has shown decreased near-fall events and improved balance scores in the immediate postoperative period.19
Our study analyzed opioid consumption patterns of TKA patients from a US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical center before and after the institution of a multimodal analgesic protocol using ACB. The primary purpose of this study was to determine whether a protocol that included intraoperative spinal anesthesia with a postoperative multimodal analgesic regimen and ACB was associated with a decreased postoperative opioid requirement when compared with patients who received intraoperative general anesthesia and a traditional opioid regimen. Secondary outcomes included the effect of opioid consumption on range of motion on postoperative day (POD) 1 and number of opioid prescriptions written at the first postoperative clinic visit.
Methods
Approval for the study was obtained from the institutional review board at the Dayton Veterans Affairs Medical Center (DVAMC) in Ohio. A retrospective chart review was performed to collect data from all patients undergoing TKA at DVAMC from June 1, 2011, through December 31, 2015. Exclusion criteria included multiple surgeries in the study time frame, documented chronic pain, allergy to local anesthetics, daily preoperative use of opioids, and incomplete data in the health record.
All surgeries were performed by 2 staff arthroplasty surgeons at a single VAMC. All patients attended a preoperative visit where a history, physical, and anesthesia evaluation were performed, and watched an educational video detailing surgical indications and postoperative rehabilitation. All surgeries were performed with tourniquets and a periarticular injection was performed at the conclusion of each case. Surgeon 1 treatment of choice was 10 mL 0.5% bupivacaine, whereas surgeon 2 performed a posterior capsular injection of 30 mL 0.25% bupivacaine and a periarticular injection of 30 mg ketorolac in 10 mL 0.25% bupivacaine with epinephrine.
Prior to August 2014, general endotracheal anesthesia was used intraoperatively. A patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) pump of morphine or hydromorphone and additional oral oxycodone or hydrocodone was used for postoperative pain. PCA pumps were patient dependent. In the control group, 245 patients received the morphine PCA while 61 received the hydromorphone PCA. Morphine PCA dosing consisted of 1-mg doses every 10 minutes with potential baseline infusion rates of 0.5 to 1.0 mg/h and a 4-hour limit of 20 mg. Hydromorphone PCA dosing consisted of 0.2 to 0.4-mg doses with a potential continuous dose of 0.2 to 0.4 mg/h and a 4-hour limit of 4 mg.
In August 2014, a new analgesic protocol was adopted for TKA consisting of intraoperative spinal anesthesia (0.75% bupivacaine) with IV sedation (propofol), a postoperative multimodal analgesic regimen, an ACB performed in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU), and opioids as needed (protocol group). The ACB catheter was a 0.5% ropivo caine hydrochloride injection. It was attached to a local anesthetic fixed flow rate pump that administers 0.5% ropivacaine without epinephrine at 8 mL/h and was removed on POD 5 by the patient. The multimodal medication regimen included IV ketorolac 15 mg every 6 hours for 3 doses, gabapentin 300 mg every 8 hours, acetaminophen 975 mg every 8 hours, meloxicam 7.5 mg daily, tramadol 50 mg every 6 hours, oxycodone 5 mg 1 to 2 tabs every 4 hours as needed, and IV hydromorphone 0.5 mg every 4 hours as needed for breakthrough pain.
Preoperative demographic characteristics were collected (Table 1). Data on all IV and oral opioid requirements were collected for both groups, converted to morphine milligram equivalents (MME), and a total morphine equivalent dose (MED) was calculated.20,21
In April 2015, a separate protocol change occurred at the DVAMC with the goal of discharge on POD 1. To standardize outcomes before and after this change, data collection regarding opioid requirements was concluded at midnight on POD 1. If a patient was discharged before midnight on POD 1, opioid requirement through the time of discharge was collected. All surgeries were performed in the morning to early afternoon; however, specific surgical times were not collected. Patients were also evaluated by a physical therapist on POD 0, and maximal knee flexion and extension were measured on POD 1. Patients were discharged with prescriptions for oxycodone/acetaminophen and tramadol and were seen 3 weeks later for their first postoperative visit. Opioid refills at the first postoperative visit were recorded. All statistical analyses were performed in SAS 9.4 with significance set to α = 0.05. Between-groups differences in preoperative and perioperative characteristics as well as postoperative outcomes were analyzed using independent samples t tests for continuous variables and Fisher exact tests for dichotomous discrete variables. Where groups differed for a pre- or perioperative variable, linear mixed models analysis was used to determine whether IV, oral, and total MEDs were significantly affected by the interaction between the pre- or perioperative variable with analgesia group. For refills at the postoperative visit, the effects of pre- or perioperative differences were tested using χ2 tests. Effect sizes for outcome variables were estimated using Cohen d and probability of superiority (Δ) for continuous variables, and relative risk (RR) in the case of discrete variables.22
Results
During the study period from June 1, 2011, through December 31, 2015, 533 eligible TKAs were performed, 306 in the control group and 227 in the protocol group. The groups had similar sex distribution; body mass index; knee range of motion; diagnoses of diabetes mellitus, coronary artery disease, and chronic kidney disease; and history of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (P ≥ .05). The protocol group was significantly older (P = .04) and had a significantly higher rate of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (P = .002). There were no significant differences between number of procedures performed by surgeon (P = .48) or total tourniquet time (P = .13) (Table 2). Mean (SD) length of stay was significantly greater in the control group compared with the protocol group (2.5 [1.3] vs 1.4 [0.7] days, P < .001).
Figure 1 shows the distributions of each type of opioid used. Compared with the control group, the protocol group had a significantly lower mean (SD) IV opioid use: 178.2 (98.0) MED vs 12.0 (24.6) MED (P < .001; d = 2.19; Δ = 0.94) and mean (SD) total opioid use: 241.7 (120.1) MED vs 74.8 (42.7) MED (P < .001; d = 1.76; Δ = 0.89). Mean (SD) oral opioid use did not differ between groups (control, 63.6 [45.4] MED; protocol, 62.9 [31.4] MED; P = .85; d = 0.02; Δ = 0.51). A significantly lower percentage of patients in the protocol group received additional opioids at the 3-week follow-up when compared to the control group: 46.7% vs 61.3%, respectively (P < .001; RR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.65-0.90).
There were no significant differences in postoperative mean (SD) maximum knee flexion (control, 67.2 [15.7]°; protocol, 67.8 [19.2]°; P = .72; d = 0.03; Δ = 0.51) or mean (SD) total flexion/extension arc (control, 66.2 [15.9]°; protocol, 67.9 [19.4]°; P = .32; d = 0.10; Δ = 0.53). Mean (SD) postoperative maximum knee extension was significantly higher in the protocol group compared with the control group (-0.1 [2.1]° vs 1.0 [3.7]°; P < .001; d = 0.35; Δ = 0.60). More patients in the protocol group (92.5%) were discharged to home compared with the control group (86.6%) (P = .02; RR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.01-1.13).
Because age and rates of COPD differed between groups, sensitivity analyses were conducted to determine whether these variables influenced postoperative opioid use. The relationship between age and group was significant for IV (P < .001) and total opioid use (P < .001). Younger patients received higher MED doses than older patients within the control group, while dosages were fairly consistent regardless of age in the protocol group (Figure 2). There was no significance in age interaction effect with regard to oral opioids (P = .83) nor opioid refills at 3-week follow-up (P = .24).
The sensitivity analysis for COPD found that a diagnosis of COPD did not significantly influence utilization of IV opioids (P = .10), or total opioids (P = .68). There was a significant interaction effect for oral opioids (Figure 3). Patients in the control group with COPD required significantly higher mean (SD) oral opioids than patients without COPD (91.5 [123.9] MED and 62.0 [36.0] MED, respectively; P = .03). In the control group, the χ2 test was significant regarding opioid prescription refills at the 3-week visit (P = .004) with 62.4% of patients with COPD requiring refills vs 44.4% without COPD (P = .004). There was no difference in refills in the protocol group (46.4% vs 48.4%).
Finally, 2-sided independent samples t test evaluated total MED use between the 2 surgeons. There was no difference in total MED per patient for the surgeons. In the control group, mean (SD) total MED for surgeon 1 was 232.9 (118.7) MED vs 252.8 (121.5) MED for surgeon 2 (P = .18). In the protocol group, the mean (SD) total MED was 72.5 (43.2) and 77.4 (42.1) for surgeon 1 and surgeon 2, respectively (P = .39).
Discussion
Coordinated efforts with major medical organizations are being made to decrease opioid prescriptions and exposure.5,6 To our knowledge, no study has quantified a decrease in opioid requirement in a VA population after implementation of a protocol that includes intraoperative spinal anesthesia and a postoperative multimodal analgesic regimen including ACB after TKA. The analgesic protocol described in this study aligns with recommendations from both the CDC and the AAOS to decrease opioid use and misuse by maximizing nonopioid medications and limiting the size and number of opioid prescriptions. However, public and medical opinion of opioids as well as prescribing practices have changed over time with a trend toward lower opioid use. The interventions, as part of the described protocol, are a result of these changes and attempt to minimize opioid use while maximizing postoperative analgesia.
Our data showed a significant decrease in total opioid use through POD 1, IV opioid use, and opioid prescriptions provided at the first postoperative visit. The protocol group used only 6.7% of the IV opioids and 30.9% of the total opioids that were used by the control group. The substantial difference in IV opioid requirement, 166.2 MED, is equivalent to 8 mg of IV hydromorphone or 55 mg of IV morphine. The difference in total opioid requirement was similar at 166.9 MED, equivalent to 111 mg of oral oxycodone.
Decreasing opioid use has the additional benefit of improving outcomes, as higher doses of opioids have been associated with increased length of stay, greater rates of DVT, and postoperative infection.23 These complications occurred in a stepwise manner, suggesting a dose-response gradient that makes the sizable decrease noted in our data of greater relevance.23 While the adverse effects (AEs) of opioids are well known, there are limited data on opioid dosing and its effect on perioperative outcomes.23
A significant decrease in the percentage of patients receiving an opioid prescription at the first postoperative visit suggests a decrease in the number of patients on prolonged opioids after TKA with implementation of modern analgesic modalities. The duration of postoperative opioid use has been found to be the strongest predictor of misuse, and each postoperative refill increases the probability of misuse by 44%.24 In addition, opioid use for > 3 months after TKA is associated with increased risk of periprosthetic infection, increased overall revision rate, and stiffness at 1 year postoperatively.9 While not entirely under the control of the surgeon, measures to decrease the number of postoperative opioid refills may lead to a decrease in opioid misuse.
In the control group, older patients tended to receive less opioids. This is likely due to physiologic changes in opioid metabolism associated with aging, including decreased renal and hepatic opioid metabolism and alterations in overall body composition that increase relative potency and duration of action of opioids in a geriatric population.25,26 No difference in opioid use by age was found for the protocol group.
Patients in the protocol group demonstrated significantly greater maximal knee extension on POD 1 compared with the control group. No difference in maximal flexion was found. This difference in extension may partially be explained by the use of an ACB. One benefit of ACB is greater quadriceps strength and fewer near-fall events when compared with FNB.15,19
Our results corroborate the findings of similar studies. A randomized controlled trial comparing a multimodal analgesic regimen with a periarticular injection without a postoperative ACB to a hydromorphone PCA revealed a significant decrease in opioid use in the multimodal analgesic group.27 Along with lower opioid requirements, the multimodal analgesic group had lower visual analog scale pain scores, fewer AEs, faster progression to physical therapy milestones, and higher satisfaction.27 Recent guidelines from the French Society of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine recommend against the use of gabapentin as a method of postoperative pain control. However, this specifically refers to the preoperative administration of gabapentin. This same set of guidelines later cites a high level of evidence suggesting patients undergoing arthroplasty benefit more from gabapentinoids.28 Multiple analgesic protocols that include gabapentin as a part of a multimodal approach have been shown to have positive results.13,29
In our study, patients receiving the multimodal analgesic regimen were significantly more likely to be discharged home rather than to postacute care facilities, which have been associated with increased rates of major complications, 30-day readmission, and 30-day reoperation.30,31 In addition, discharge to an inpatient rehabilitation or skilled nursing facility has not been found to result in higher functional outcomes, despite $3.2 billion spent yearly on rehabilitation services after primary TKA.32,33
A component of our described analgesic protocol included spinal anesthesia intraoperatively. The differences between groups regarding anesthesia type can be attributed to this protocol change. A significantly greater percentage of patients in the protocol group received spinal anesthesia, while more patients in the control group received general anesthesia. While patients who received spinal anesthesia may have enhanced analgesia in the immediate postoperative period, no differences in opioid outcomes were seen based on anesthesia type. Known benefits of intraoperative spinal anesthesia include decreased perioperative blood loss and a smaller decrease in hemoglobin postoperatively, as well as lower rates of in-hospital complications, including pulmonary embolism, pneumonia, cerebrovascular events, and acute renal failure.34
Limitations
A number of limitations of this study should be noted. One was a protocol change regarding length of stay, which occurred during the study period and resulted in a significantly shorter length of stay in the protocol group. As a result, opioid use data were analyzed only through midnight at the end of POD 1. Patients who were discharged on POD 1 did not have opioid use data available for the full duration of the first POD, which may exaggerate the decrease in opioid requirements, as opioids used after discharge but prior to midnight on POD 1 were not recorded. However, opioids taken at home are oral with a low MME compared with IV opioids received by hospitalized patients in the control group. In addition, if taken as prescribed, patients at home would only have enough time to take a few doses of opioids prior to the midnight cutoff. We do not believe this difference in time of opioid use meaningfully affected the data. An additional limitation includes the variability between periarticular injections between surgeons. While the percentage of patients that received injections from surgeon 1 vs surgeon 2 were similar, it cannot be ruled out as a potential confounding factor. Other limitations include a lack of pain scores to compare subjective pain ratings, the retrospective nature of the study, and a largely homogenous male VA population.
Conclusions
Ease of access to opioids is a risk factor for opioid abuse, which itself is a risk factor for subsequent heroin use.1,2 The CDC and AAOS have thus published recommendations regarding opioid prescribing practices to decrease opioid use and abuse.5,6 Our described protocol, which aligns with these recommendations, resulted in a significant decrease in IV opioid requirement, total opioid requirement, and lower rates of opioid prescriptions provided at the first postoperative visit. These promising findings demonstrate a lower percentage of patients on long-term opioids after TKA and a significantly decreased cumulative opioid exposure.
1. Lankenau SE, Teti M, Silva K, Jackson Bloom J, Harocopos A, Treese M. Initiation into prescription opioid misuse amongst young injection drug users. Int J Drug Policy. 2012;23(1):37-44. doi:10.1016/j.drugpo.2011.05.014
2. Jones CM. Heroin use and heroin use risk behaviors among nonmedical users of prescription opioid pain relievers - United States, 2002-2004 and 2008-2010. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2013;132(1-2):95-100. doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2013.01.007
3. Manchikanti L, Singh A. Therapeutic opioids: a ten-year perspective on the complexities and complications of the escalating use, abuse, and nonmedical use of opioids. Pain Physician. 2008;11(suppl 2):S63-S88.
4. Seth P, Scholl L, Rudd RA, Bacon S. Overdose deaths involving opioids, cocaine, and psychostimulants - United States, 2015-2016. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2018;67(12):349-358. Published 2018 Mar 30. doi:10.15585/mmwr.mm6712a1
5. Dowell D, Haegerich TM, Chou R. CDC Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain-United States, 2016. JAMA. 2016;315(15):1624-1645. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.1464
6. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Information statement: opioid use, misuse, and abuse in orthopaedic practice. Published October 2015. Accessed November 12, 2021. https://aaos.org/globalassets/about /bylaws-library/information-statements/1045-opioid-use -misuse-and-abuse-in-practice.pdf
7. Hernandez NM, Parry JA, Taunton MJ. Patients at risk: large opioid prescriptions after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2017;32(8):2395-2398. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2017.02.060
8. Gerner P, Poeran J, Cozowicz C, Mörwald EE, Zubizarreta N, Mazumdar M, Memtsoudis SG, Multimodal pain management in total hip and knee arthroplasty: trends over the last 10 years. Abstract presented at: American Society of Anesthesiologists Annual Meeting; October 21, 2017; Boston, MA.
9. Cancienne JM, Patel KJ, Browne JA, Werner BC. Narcotic use and total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2018;33(1):113-118. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2017.08.006
10. Moucha CS, Weiser MC, Levin EJ. Current strategies in anesthesia and analgesia for total knee arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2016;24(2):60-73. doi:10.5435/JAAOS-D-14-00259
11. Wick EC, Grant MC, Wu CL. Postoperative multimodal analgesia pain management with nonopioid analgesics and techniques: a review. JAMA Surg. 2017;152(7):691-697.doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2017.0898
12. Lamplot JD, Wagner ER, Manning DW. Multimodal pain management in total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized controlled trial. J Arthoplasty. 2014;29(2):329-334. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2013.06.005
13. Golladay GJ, Balch KR, Dalury DF, Satpathy J, Jiranek WA. Oral multimodal analgesia for total joint arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2017;32(9S):S69-S73. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2017.05.002
14. Ardon AE, Clendenen SR, Porter SB, Robards CB, Greengrass RA. Opioid consumption in total knee arthroplasty patients: a retrospective comparison of adductor canal and femoral nerve continuous infusions in the presence of a sciatic nerve catheter. J Clin Anesth. 2016;31:19-26. doi:10.1016/j.jclinane.2015.12.014
15. Li D, Ma GG. Analgesic efficacy and quadriceps strength of adductor canal block versus femoral nerve block following total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2016;24(8):2614-2619. doi:10.1007/s00167-015-3874-3
16. Li D, Yang Z, Xie X, Zhao J, Kang P. Adductor canal block provides better performance after total knee arthroplasty compared with femoral nerve block: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Orthop. 2016;40(5):925-933. doi:10.1007/s00264-015-2998-x
17. Horner G, Dellon AL. Innervation of the human knee joint and implications for surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994;(301):221-226.
18. Kim DH, Lin Y, Goytizolo EA, et al. Adductor canal block versus femoral nerve block for total knee arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Anesthesiology. 2014;120(3):540-550. doi:10.1097/ALN.0000000000000119
19. Thacher RR, Hickernell TR, Grosso MJ, et al. Decreased risk of knee buckling with adductor canal block versus femoral nerve block in total knee arthroplasty: a retrospective cohort study. Arthroplasty Today. 2017;3(4):281-285. Published 2017 Apr 15. doi:10.1016/j.artd.2017.02.008
20. Von Korff M, Saunders K, Thomas Ray G, et al. De facto long-term opioid therapy for noncancer pain [published correction appears in Clin J Pain. 2014 Sep;30(9):830. Korff, Michael Von [corrected to Von Korff, Michael]]. Clin J Pain. 2008;24(6):521-527. doi:10.1097/AJP.0b013e318169d03b
21. Kishner S. Opioid equivalents and conversions: overview. Published January 29, 2018. Accessed November 12, 2021. https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/2138678 -overview#a1
22. Ruscio J, Mullen T. Confidence intervals for the probability of superiority effect size measure and the area under a receiver operating characteristic curve. Multivariate Behav Res. 2012;47(2):201-223. doi:10.1080/00273171.2012.658329
23. Cozowicz C, Olson A, Poeran J, et al. Opioid prescription levels and postoperative outcomes in orthopedic orthopedic surgery. Pain. 2017;158(12):2422-2430. doi:10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001047
24. Brat GA, Agniel D, Beam A, et al. Postsurgical prescriptions for opioid naive patients and association with overdose and misuse: retrospective cohort study. BMJ. 2018;360:j5790. Published 2018 Jan 17. doi:10.1136/bmj.j5790
25. Tegeder I, Lötsch J, Geisslinger G. Pharmacokinetics of opioids in liver disease. Clin Pharmacokinet. 1999;37(1):17- 40. doi:10.2165/00003088-199937010-00002
26. Linnebur SA, O’Connell MB, Wessell AM, et al. Pharmacy practice, research, education, and advocacy for older adults. Pharmacotherapy. 2005;25(10):1396-1430. doi:10.1592/phco.2005.25.10.1396
27. Lamplot JD, Wagner ER, Manning DW. Multimodal pain management in total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized controlled trial. J Arthroplasty. 2014;29(2):329- 334. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2013.06.005
28. Aubrun F, Nouette-Gaulain K, Fletcher D, et al. Revision of expert panel’s guidelines on postoperative pain management. Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med. 2019;38(4):405-411. doi:10.1016/j.accpm.2019.02.011
29. Han C, Li XD, Jiang HQ, Ma JX, Ma XL. The use of gabapentin in the management of postoperative pain after total knee arthroplasty: A PRISMA-compliant metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials [published correction appears in Medicine (Baltimore). 2016 Jul 18;95(28):e0916]. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016;95(23):e3883. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000003883
30. McLawhorn AS, Fu MC, Schairer WW, Sculco PK, MacLean CH, Padgett DE. Continued inpatient care after primary total knee arthroplasty increases 30-day postdischarge complications: a propensity score-adjusted analysis. J Arthroplasty. 2017;32(9S):S113-S118. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2017.01.039
31. Pelt CE, Gililland JM, Erickson JA, Trimble DE, Anderson MB, Peters CL. Improving value in total joint arthroplasty: a comprehensive patient education and management program decreases discharge to post-acute care facilities and post-operative complications. J Arthroplasty. 2018;33(1):14-18. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2017.08.003
32. Padgett DE, Christ AB, Joseph AD, Lee YY, Haas SB, Lyman S. Discharge to inpatient rehab does not result in improved functional outcomes following primary total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2018;33(6):1663-1667. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2017.12.033
33. Lavernia CJ, D’Apuzzo MR, Hernandez VH, Lee DJ, Rossi MD. Postdischarge costs in arthroplasty surgery. J Arthroplasty. 2006;21(6 Suppl 2):144-150. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2006.05.003
Ease of access to opioids in the perioperative period is a risk factor for opioid misuse and has been identified as a strong risk factor for heroin use.1,2 Three-quarters of today’s heroin users were introduced to opioids through prescription medications.2 The United States accounts for about 80% of the global opioid supply consumption, and deaths from opioid overdose are increasing: 70,630 deaths in 2019 alone.3,4
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has called for changes in opioid prescribing. The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) also has published an information statement with strategies to decrease opioid misuse and abuse.5,6 Arthroplasty surgeons have recently focused on decreasing use of opioids in total knee arthroplasty (TKA), a procedure traditionally associated with high levels of opioid consumption and historical reliance on opioid monotherapy for postoperative analgesia.7,8 From a clinical perspective, prolonged postoperative opioid use contributes to poorer surgical outcomes due to increased risk of complications, including stiffness, infection, and revision TKA.9
Multimodal pain regimens are increasingly being used to control postoperative pain as data supports their efficacy.10,11 Previous studies have found that simultaneous modulation of multiple pain pathways decreases narcotics consumption and improves patient outcomes.12,13 Along with other adjuvant therapies, peripheral nerve blocks, such as adductor canal block (ACB) and femoral nerve block (FNB), have been used to decrease postoperative pain.14 Studies have shown that ACB has fewer complications and shorter functional recovery times compared with FNB.15,16 The distribution of the ACB excludes the femoral nerve, thus preserving greater quadriceps strength while providing equivalent levels of analgesia compared with FNB.15,17,18 The ACB has shown decreased near-fall events and improved balance scores in the immediate postoperative period.19
Our study analyzed opioid consumption patterns of TKA patients from a US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical center before and after the institution of a multimodal analgesic protocol using ACB. The primary purpose of this study was to determine whether a protocol that included intraoperative spinal anesthesia with a postoperative multimodal analgesic regimen and ACB was associated with a decreased postoperative opioid requirement when compared with patients who received intraoperative general anesthesia and a traditional opioid regimen. Secondary outcomes included the effect of opioid consumption on range of motion on postoperative day (POD) 1 and number of opioid prescriptions written at the first postoperative clinic visit.
Methods
Approval for the study was obtained from the institutional review board at the Dayton Veterans Affairs Medical Center (DVAMC) in Ohio. A retrospective chart review was performed to collect data from all patients undergoing TKA at DVAMC from June 1, 2011, through December 31, 2015. Exclusion criteria included multiple surgeries in the study time frame, documented chronic pain, allergy to local anesthetics, daily preoperative use of opioids, and incomplete data in the health record.
All surgeries were performed by 2 staff arthroplasty surgeons at a single VAMC. All patients attended a preoperative visit where a history, physical, and anesthesia evaluation were performed, and watched an educational video detailing surgical indications and postoperative rehabilitation. All surgeries were performed with tourniquets and a periarticular injection was performed at the conclusion of each case. Surgeon 1 treatment of choice was 10 mL 0.5% bupivacaine, whereas surgeon 2 performed a posterior capsular injection of 30 mL 0.25% bupivacaine and a periarticular injection of 30 mg ketorolac in 10 mL 0.25% bupivacaine with epinephrine.
Prior to August 2014, general endotracheal anesthesia was used intraoperatively. A patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) pump of morphine or hydromorphone and additional oral oxycodone or hydrocodone was used for postoperative pain. PCA pumps were patient dependent. In the control group, 245 patients received the morphine PCA while 61 received the hydromorphone PCA. Morphine PCA dosing consisted of 1-mg doses every 10 minutes with potential baseline infusion rates of 0.5 to 1.0 mg/h and a 4-hour limit of 20 mg. Hydromorphone PCA dosing consisted of 0.2 to 0.4-mg doses with a potential continuous dose of 0.2 to 0.4 mg/h and a 4-hour limit of 4 mg.
In August 2014, a new analgesic protocol was adopted for TKA consisting of intraoperative spinal anesthesia (0.75% bupivacaine) with IV sedation (propofol), a postoperative multimodal analgesic regimen, an ACB performed in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU), and opioids as needed (protocol group). The ACB catheter was a 0.5% ropivo caine hydrochloride injection. It was attached to a local anesthetic fixed flow rate pump that administers 0.5% ropivacaine without epinephrine at 8 mL/h and was removed on POD 5 by the patient. The multimodal medication regimen included IV ketorolac 15 mg every 6 hours for 3 doses, gabapentin 300 mg every 8 hours, acetaminophen 975 mg every 8 hours, meloxicam 7.5 mg daily, tramadol 50 mg every 6 hours, oxycodone 5 mg 1 to 2 tabs every 4 hours as needed, and IV hydromorphone 0.5 mg every 4 hours as needed for breakthrough pain.
Preoperative demographic characteristics were collected (Table 1). Data on all IV and oral opioid requirements were collected for both groups, converted to morphine milligram equivalents (MME), and a total morphine equivalent dose (MED) was calculated.20,21
In April 2015, a separate protocol change occurred at the DVAMC with the goal of discharge on POD 1. To standardize outcomes before and after this change, data collection regarding opioid requirements was concluded at midnight on POD 1. If a patient was discharged before midnight on POD 1, opioid requirement through the time of discharge was collected. All surgeries were performed in the morning to early afternoon; however, specific surgical times were not collected. Patients were also evaluated by a physical therapist on POD 0, and maximal knee flexion and extension were measured on POD 1. Patients were discharged with prescriptions for oxycodone/acetaminophen and tramadol and were seen 3 weeks later for their first postoperative visit. Opioid refills at the first postoperative visit were recorded. All statistical analyses were performed in SAS 9.4 with significance set to α = 0.05. Between-groups differences in preoperative and perioperative characteristics as well as postoperative outcomes were analyzed using independent samples t tests for continuous variables and Fisher exact tests for dichotomous discrete variables. Where groups differed for a pre- or perioperative variable, linear mixed models analysis was used to determine whether IV, oral, and total MEDs were significantly affected by the interaction between the pre- or perioperative variable with analgesia group. For refills at the postoperative visit, the effects of pre- or perioperative differences were tested using χ2 tests. Effect sizes for outcome variables were estimated using Cohen d and probability of superiority (Δ) for continuous variables, and relative risk (RR) in the case of discrete variables.22
Results
During the study period from June 1, 2011, through December 31, 2015, 533 eligible TKAs were performed, 306 in the control group and 227 in the protocol group. The groups had similar sex distribution; body mass index; knee range of motion; diagnoses of diabetes mellitus, coronary artery disease, and chronic kidney disease; and history of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (P ≥ .05). The protocol group was significantly older (P = .04) and had a significantly higher rate of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (P = .002). There were no significant differences between number of procedures performed by surgeon (P = .48) or total tourniquet time (P = .13) (Table 2). Mean (SD) length of stay was significantly greater in the control group compared with the protocol group (2.5 [1.3] vs 1.4 [0.7] days, P < .001).
Figure 1 shows the distributions of each type of opioid used. Compared with the control group, the protocol group had a significantly lower mean (SD) IV opioid use: 178.2 (98.0) MED vs 12.0 (24.6) MED (P < .001; d = 2.19; Δ = 0.94) and mean (SD) total opioid use: 241.7 (120.1) MED vs 74.8 (42.7) MED (P < .001; d = 1.76; Δ = 0.89). Mean (SD) oral opioid use did not differ between groups (control, 63.6 [45.4] MED; protocol, 62.9 [31.4] MED; P = .85; d = 0.02; Δ = 0.51). A significantly lower percentage of patients in the protocol group received additional opioids at the 3-week follow-up when compared to the control group: 46.7% vs 61.3%, respectively (P < .001; RR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.65-0.90).
There were no significant differences in postoperative mean (SD) maximum knee flexion (control, 67.2 [15.7]°; protocol, 67.8 [19.2]°; P = .72; d = 0.03; Δ = 0.51) or mean (SD) total flexion/extension arc (control, 66.2 [15.9]°; protocol, 67.9 [19.4]°; P = .32; d = 0.10; Δ = 0.53). Mean (SD) postoperative maximum knee extension was significantly higher in the protocol group compared with the control group (-0.1 [2.1]° vs 1.0 [3.7]°; P < .001; d = 0.35; Δ = 0.60). More patients in the protocol group (92.5%) were discharged to home compared with the control group (86.6%) (P = .02; RR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.01-1.13).
Because age and rates of COPD differed between groups, sensitivity analyses were conducted to determine whether these variables influenced postoperative opioid use. The relationship between age and group was significant for IV (P < .001) and total opioid use (P < .001). Younger patients received higher MED doses than older patients within the control group, while dosages were fairly consistent regardless of age in the protocol group (Figure 2). There was no significance in age interaction effect with regard to oral opioids (P = .83) nor opioid refills at 3-week follow-up (P = .24).
The sensitivity analysis for COPD found that a diagnosis of COPD did not significantly influence utilization of IV opioids (P = .10), or total opioids (P = .68). There was a significant interaction effect for oral opioids (Figure 3). Patients in the control group with COPD required significantly higher mean (SD) oral opioids than patients without COPD (91.5 [123.9] MED and 62.0 [36.0] MED, respectively; P = .03). In the control group, the χ2 test was significant regarding opioid prescription refills at the 3-week visit (P = .004) with 62.4% of patients with COPD requiring refills vs 44.4% without COPD (P = .004). There was no difference in refills in the protocol group (46.4% vs 48.4%).
Finally, 2-sided independent samples t test evaluated total MED use between the 2 surgeons. There was no difference in total MED per patient for the surgeons. In the control group, mean (SD) total MED for surgeon 1 was 232.9 (118.7) MED vs 252.8 (121.5) MED for surgeon 2 (P = .18). In the protocol group, the mean (SD) total MED was 72.5 (43.2) and 77.4 (42.1) for surgeon 1 and surgeon 2, respectively (P = .39).
Discussion
Coordinated efforts with major medical organizations are being made to decrease opioid prescriptions and exposure.5,6 To our knowledge, no study has quantified a decrease in opioid requirement in a VA population after implementation of a protocol that includes intraoperative spinal anesthesia and a postoperative multimodal analgesic regimen including ACB after TKA. The analgesic protocol described in this study aligns with recommendations from both the CDC and the AAOS to decrease opioid use and misuse by maximizing nonopioid medications and limiting the size and number of opioid prescriptions. However, public and medical opinion of opioids as well as prescribing practices have changed over time with a trend toward lower opioid use. The interventions, as part of the described protocol, are a result of these changes and attempt to minimize opioid use while maximizing postoperative analgesia.
Our data showed a significant decrease in total opioid use through POD 1, IV opioid use, and opioid prescriptions provided at the first postoperative visit. The protocol group used only 6.7% of the IV opioids and 30.9% of the total opioids that were used by the control group. The substantial difference in IV opioid requirement, 166.2 MED, is equivalent to 8 mg of IV hydromorphone or 55 mg of IV morphine. The difference in total opioid requirement was similar at 166.9 MED, equivalent to 111 mg of oral oxycodone.
Decreasing opioid use has the additional benefit of improving outcomes, as higher doses of opioids have been associated with increased length of stay, greater rates of DVT, and postoperative infection.23 These complications occurred in a stepwise manner, suggesting a dose-response gradient that makes the sizable decrease noted in our data of greater relevance.23 While the adverse effects (AEs) of opioids are well known, there are limited data on opioid dosing and its effect on perioperative outcomes.23
A significant decrease in the percentage of patients receiving an opioid prescription at the first postoperative visit suggests a decrease in the number of patients on prolonged opioids after TKA with implementation of modern analgesic modalities. The duration of postoperative opioid use has been found to be the strongest predictor of misuse, and each postoperative refill increases the probability of misuse by 44%.24 In addition, opioid use for > 3 months after TKA is associated with increased risk of periprosthetic infection, increased overall revision rate, and stiffness at 1 year postoperatively.9 While not entirely under the control of the surgeon, measures to decrease the number of postoperative opioid refills may lead to a decrease in opioid misuse.
In the control group, older patients tended to receive less opioids. This is likely due to physiologic changes in opioid metabolism associated with aging, including decreased renal and hepatic opioid metabolism and alterations in overall body composition that increase relative potency and duration of action of opioids in a geriatric population.25,26 No difference in opioid use by age was found for the protocol group.
Patients in the protocol group demonstrated significantly greater maximal knee extension on POD 1 compared with the control group. No difference in maximal flexion was found. This difference in extension may partially be explained by the use of an ACB. One benefit of ACB is greater quadriceps strength and fewer near-fall events when compared with FNB.15,19
Our results corroborate the findings of similar studies. A randomized controlled trial comparing a multimodal analgesic regimen with a periarticular injection without a postoperative ACB to a hydromorphone PCA revealed a significant decrease in opioid use in the multimodal analgesic group.27 Along with lower opioid requirements, the multimodal analgesic group had lower visual analog scale pain scores, fewer AEs, faster progression to physical therapy milestones, and higher satisfaction.27 Recent guidelines from the French Society of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine recommend against the use of gabapentin as a method of postoperative pain control. However, this specifically refers to the preoperative administration of gabapentin. This same set of guidelines later cites a high level of evidence suggesting patients undergoing arthroplasty benefit more from gabapentinoids.28 Multiple analgesic protocols that include gabapentin as a part of a multimodal approach have been shown to have positive results.13,29
In our study, patients receiving the multimodal analgesic regimen were significantly more likely to be discharged home rather than to postacute care facilities, which have been associated with increased rates of major complications, 30-day readmission, and 30-day reoperation.30,31 In addition, discharge to an inpatient rehabilitation or skilled nursing facility has not been found to result in higher functional outcomes, despite $3.2 billion spent yearly on rehabilitation services after primary TKA.32,33
A component of our described analgesic protocol included spinal anesthesia intraoperatively. The differences between groups regarding anesthesia type can be attributed to this protocol change. A significantly greater percentage of patients in the protocol group received spinal anesthesia, while more patients in the control group received general anesthesia. While patients who received spinal anesthesia may have enhanced analgesia in the immediate postoperative period, no differences in opioid outcomes were seen based on anesthesia type. Known benefits of intraoperative spinal anesthesia include decreased perioperative blood loss and a smaller decrease in hemoglobin postoperatively, as well as lower rates of in-hospital complications, including pulmonary embolism, pneumonia, cerebrovascular events, and acute renal failure.34
Limitations
A number of limitations of this study should be noted. One was a protocol change regarding length of stay, which occurred during the study period and resulted in a significantly shorter length of stay in the protocol group. As a result, opioid use data were analyzed only through midnight at the end of POD 1. Patients who were discharged on POD 1 did not have opioid use data available for the full duration of the first POD, which may exaggerate the decrease in opioid requirements, as opioids used after discharge but prior to midnight on POD 1 were not recorded. However, opioids taken at home are oral with a low MME compared with IV opioids received by hospitalized patients in the control group. In addition, if taken as prescribed, patients at home would only have enough time to take a few doses of opioids prior to the midnight cutoff. We do not believe this difference in time of opioid use meaningfully affected the data. An additional limitation includes the variability between periarticular injections between surgeons. While the percentage of patients that received injections from surgeon 1 vs surgeon 2 were similar, it cannot be ruled out as a potential confounding factor. Other limitations include a lack of pain scores to compare subjective pain ratings, the retrospective nature of the study, and a largely homogenous male VA population.
Conclusions
Ease of access to opioids is a risk factor for opioid abuse, which itself is a risk factor for subsequent heroin use.1,2 The CDC and AAOS have thus published recommendations regarding opioid prescribing practices to decrease opioid use and abuse.5,6 Our described protocol, which aligns with these recommendations, resulted in a significant decrease in IV opioid requirement, total opioid requirement, and lower rates of opioid prescriptions provided at the first postoperative visit. These promising findings demonstrate a lower percentage of patients on long-term opioids after TKA and a significantly decreased cumulative opioid exposure.
Ease of access to opioids in the perioperative period is a risk factor for opioid misuse and has been identified as a strong risk factor for heroin use.1,2 Three-quarters of today’s heroin users were introduced to opioids through prescription medications.2 The United States accounts for about 80% of the global opioid supply consumption, and deaths from opioid overdose are increasing: 70,630 deaths in 2019 alone.3,4
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has called for changes in opioid prescribing. The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) also has published an information statement with strategies to decrease opioid misuse and abuse.5,6 Arthroplasty surgeons have recently focused on decreasing use of opioids in total knee arthroplasty (TKA), a procedure traditionally associated with high levels of opioid consumption and historical reliance on opioid monotherapy for postoperative analgesia.7,8 From a clinical perspective, prolonged postoperative opioid use contributes to poorer surgical outcomes due to increased risk of complications, including stiffness, infection, and revision TKA.9
Multimodal pain regimens are increasingly being used to control postoperative pain as data supports their efficacy.10,11 Previous studies have found that simultaneous modulation of multiple pain pathways decreases narcotics consumption and improves patient outcomes.12,13 Along with other adjuvant therapies, peripheral nerve blocks, such as adductor canal block (ACB) and femoral nerve block (FNB), have been used to decrease postoperative pain.14 Studies have shown that ACB has fewer complications and shorter functional recovery times compared with FNB.15,16 The distribution of the ACB excludes the femoral nerve, thus preserving greater quadriceps strength while providing equivalent levels of analgesia compared with FNB.15,17,18 The ACB has shown decreased near-fall events and improved balance scores in the immediate postoperative period.19
Our study analyzed opioid consumption patterns of TKA patients from a US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical center before and after the institution of a multimodal analgesic protocol using ACB. The primary purpose of this study was to determine whether a protocol that included intraoperative spinal anesthesia with a postoperative multimodal analgesic regimen and ACB was associated with a decreased postoperative opioid requirement when compared with patients who received intraoperative general anesthesia and a traditional opioid regimen. Secondary outcomes included the effect of opioid consumption on range of motion on postoperative day (POD) 1 and number of opioid prescriptions written at the first postoperative clinic visit.
Methods
Approval for the study was obtained from the institutional review board at the Dayton Veterans Affairs Medical Center (DVAMC) in Ohio. A retrospective chart review was performed to collect data from all patients undergoing TKA at DVAMC from June 1, 2011, through December 31, 2015. Exclusion criteria included multiple surgeries in the study time frame, documented chronic pain, allergy to local anesthetics, daily preoperative use of opioids, and incomplete data in the health record.
All surgeries were performed by 2 staff arthroplasty surgeons at a single VAMC. All patients attended a preoperative visit where a history, physical, and anesthesia evaluation were performed, and watched an educational video detailing surgical indications and postoperative rehabilitation. All surgeries were performed with tourniquets and a periarticular injection was performed at the conclusion of each case. Surgeon 1 treatment of choice was 10 mL 0.5% bupivacaine, whereas surgeon 2 performed a posterior capsular injection of 30 mL 0.25% bupivacaine and a periarticular injection of 30 mg ketorolac in 10 mL 0.25% bupivacaine with epinephrine.
Prior to August 2014, general endotracheal anesthesia was used intraoperatively. A patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) pump of morphine or hydromorphone and additional oral oxycodone or hydrocodone was used for postoperative pain. PCA pumps were patient dependent. In the control group, 245 patients received the morphine PCA while 61 received the hydromorphone PCA. Morphine PCA dosing consisted of 1-mg doses every 10 minutes with potential baseline infusion rates of 0.5 to 1.0 mg/h and a 4-hour limit of 20 mg. Hydromorphone PCA dosing consisted of 0.2 to 0.4-mg doses with a potential continuous dose of 0.2 to 0.4 mg/h and a 4-hour limit of 4 mg.
In August 2014, a new analgesic protocol was adopted for TKA consisting of intraoperative spinal anesthesia (0.75% bupivacaine) with IV sedation (propofol), a postoperative multimodal analgesic regimen, an ACB performed in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU), and opioids as needed (protocol group). The ACB catheter was a 0.5% ropivo caine hydrochloride injection. It was attached to a local anesthetic fixed flow rate pump that administers 0.5% ropivacaine without epinephrine at 8 mL/h and was removed on POD 5 by the patient. The multimodal medication regimen included IV ketorolac 15 mg every 6 hours for 3 doses, gabapentin 300 mg every 8 hours, acetaminophen 975 mg every 8 hours, meloxicam 7.5 mg daily, tramadol 50 mg every 6 hours, oxycodone 5 mg 1 to 2 tabs every 4 hours as needed, and IV hydromorphone 0.5 mg every 4 hours as needed for breakthrough pain.
Preoperative demographic characteristics were collected (Table 1). Data on all IV and oral opioid requirements were collected for both groups, converted to morphine milligram equivalents (MME), and a total morphine equivalent dose (MED) was calculated.20,21
In April 2015, a separate protocol change occurred at the DVAMC with the goal of discharge on POD 1. To standardize outcomes before and after this change, data collection regarding opioid requirements was concluded at midnight on POD 1. If a patient was discharged before midnight on POD 1, opioid requirement through the time of discharge was collected. All surgeries were performed in the morning to early afternoon; however, specific surgical times were not collected. Patients were also evaluated by a physical therapist on POD 0, and maximal knee flexion and extension were measured on POD 1. Patients were discharged with prescriptions for oxycodone/acetaminophen and tramadol and were seen 3 weeks later for their first postoperative visit. Opioid refills at the first postoperative visit were recorded. All statistical analyses were performed in SAS 9.4 with significance set to α = 0.05. Between-groups differences in preoperative and perioperative characteristics as well as postoperative outcomes were analyzed using independent samples t tests for continuous variables and Fisher exact tests for dichotomous discrete variables. Where groups differed for a pre- or perioperative variable, linear mixed models analysis was used to determine whether IV, oral, and total MEDs were significantly affected by the interaction between the pre- or perioperative variable with analgesia group. For refills at the postoperative visit, the effects of pre- or perioperative differences were tested using χ2 tests. Effect sizes for outcome variables were estimated using Cohen d and probability of superiority (Δ) for continuous variables, and relative risk (RR) in the case of discrete variables.22
Results
During the study period from June 1, 2011, through December 31, 2015, 533 eligible TKAs were performed, 306 in the control group and 227 in the protocol group. The groups had similar sex distribution; body mass index; knee range of motion; diagnoses of diabetes mellitus, coronary artery disease, and chronic kidney disease; and history of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (P ≥ .05). The protocol group was significantly older (P = .04) and had a significantly higher rate of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (P = .002). There were no significant differences between number of procedures performed by surgeon (P = .48) or total tourniquet time (P = .13) (Table 2). Mean (SD) length of stay was significantly greater in the control group compared with the protocol group (2.5 [1.3] vs 1.4 [0.7] days, P < .001).
Figure 1 shows the distributions of each type of opioid used. Compared with the control group, the protocol group had a significantly lower mean (SD) IV opioid use: 178.2 (98.0) MED vs 12.0 (24.6) MED (P < .001; d = 2.19; Δ = 0.94) and mean (SD) total opioid use: 241.7 (120.1) MED vs 74.8 (42.7) MED (P < .001; d = 1.76; Δ = 0.89). Mean (SD) oral opioid use did not differ between groups (control, 63.6 [45.4] MED; protocol, 62.9 [31.4] MED; P = .85; d = 0.02; Δ = 0.51). A significantly lower percentage of patients in the protocol group received additional opioids at the 3-week follow-up when compared to the control group: 46.7% vs 61.3%, respectively (P < .001; RR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.65-0.90).
There were no significant differences in postoperative mean (SD) maximum knee flexion (control, 67.2 [15.7]°; protocol, 67.8 [19.2]°; P = .72; d = 0.03; Δ = 0.51) or mean (SD) total flexion/extension arc (control, 66.2 [15.9]°; protocol, 67.9 [19.4]°; P = .32; d = 0.10; Δ = 0.53). Mean (SD) postoperative maximum knee extension was significantly higher in the protocol group compared with the control group (-0.1 [2.1]° vs 1.0 [3.7]°; P < .001; d = 0.35; Δ = 0.60). More patients in the protocol group (92.5%) were discharged to home compared with the control group (86.6%) (P = .02; RR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.01-1.13).
Because age and rates of COPD differed between groups, sensitivity analyses were conducted to determine whether these variables influenced postoperative opioid use. The relationship between age and group was significant for IV (P < .001) and total opioid use (P < .001). Younger patients received higher MED doses than older patients within the control group, while dosages were fairly consistent regardless of age in the protocol group (Figure 2). There was no significance in age interaction effect with regard to oral opioids (P = .83) nor opioid refills at 3-week follow-up (P = .24).
The sensitivity analysis for COPD found that a diagnosis of COPD did not significantly influence utilization of IV opioids (P = .10), or total opioids (P = .68). There was a significant interaction effect for oral opioids (Figure 3). Patients in the control group with COPD required significantly higher mean (SD) oral opioids than patients without COPD (91.5 [123.9] MED and 62.0 [36.0] MED, respectively; P = .03). In the control group, the χ2 test was significant regarding opioid prescription refills at the 3-week visit (P = .004) with 62.4% of patients with COPD requiring refills vs 44.4% without COPD (P = .004). There was no difference in refills in the protocol group (46.4% vs 48.4%).
Finally, 2-sided independent samples t test evaluated total MED use between the 2 surgeons. There was no difference in total MED per patient for the surgeons. In the control group, mean (SD) total MED for surgeon 1 was 232.9 (118.7) MED vs 252.8 (121.5) MED for surgeon 2 (P = .18). In the protocol group, the mean (SD) total MED was 72.5 (43.2) and 77.4 (42.1) for surgeon 1 and surgeon 2, respectively (P = .39).
Discussion
Coordinated efforts with major medical organizations are being made to decrease opioid prescriptions and exposure.5,6 To our knowledge, no study has quantified a decrease in opioid requirement in a VA population after implementation of a protocol that includes intraoperative spinal anesthesia and a postoperative multimodal analgesic regimen including ACB after TKA. The analgesic protocol described in this study aligns with recommendations from both the CDC and the AAOS to decrease opioid use and misuse by maximizing nonopioid medications and limiting the size and number of opioid prescriptions. However, public and medical opinion of opioids as well as prescribing practices have changed over time with a trend toward lower opioid use. The interventions, as part of the described protocol, are a result of these changes and attempt to minimize opioid use while maximizing postoperative analgesia.
Our data showed a significant decrease in total opioid use through POD 1, IV opioid use, and opioid prescriptions provided at the first postoperative visit. The protocol group used only 6.7% of the IV opioids and 30.9% of the total opioids that were used by the control group. The substantial difference in IV opioid requirement, 166.2 MED, is equivalent to 8 mg of IV hydromorphone or 55 mg of IV morphine. The difference in total opioid requirement was similar at 166.9 MED, equivalent to 111 mg of oral oxycodone.
Decreasing opioid use has the additional benefit of improving outcomes, as higher doses of opioids have been associated with increased length of stay, greater rates of DVT, and postoperative infection.23 These complications occurred in a stepwise manner, suggesting a dose-response gradient that makes the sizable decrease noted in our data of greater relevance.23 While the adverse effects (AEs) of opioids are well known, there are limited data on opioid dosing and its effect on perioperative outcomes.23
A significant decrease in the percentage of patients receiving an opioid prescription at the first postoperative visit suggests a decrease in the number of patients on prolonged opioids after TKA with implementation of modern analgesic modalities. The duration of postoperative opioid use has been found to be the strongest predictor of misuse, and each postoperative refill increases the probability of misuse by 44%.24 In addition, opioid use for > 3 months after TKA is associated with increased risk of periprosthetic infection, increased overall revision rate, and stiffness at 1 year postoperatively.9 While not entirely under the control of the surgeon, measures to decrease the number of postoperative opioid refills may lead to a decrease in opioid misuse.
In the control group, older patients tended to receive less opioids. This is likely due to physiologic changes in opioid metabolism associated with aging, including decreased renal and hepatic opioid metabolism and alterations in overall body composition that increase relative potency and duration of action of opioids in a geriatric population.25,26 No difference in opioid use by age was found for the protocol group.
Patients in the protocol group demonstrated significantly greater maximal knee extension on POD 1 compared with the control group. No difference in maximal flexion was found. This difference in extension may partially be explained by the use of an ACB. One benefit of ACB is greater quadriceps strength and fewer near-fall events when compared with FNB.15,19
Our results corroborate the findings of similar studies. A randomized controlled trial comparing a multimodal analgesic regimen with a periarticular injection without a postoperative ACB to a hydromorphone PCA revealed a significant decrease in opioid use in the multimodal analgesic group.27 Along with lower opioid requirements, the multimodal analgesic group had lower visual analog scale pain scores, fewer AEs, faster progression to physical therapy milestones, and higher satisfaction.27 Recent guidelines from the French Society of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine recommend against the use of gabapentin as a method of postoperative pain control. However, this specifically refers to the preoperative administration of gabapentin. This same set of guidelines later cites a high level of evidence suggesting patients undergoing arthroplasty benefit more from gabapentinoids.28 Multiple analgesic protocols that include gabapentin as a part of a multimodal approach have been shown to have positive results.13,29
In our study, patients receiving the multimodal analgesic regimen were significantly more likely to be discharged home rather than to postacute care facilities, which have been associated with increased rates of major complications, 30-day readmission, and 30-day reoperation.30,31 In addition, discharge to an inpatient rehabilitation or skilled nursing facility has not been found to result in higher functional outcomes, despite $3.2 billion spent yearly on rehabilitation services after primary TKA.32,33
A component of our described analgesic protocol included spinal anesthesia intraoperatively. The differences between groups regarding anesthesia type can be attributed to this protocol change. A significantly greater percentage of patients in the protocol group received spinal anesthesia, while more patients in the control group received general anesthesia. While patients who received spinal anesthesia may have enhanced analgesia in the immediate postoperative period, no differences in opioid outcomes were seen based on anesthesia type. Known benefits of intraoperative spinal anesthesia include decreased perioperative blood loss and a smaller decrease in hemoglobin postoperatively, as well as lower rates of in-hospital complications, including pulmonary embolism, pneumonia, cerebrovascular events, and acute renal failure.34
Limitations
A number of limitations of this study should be noted. One was a protocol change regarding length of stay, which occurred during the study period and resulted in a significantly shorter length of stay in the protocol group. As a result, opioid use data were analyzed only through midnight at the end of POD 1. Patients who were discharged on POD 1 did not have opioid use data available for the full duration of the first POD, which may exaggerate the decrease in opioid requirements, as opioids used after discharge but prior to midnight on POD 1 were not recorded. However, opioids taken at home are oral with a low MME compared with IV opioids received by hospitalized patients in the control group. In addition, if taken as prescribed, patients at home would only have enough time to take a few doses of opioids prior to the midnight cutoff. We do not believe this difference in time of opioid use meaningfully affected the data. An additional limitation includes the variability between periarticular injections between surgeons. While the percentage of patients that received injections from surgeon 1 vs surgeon 2 were similar, it cannot be ruled out as a potential confounding factor. Other limitations include a lack of pain scores to compare subjective pain ratings, the retrospective nature of the study, and a largely homogenous male VA population.
Conclusions
Ease of access to opioids is a risk factor for opioid abuse, which itself is a risk factor for subsequent heroin use.1,2 The CDC and AAOS have thus published recommendations regarding opioid prescribing practices to decrease opioid use and abuse.5,6 Our described protocol, which aligns with these recommendations, resulted in a significant decrease in IV opioid requirement, total opioid requirement, and lower rates of opioid prescriptions provided at the first postoperative visit. These promising findings demonstrate a lower percentage of patients on long-term opioids after TKA and a significantly decreased cumulative opioid exposure.
1. Lankenau SE, Teti M, Silva K, Jackson Bloom J, Harocopos A, Treese M. Initiation into prescription opioid misuse amongst young injection drug users. Int J Drug Policy. 2012;23(1):37-44. doi:10.1016/j.drugpo.2011.05.014
2. Jones CM. Heroin use and heroin use risk behaviors among nonmedical users of prescription opioid pain relievers - United States, 2002-2004 and 2008-2010. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2013;132(1-2):95-100. doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2013.01.007
3. Manchikanti L, Singh A. Therapeutic opioids: a ten-year perspective on the complexities and complications of the escalating use, abuse, and nonmedical use of opioids. Pain Physician. 2008;11(suppl 2):S63-S88.
4. Seth P, Scholl L, Rudd RA, Bacon S. Overdose deaths involving opioids, cocaine, and psychostimulants - United States, 2015-2016. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2018;67(12):349-358. Published 2018 Mar 30. doi:10.15585/mmwr.mm6712a1
5. Dowell D, Haegerich TM, Chou R. CDC Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain-United States, 2016. JAMA. 2016;315(15):1624-1645. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.1464
6. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Information statement: opioid use, misuse, and abuse in orthopaedic practice. Published October 2015. Accessed November 12, 2021. https://aaos.org/globalassets/about /bylaws-library/information-statements/1045-opioid-use -misuse-and-abuse-in-practice.pdf
7. Hernandez NM, Parry JA, Taunton MJ. Patients at risk: large opioid prescriptions after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2017;32(8):2395-2398. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2017.02.060
8. Gerner P, Poeran J, Cozowicz C, Mörwald EE, Zubizarreta N, Mazumdar M, Memtsoudis SG, Multimodal pain management in total hip and knee arthroplasty: trends over the last 10 years. Abstract presented at: American Society of Anesthesiologists Annual Meeting; October 21, 2017; Boston, MA.
9. Cancienne JM, Patel KJ, Browne JA, Werner BC. Narcotic use and total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2018;33(1):113-118. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2017.08.006
10. Moucha CS, Weiser MC, Levin EJ. Current strategies in anesthesia and analgesia for total knee arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2016;24(2):60-73. doi:10.5435/JAAOS-D-14-00259
11. Wick EC, Grant MC, Wu CL. Postoperative multimodal analgesia pain management with nonopioid analgesics and techniques: a review. JAMA Surg. 2017;152(7):691-697.doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2017.0898
12. Lamplot JD, Wagner ER, Manning DW. Multimodal pain management in total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized controlled trial. J Arthoplasty. 2014;29(2):329-334. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2013.06.005
13. Golladay GJ, Balch KR, Dalury DF, Satpathy J, Jiranek WA. Oral multimodal analgesia for total joint arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2017;32(9S):S69-S73. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2017.05.002
14. Ardon AE, Clendenen SR, Porter SB, Robards CB, Greengrass RA. Opioid consumption in total knee arthroplasty patients: a retrospective comparison of adductor canal and femoral nerve continuous infusions in the presence of a sciatic nerve catheter. J Clin Anesth. 2016;31:19-26. doi:10.1016/j.jclinane.2015.12.014
15. Li D, Ma GG. Analgesic efficacy and quadriceps strength of adductor canal block versus femoral nerve block following total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2016;24(8):2614-2619. doi:10.1007/s00167-015-3874-3
16. Li D, Yang Z, Xie X, Zhao J, Kang P. Adductor canal block provides better performance after total knee arthroplasty compared with femoral nerve block: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Orthop. 2016;40(5):925-933. doi:10.1007/s00264-015-2998-x
17. Horner G, Dellon AL. Innervation of the human knee joint and implications for surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994;(301):221-226.
18. Kim DH, Lin Y, Goytizolo EA, et al. Adductor canal block versus femoral nerve block for total knee arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Anesthesiology. 2014;120(3):540-550. doi:10.1097/ALN.0000000000000119
19. Thacher RR, Hickernell TR, Grosso MJ, et al. Decreased risk of knee buckling with adductor canal block versus femoral nerve block in total knee arthroplasty: a retrospective cohort study. Arthroplasty Today. 2017;3(4):281-285. Published 2017 Apr 15. doi:10.1016/j.artd.2017.02.008
20. Von Korff M, Saunders K, Thomas Ray G, et al. De facto long-term opioid therapy for noncancer pain [published correction appears in Clin J Pain. 2014 Sep;30(9):830. Korff, Michael Von [corrected to Von Korff, Michael]]. Clin J Pain. 2008;24(6):521-527. doi:10.1097/AJP.0b013e318169d03b
21. Kishner S. Opioid equivalents and conversions: overview. Published January 29, 2018. Accessed November 12, 2021. https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/2138678 -overview#a1
22. Ruscio J, Mullen T. Confidence intervals for the probability of superiority effect size measure and the area under a receiver operating characteristic curve. Multivariate Behav Res. 2012;47(2):201-223. doi:10.1080/00273171.2012.658329
23. Cozowicz C, Olson A, Poeran J, et al. Opioid prescription levels and postoperative outcomes in orthopedic orthopedic surgery. Pain. 2017;158(12):2422-2430. doi:10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001047
24. Brat GA, Agniel D, Beam A, et al. Postsurgical prescriptions for opioid naive patients and association with overdose and misuse: retrospective cohort study. BMJ. 2018;360:j5790. Published 2018 Jan 17. doi:10.1136/bmj.j5790
25. Tegeder I, Lötsch J, Geisslinger G. Pharmacokinetics of opioids in liver disease. Clin Pharmacokinet. 1999;37(1):17- 40. doi:10.2165/00003088-199937010-00002
26. Linnebur SA, O’Connell MB, Wessell AM, et al. Pharmacy practice, research, education, and advocacy for older adults. Pharmacotherapy. 2005;25(10):1396-1430. doi:10.1592/phco.2005.25.10.1396
27. Lamplot JD, Wagner ER, Manning DW. Multimodal pain management in total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized controlled trial. J Arthroplasty. 2014;29(2):329- 334. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2013.06.005
28. Aubrun F, Nouette-Gaulain K, Fletcher D, et al. Revision of expert panel’s guidelines on postoperative pain management. Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med. 2019;38(4):405-411. doi:10.1016/j.accpm.2019.02.011
29. Han C, Li XD, Jiang HQ, Ma JX, Ma XL. The use of gabapentin in the management of postoperative pain after total knee arthroplasty: A PRISMA-compliant metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials [published correction appears in Medicine (Baltimore). 2016 Jul 18;95(28):e0916]. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016;95(23):e3883. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000003883
30. McLawhorn AS, Fu MC, Schairer WW, Sculco PK, MacLean CH, Padgett DE. Continued inpatient care after primary total knee arthroplasty increases 30-day postdischarge complications: a propensity score-adjusted analysis. J Arthroplasty. 2017;32(9S):S113-S118. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2017.01.039
31. Pelt CE, Gililland JM, Erickson JA, Trimble DE, Anderson MB, Peters CL. Improving value in total joint arthroplasty: a comprehensive patient education and management program decreases discharge to post-acute care facilities and post-operative complications. J Arthroplasty. 2018;33(1):14-18. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2017.08.003
32. Padgett DE, Christ AB, Joseph AD, Lee YY, Haas SB, Lyman S. Discharge to inpatient rehab does not result in improved functional outcomes following primary total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2018;33(6):1663-1667. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2017.12.033
33. Lavernia CJ, D’Apuzzo MR, Hernandez VH, Lee DJ, Rossi MD. Postdischarge costs in arthroplasty surgery. J Arthroplasty. 2006;21(6 Suppl 2):144-150. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2006.05.003
1. Lankenau SE, Teti M, Silva K, Jackson Bloom J, Harocopos A, Treese M. Initiation into prescription opioid misuse amongst young injection drug users. Int J Drug Policy. 2012;23(1):37-44. doi:10.1016/j.drugpo.2011.05.014
2. Jones CM. Heroin use and heroin use risk behaviors among nonmedical users of prescription opioid pain relievers - United States, 2002-2004 and 2008-2010. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2013;132(1-2):95-100. doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2013.01.007
3. Manchikanti L, Singh A. Therapeutic opioids: a ten-year perspective on the complexities and complications of the escalating use, abuse, and nonmedical use of opioids. Pain Physician. 2008;11(suppl 2):S63-S88.
4. Seth P, Scholl L, Rudd RA, Bacon S. Overdose deaths involving opioids, cocaine, and psychostimulants - United States, 2015-2016. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2018;67(12):349-358. Published 2018 Mar 30. doi:10.15585/mmwr.mm6712a1
5. Dowell D, Haegerich TM, Chou R. CDC Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain-United States, 2016. JAMA. 2016;315(15):1624-1645. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.1464
6. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Information statement: opioid use, misuse, and abuse in orthopaedic practice. Published October 2015. Accessed November 12, 2021. https://aaos.org/globalassets/about /bylaws-library/information-statements/1045-opioid-use -misuse-and-abuse-in-practice.pdf
7. Hernandez NM, Parry JA, Taunton MJ. Patients at risk: large opioid prescriptions after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2017;32(8):2395-2398. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2017.02.060
8. Gerner P, Poeran J, Cozowicz C, Mörwald EE, Zubizarreta N, Mazumdar M, Memtsoudis SG, Multimodal pain management in total hip and knee arthroplasty: trends over the last 10 years. Abstract presented at: American Society of Anesthesiologists Annual Meeting; October 21, 2017; Boston, MA.
9. Cancienne JM, Patel KJ, Browne JA, Werner BC. Narcotic use and total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2018;33(1):113-118. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2017.08.006
10. Moucha CS, Weiser MC, Levin EJ. Current strategies in anesthesia and analgesia for total knee arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2016;24(2):60-73. doi:10.5435/JAAOS-D-14-00259
11. Wick EC, Grant MC, Wu CL. Postoperative multimodal analgesia pain management with nonopioid analgesics and techniques: a review. JAMA Surg. 2017;152(7):691-697.doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2017.0898
12. Lamplot JD, Wagner ER, Manning DW. Multimodal pain management in total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized controlled trial. J Arthoplasty. 2014;29(2):329-334. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2013.06.005
13. Golladay GJ, Balch KR, Dalury DF, Satpathy J, Jiranek WA. Oral multimodal analgesia for total joint arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2017;32(9S):S69-S73. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2017.05.002
14. Ardon AE, Clendenen SR, Porter SB, Robards CB, Greengrass RA. Opioid consumption in total knee arthroplasty patients: a retrospective comparison of adductor canal and femoral nerve continuous infusions in the presence of a sciatic nerve catheter. J Clin Anesth. 2016;31:19-26. doi:10.1016/j.jclinane.2015.12.014
15. Li D, Ma GG. Analgesic efficacy and quadriceps strength of adductor canal block versus femoral nerve block following total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2016;24(8):2614-2619. doi:10.1007/s00167-015-3874-3
16. Li D, Yang Z, Xie X, Zhao J, Kang P. Adductor canal block provides better performance after total knee arthroplasty compared with femoral nerve block: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Orthop. 2016;40(5):925-933. doi:10.1007/s00264-015-2998-x
17. Horner G, Dellon AL. Innervation of the human knee joint and implications for surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994;(301):221-226.
18. Kim DH, Lin Y, Goytizolo EA, et al. Adductor canal block versus femoral nerve block for total knee arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Anesthesiology. 2014;120(3):540-550. doi:10.1097/ALN.0000000000000119
19. Thacher RR, Hickernell TR, Grosso MJ, et al. Decreased risk of knee buckling with adductor canal block versus femoral nerve block in total knee arthroplasty: a retrospective cohort study. Arthroplasty Today. 2017;3(4):281-285. Published 2017 Apr 15. doi:10.1016/j.artd.2017.02.008
20. Von Korff M, Saunders K, Thomas Ray G, et al. De facto long-term opioid therapy for noncancer pain [published correction appears in Clin J Pain. 2014 Sep;30(9):830. Korff, Michael Von [corrected to Von Korff, Michael]]. Clin J Pain. 2008;24(6):521-527. doi:10.1097/AJP.0b013e318169d03b
21. Kishner S. Opioid equivalents and conversions: overview. Published January 29, 2018. Accessed November 12, 2021. https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/2138678 -overview#a1
22. Ruscio J, Mullen T. Confidence intervals for the probability of superiority effect size measure and the area under a receiver operating characteristic curve. Multivariate Behav Res. 2012;47(2):201-223. doi:10.1080/00273171.2012.658329
23. Cozowicz C, Olson A, Poeran J, et al. Opioid prescription levels and postoperative outcomes in orthopedic orthopedic surgery. Pain. 2017;158(12):2422-2430. doi:10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001047
24. Brat GA, Agniel D, Beam A, et al. Postsurgical prescriptions for opioid naive patients and association with overdose and misuse: retrospective cohort study. BMJ. 2018;360:j5790. Published 2018 Jan 17. doi:10.1136/bmj.j5790
25. Tegeder I, Lötsch J, Geisslinger G. Pharmacokinetics of opioids in liver disease. Clin Pharmacokinet. 1999;37(1):17- 40. doi:10.2165/00003088-199937010-00002
26. Linnebur SA, O’Connell MB, Wessell AM, et al. Pharmacy practice, research, education, and advocacy for older adults. Pharmacotherapy. 2005;25(10):1396-1430. doi:10.1592/phco.2005.25.10.1396
27. Lamplot JD, Wagner ER, Manning DW. Multimodal pain management in total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomized controlled trial. J Arthroplasty. 2014;29(2):329- 334. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2013.06.005
28. Aubrun F, Nouette-Gaulain K, Fletcher D, et al. Revision of expert panel’s guidelines on postoperative pain management. Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med. 2019;38(4):405-411. doi:10.1016/j.accpm.2019.02.011
29. Han C, Li XD, Jiang HQ, Ma JX, Ma XL. The use of gabapentin in the management of postoperative pain after total knee arthroplasty: A PRISMA-compliant metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials [published correction appears in Medicine (Baltimore). 2016 Jul 18;95(28):e0916]. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016;95(23):e3883. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000003883
30. McLawhorn AS, Fu MC, Schairer WW, Sculco PK, MacLean CH, Padgett DE. Continued inpatient care after primary total knee arthroplasty increases 30-day postdischarge complications: a propensity score-adjusted analysis. J Arthroplasty. 2017;32(9S):S113-S118. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2017.01.039
31. Pelt CE, Gililland JM, Erickson JA, Trimble DE, Anderson MB, Peters CL. Improving value in total joint arthroplasty: a comprehensive patient education and management program decreases discharge to post-acute care facilities and post-operative complications. J Arthroplasty. 2018;33(1):14-18. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2017.08.003
32. Padgett DE, Christ AB, Joseph AD, Lee YY, Haas SB, Lyman S. Discharge to inpatient rehab does not result in improved functional outcomes following primary total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2018;33(6):1663-1667. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2017.12.033
33. Lavernia CJ, D’Apuzzo MR, Hernandez VH, Lee DJ, Rossi MD. Postdischarge costs in arthroplasty surgery. J Arthroplasty. 2006;21(6 Suppl 2):144-150. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2006.05.003
The Angel of Death in Clarksburg
Readers of this column may recall that since I have been the Editor-in-Chief of Federal Practitioner, my December editorial focuses on the best and worst of the year in federal medicine. In 2021, these evaluative terms fail to capture the sadness and global devastation that mark this grim epoch of the continuing pandemic, increasing climate disasters, rising political tensions, and racial violence. Thus, this year my editorial is framed in terms of the philosophical or theological categories of good and evil as the only concepts that can even begin to express the horrendous events that occurred in West Virginia.
On June 28, 2018, then US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Executive-in-Charge, Carolyn Clancy, MD, contacted Inspector General Michael Missal to alert him that “there may be an ‘Angel of Death’ in Clarksburg [West Virginia].”1 Two years later Reta Mays, a 46-year-old VA nursing assistant, entered a guilty plea in federal court to the deaths of 7 vulnerable veterans. The legal charges were second-degree murder and 1 count of assault with intent to commit murder by injecting insulin. The victims were all patients on Ward 3 at the Louis A. Johnson VA, Medical Center in Clarksburg, where Mays worked the night shift from 2015 to 2018.2 Mays was sentenced in May of this year to 7 consecutive life terms for each of the veterans whose lives she cruelly ended and an additional 240 months for the eighth patient who survived her murder attempt.3
The term angel of death has religious roots in Judaism, although not strictly in the Hebrew scriptures. Neither the Jewish nor Christian Bible identifies a specific figure who is the angel of death. The idea first appears in Rabbinic literature and Jewish tradition.4 The angel God sends as a messenger of death is known as malakh ha-mavet in Hebrew. The revered Jewish physician and philosopher Moses Maimonides taught in his Guide for the Perplexed the angel of death is synonymous with the devil, and the evil inclination that dwells in the mind of all human beings.5In modern times, the concept of an angel of death has come to designate a serial killer who is a health care professional (HCP). A group of forensic scientists, HCPs, and attorneys, including former VA Under Secretary for Health Dr. Kenneth Kizer, published a study of HCPs who had been prosecuted or convicted of serial murder. Nurses constituted the largest group of offenders (60%) with nursing aides like Mays responsible for 18% of murders, and physicians 12%. The review found that though health care serial killers are rare, they operate in nations across the Western world, in many different states in this country, and in almost all health care settings, including previous VA angels of death.6Nursing aides who are not supposed to have access to medications—a major problem in Mays’ case—nor permitted to administer them more often resort to noncontrolled substances to kill their victims.1 Mays chose insulin as her murder weapon as did 13% of serial killers. Just as insulin may be difficult to detect in toxicology, so Mays and others like her committed their crimes on the night shift when they were less likely to be discovered.6
Many of us feel compelled to seek a rational motivation for why healers would mutate into killers: If we can find a reason for this heinous behavior it somehow helps us feel the world is more intelligible and controllable. Unfortunately, despite intensive forensic investigations of multiple angels of death, there is little definitive understanding of the motives of these murders.6 Mays disclosed more than most. As part of a plea bargain, she provided investigators with 2 rationales for her killing: She wanted to ease the patients’ suffering. Such claims of being an angel of mercy are common among HCP serial murders, which the patterns of the killings generally disprove. The patients Mays lethally injected, while mostly old and ill, were all expected to recover and leave the hospital. The Inspector General report uncovered a cautionary detail that has at least indirect bearing on the nursing assistant’s contention that she “wanted to let the patient’s die gently”: Contrary to VHA requirements, the facility had no functioning palliative care team. This finding in no way excuses or even explains Mays’ actions; it does, however, reinforce the essential value of palliative care expertise in an aging veteran population with many life-limiting conditions.7
Mays’ second motivation seems more plausible, based on her life narrative and the literature on HCP serial killers. Mays disclosed to investigators that she “had a lot of stress and chaos in [her] personal and professional life and these actions gave [her] a sense of control.”1 Her prior use of excessive force when employed at a prison as well as forensic science indicating that feelings of wielding power over life and death often drive health care murders, suggest this may have been a factor in Mays’ horrific conduct.8
It seems blasphemous to associate the word good in the same pages with this terrible evil. Nothing can compensate or justify the betrayal of the sacred oath of an HCP and the public trust of a VHA employee. Yet that very impossibility carries with it an obligation to ask, as did the author of an article about a recent Canadian nurse serial killer, “What can we learn from the [Mays] story?”9
Mays could never have taken the lives of 8 patients without clinical and administrative lapses and shortcuts at all levels of the health care system. Indeed, the 100-plus page Inspector General report makes 15 recommendations for the VHA, the Veterans Integrated Service Network, and the facility, encompassing areas of personnel hiring and performance evaluation, medication management and security, reporting and responding to unexplained events, quality and safety programs oversight, leaders’ responses, corrective actions, and even computer systems data analysis.
I want to suggest 2 ethical additions to this list addressed to all of us as VHA staff and especially to those of us who are HCPs. From the perspective of virtue ethics, Reta Mays is a tragedy about complacency and compromise in everyday work that the pandemic has made even more frequent and challenging to avoid and resist. This is what the Roman Virgil means in the epigraph that the road down to hell is easy and the road back very difficult.
I propose the need for discernment in trying to listen to our moral intuitions that tell us something is amiss and diligence in adhering to best practices even when we are fearful, exhausted, demoralized, or apathetic. These 2 habits of commitment to veterans, one of compassion and the other of competence, can help us follow the good inclinations of our hearts and together with system changes can bar the doors of our hospitals to the visits of future angels of death. This dedication is the least we owe to the families of the patients at Clarksburg whose loved ones never came home and whose questions likely can never be fully answered.
1. US Department of Veterans Affairs, Office of Inspector General. Veterans Health Administration: care and oversight deficiencies related to multiple homicides at the Louis A. Johnson VA Medical Center in Clarksburg, West Virginia. Healthcare Inspection Report #20-035993-140. Published May 11 2021. Accessed November 22, 2021. https://www.va.gov/oig/pubs/VAOIG-20-03593-140.pdf
2. Kennedy M, Schwartz M. Former VA medical worker pleads guilty to murdering 7 patients in West Virginia. Published July 14, 2020. Accessed November 22, 2021. https://www.npr.org/2020/07/14/890776010/former-va-medical-worker-charged-with-7-murders-in-west-virginia
3. US Department of Justice, US Attorney’s Office Northern District of West Virginia. Former VA hospital nursing assistant sentenced to seven consecutive life sentences for murdering seven veterans and assault with intent to commit murder of an eighth [press release]. Published May 11, 2021. Accessed November 22, 2021. https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndwv/pr/former-va-hospital-nursing-assistant-sentenced-seven-consecutive-life-sentences.
4. Jacobs L. The Jewish Religion: A Companion. 1st ed. Oxford University Press;1995:116.
5. Maimonides. Guide for the Perplexed. Frielander M, trans. Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd; 1904:pt 3, chap 22.
6. Yorker BC, Kizer KW, Lampe P, Forrest AR, Lannan JM, Russell DA. Serial murder by healthcare professionals. J Forensic Sci. 2006;51(6):1362-1371. doi:10.1111/j.1556-4029.2006.00273.x
7. VHA Directive 1139. Palliative care consult teams (PCCT) and VISN leads. Published June 14, 2017.
8. Rourke S, Ward T. Healthcare serial killers: patterns and policies. Published August 14, 2017. Accessed November 22, 2021. https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/884136
9. Frank C. Health care serial murder: what can we learn from the Wettlaufer story? Can Fam Physician. 2020;66(10):719-722.
Readers of this column may recall that since I have been the Editor-in-Chief of Federal Practitioner, my December editorial focuses on the best and worst of the year in federal medicine. In 2021, these evaluative terms fail to capture the sadness and global devastation that mark this grim epoch of the continuing pandemic, increasing climate disasters, rising political tensions, and racial violence. Thus, this year my editorial is framed in terms of the philosophical or theological categories of good and evil as the only concepts that can even begin to express the horrendous events that occurred in West Virginia.
On June 28, 2018, then US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Executive-in-Charge, Carolyn Clancy, MD, contacted Inspector General Michael Missal to alert him that “there may be an ‘Angel of Death’ in Clarksburg [West Virginia].”1 Two years later Reta Mays, a 46-year-old VA nursing assistant, entered a guilty plea in federal court to the deaths of 7 vulnerable veterans. The legal charges were second-degree murder and 1 count of assault with intent to commit murder by injecting insulin. The victims were all patients on Ward 3 at the Louis A. Johnson VA, Medical Center in Clarksburg, where Mays worked the night shift from 2015 to 2018.2 Mays was sentenced in May of this year to 7 consecutive life terms for each of the veterans whose lives she cruelly ended and an additional 240 months for the eighth patient who survived her murder attempt.3
The term angel of death has religious roots in Judaism, although not strictly in the Hebrew scriptures. Neither the Jewish nor Christian Bible identifies a specific figure who is the angel of death. The idea first appears in Rabbinic literature and Jewish tradition.4 The angel God sends as a messenger of death is known as malakh ha-mavet in Hebrew. The revered Jewish physician and philosopher Moses Maimonides taught in his Guide for the Perplexed the angel of death is synonymous with the devil, and the evil inclination that dwells in the mind of all human beings.5In modern times, the concept of an angel of death has come to designate a serial killer who is a health care professional (HCP). A group of forensic scientists, HCPs, and attorneys, including former VA Under Secretary for Health Dr. Kenneth Kizer, published a study of HCPs who had been prosecuted or convicted of serial murder. Nurses constituted the largest group of offenders (60%) with nursing aides like Mays responsible for 18% of murders, and physicians 12%. The review found that though health care serial killers are rare, they operate in nations across the Western world, in many different states in this country, and in almost all health care settings, including previous VA angels of death.6Nursing aides who are not supposed to have access to medications—a major problem in Mays’ case—nor permitted to administer them more often resort to noncontrolled substances to kill their victims.1 Mays chose insulin as her murder weapon as did 13% of serial killers. Just as insulin may be difficult to detect in toxicology, so Mays and others like her committed their crimes on the night shift when they were less likely to be discovered.6
Many of us feel compelled to seek a rational motivation for why healers would mutate into killers: If we can find a reason for this heinous behavior it somehow helps us feel the world is more intelligible and controllable. Unfortunately, despite intensive forensic investigations of multiple angels of death, there is little definitive understanding of the motives of these murders.6 Mays disclosed more than most. As part of a plea bargain, she provided investigators with 2 rationales for her killing: She wanted to ease the patients’ suffering. Such claims of being an angel of mercy are common among HCP serial murders, which the patterns of the killings generally disprove. The patients Mays lethally injected, while mostly old and ill, were all expected to recover and leave the hospital. The Inspector General report uncovered a cautionary detail that has at least indirect bearing on the nursing assistant’s contention that she “wanted to let the patient’s die gently”: Contrary to VHA requirements, the facility had no functioning palliative care team. This finding in no way excuses or even explains Mays’ actions; it does, however, reinforce the essential value of palliative care expertise in an aging veteran population with many life-limiting conditions.7
Mays’ second motivation seems more plausible, based on her life narrative and the literature on HCP serial killers. Mays disclosed to investigators that she “had a lot of stress and chaos in [her] personal and professional life and these actions gave [her] a sense of control.”1 Her prior use of excessive force when employed at a prison as well as forensic science indicating that feelings of wielding power over life and death often drive health care murders, suggest this may have been a factor in Mays’ horrific conduct.8
It seems blasphemous to associate the word good in the same pages with this terrible evil. Nothing can compensate or justify the betrayal of the sacred oath of an HCP and the public trust of a VHA employee. Yet that very impossibility carries with it an obligation to ask, as did the author of an article about a recent Canadian nurse serial killer, “What can we learn from the [Mays] story?”9
Mays could never have taken the lives of 8 patients without clinical and administrative lapses and shortcuts at all levels of the health care system. Indeed, the 100-plus page Inspector General report makes 15 recommendations for the VHA, the Veterans Integrated Service Network, and the facility, encompassing areas of personnel hiring and performance evaluation, medication management and security, reporting and responding to unexplained events, quality and safety programs oversight, leaders’ responses, corrective actions, and even computer systems data analysis.
I want to suggest 2 ethical additions to this list addressed to all of us as VHA staff and especially to those of us who are HCPs. From the perspective of virtue ethics, Reta Mays is a tragedy about complacency and compromise in everyday work that the pandemic has made even more frequent and challenging to avoid and resist. This is what the Roman Virgil means in the epigraph that the road down to hell is easy and the road back very difficult.
I propose the need for discernment in trying to listen to our moral intuitions that tell us something is amiss and diligence in adhering to best practices even when we are fearful, exhausted, demoralized, or apathetic. These 2 habits of commitment to veterans, one of compassion and the other of competence, can help us follow the good inclinations of our hearts and together with system changes can bar the doors of our hospitals to the visits of future angels of death. This dedication is the least we owe to the families of the patients at Clarksburg whose loved ones never came home and whose questions likely can never be fully answered.
Readers of this column may recall that since I have been the Editor-in-Chief of Federal Practitioner, my December editorial focuses on the best and worst of the year in federal medicine. In 2021, these evaluative terms fail to capture the sadness and global devastation that mark this grim epoch of the continuing pandemic, increasing climate disasters, rising political tensions, and racial violence. Thus, this year my editorial is framed in terms of the philosophical or theological categories of good and evil as the only concepts that can even begin to express the horrendous events that occurred in West Virginia.
On June 28, 2018, then US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Executive-in-Charge, Carolyn Clancy, MD, contacted Inspector General Michael Missal to alert him that “there may be an ‘Angel of Death’ in Clarksburg [West Virginia].”1 Two years later Reta Mays, a 46-year-old VA nursing assistant, entered a guilty plea in federal court to the deaths of 7 vulnerable veterans. The legal charges were second-degree murder and 1 count of assault with intent to commit murder by injecting insulin. The victims were all patients on Ward 3 at the Louis A. Johnson VA, Medical Center in Clarksburg, where Mays worked the night shift from 2015 to 2018.2 Mays was sentenced in May of this year to 7 consecutive life terms for each of the veterans whose lives she cruelly ended and an additional 240 months for the eighth patient who survived her murder attempt.3
The term angel of death has religious roots in Judaism, although not strictly in the Hebrew scriptures. Neither the Jewish nor Christian Bible identifies a specific figure who is the angel of death. The idea first appears in Rabbinic literature and Jewish tradition.4 The angel God sends as a messenger of death is known as malakh ha-mavet in Hebrew. The revered Jewish physician and philosopher Moses Maimonides taught in his Guide for the Perplexed the angel of death is synonymous with the devil, and the evil inclination that dwells in the mind of all human beings.5In modern times, the concept of an angel of death has come to designate a serial killer who is a health care professional (HCP). A group of forensic scientists, HCPs, and attorneys, including former VA Under Secretary for Health Dr. Kenneth Kizer, published a study of HCPs who had been prosecuted or convicted of serial murder. Nurses constituted the largest group of offenders (60%) with nursing aides like Mays responsible for 18% of murders, and physicians 12%. The review found that though health care serial killers are rare, they operate in nations across the Western world, in many different states in this country, and in almost all health care settings, including previous VA angels of death.6Nursing aides who are not supposed to have access to medications—a major problem in Mays’ case—nor permitted to administer them more often resort to noncontrolled substances to kill their victims.1 Mays chose insulin as her murder weapon as did 13% of serial killers. Just as insulin may be difficult to detect in toxicology, so Mays and others like her committed their crimes on the night shift when they were less likely to be discovered.6
Many of us feel compelled to seek a rational motivation for why healers would mutate into killers: If we can find a reason for this heinous behavior it somehow helps us feel the world is more intelligible and controllable. Unfortunately, despite intensive forensic investigations of multiple angels of death, there is little definitive understanding of the motives of these murders.6 Mays disclosed more than most. As part of a plea bargain, she provided investigators with 2 rationales for her killing: She wanted to ease the patients’ suffering. Such claims of being an angel of mercy are common among HCP serial murders, which the patterns of the killings generally disprove. The patients Mays lethally injected, while mostly old and ill, were all expected to recover and leave the hospital. The Inspector General report uncovered a cautionary detail that has at least indirect bearing on the nursing assistant’s contention that she “wanted to let the patient’s die gently”: Contrary to VHA requirements, the facility had no functioning palliative care team. This finding in no way excuses or even explains Mays’ actions; it does, however, reinforce the essential value of palliative care expertise in an aging veteran population with many life-limiting conditions.7
Mays’ second motivation seems more plausible, based on her life narrative and the literature on HCP serial killers. Mays disclosed to investigators that she “had a lot of stress and chaos in [her] personal and professional life and these actions gave [her] a sense of control.”1 Her prior use of excessive force when employed at a prison as well as forensic science indicating that feelings of wielding power over life and death often drive health care murders, suggest this may have been a factor in Mays’ horrific conduct.8
It seems blasphemous to associate the word good in the same pages with this terrible evil. Nothing can compensate or justify the betrayal of the sacred oath of an HCP and the public trust of a VHA employee. Yet that very impossibility carries with it an obligation to ask, as did the author of an article about a recent Canadian nurse serial killer, “What can we learn from the [Mays] story?”9
Mays could never have taken the lives of 8 patients without clinical and administrative lapses and shortcuts at all levels of the health care system. Indeed, the 100-plus page Inspector General report makes 15 recommendations for the VHA, the Veterans Integrated Service Network, and the facility, encompassing areas of personnel hiring and performance evaluation, medication management and security, reporting and responding to unexplained events, quality and safety programs oversight, leaders’ responses, corrective actions, and even computer systems data analysis.
I want to suggest 2 ethical additions to this list addressed to all of us as VHA staff and especially to those of us who are HCPs. From the perspective of virtue ethics, Reta Mays is a tragedy about complacency and compromise in everyday work that the pandemic has made even more frequent and challenging to avoid and resist. This is what the Roman Virgil means in the epigraph that the road down to hell is easy and the road back very difficult.
I propose the need for discernment in trying to listen to our moral intuitions that tell us something is amiss and diligence in adhering to best practices even when we are fearful, exhausted, demoralized, or apathetic. These 2 habits of commitment to veterans, one of compassion and the other of competence, can help us follow the good inclinations of our hearts and together with system changes can bar the doors of our hospitals to the visits of future angels of death. This dedication is the least we owe to the families of the patients at Clarksburg whose loved ones never came home and whose questions likely can never be fully answered.
1. US Department of Veterans Affairs, Office of Inspector General. Veterans Health Administration: care and oversight deficiencies related to multiple homicides at the Louis A. Johnson VA Medical Center in Clarksburg, West Virginia. Healthcare Inspection Report #20-035993-140. Published May 11 2021. Accessed November 22, 2021. https://www.va.gov/oig/pubs/VAOIG-20-03593-140.pdf
2. Kennedy M, Schwartz M. Former VA medical worker pleads guilty to murdering 7 patients in West Virginia. Published July 14, 2020. Accessed November 22, 2021. https://www.npr.org/2020/07/14/890776010/former-va-medical-worker-charged-with-7-murders-in-west-virginia
3. US Department of Justice, US Attorney’s Office Northern District of West Virginia. Former VA hospital nursing assistant sentenced to seven consecutive life sentences for murdering seven veterans and assault with intent to commit murder of an eighth [press release]. Published May 11, 2021. Accessed November 22, 2021. https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndwv/pr/former-va-hospital-nursing-assistant-sentenced-seven-consecutive-life-sentences.
4. Jacobs L. The Jewish Religion: A Companion. 1st ed. Oxford University Press;1995:116.
5. Maimonides. Guide for the Perplexed. Frielander M, trans. Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd; 1904:pt 3, chap 22.
6. Yorker BC, Kizer KW, Lampe P, Forrest AR, Lannan JM, Russell DA. Serial murder by healthcare professionals. J Forensic Sci. 2006;51(6):1362-1371. doi:10.1111/j.1556-4029.2006.00273.x
7. VHA Directive 1139. Palliative care consult teams (PCCT) and VISN leads. Published June 14, 2017.
8. Rourke S, Ward T. Healthcare serial killers: patterns and policies. Published August 14, 2017. Accessed November 22, 2021. https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/884136
9. Frank C. Health care serial murder: what can we learn from the Wettlaufer story? Can Fam Physician. 2020;66(10):719-722.
1. US Department of Veterans Affairs, Office of Inspector General. Veterans Health Administration: care and oversight deficiencies related to multiple homicides at the Louis A. Johnson VA Medical Center in Clarksburg, West Virginia. Healthcare Inspection Report #20-035993-140. Published May 11 2021. Accessed November 22, 2021. https://www.va.gov/oig/pubs/VAOIG-20-03593-140.pdf
2. Kennedy M, Schwartz M. Former VA medical worker pleads guilty to murdering 7 patients in West Virginia. Published July 14, 2020. Accessed November 22, 2021. https://www.npr.org/2020/07/14/890776010/former-va-medical-worker-charged-with-7-murders-in-west-virginia
3. US Department of Justice, US Attorney’s Office Northern District of West Virginia. Former VA hospital nursing assistant sentenced to seven consecutive life sentences for murdering seven veterans and assault with intent to commit murder of an eighth [press release]. Published May 11, 2021. Accessed November 22, 2021. https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndwv/pr/former-va-hospital-nursing-assistant-sentenced-seven-consecutive-life-sentences.
4. Jacobs L. The Jewish Religion: A Companion. 1st ed. Oxford University Press;1995:116.
5. Maimonides. Guide for the Perplexed. Frielander M, trans. Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd; 1904:pt 3, chap 22.
6. Yorker BC, Kizer KW, Lampe P, Forrest AR, Lannan JM, Russell DA. Serial murder by healthcare professionals. J Forensic Sci. 2006;51(6):1362-1371. doi:10.1111/j.1556-4029.2006.00273.x
7. VHA Directive 1139. Palliative care consult teams (PCCT) and VISN leads. Published June 14, 2017.
8. Rourke S, Ward T. Healthcare serial killers: patterns and policies. Published August 14, 2017. Accessed November 22, 2021. https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/884136
9. Frank C. Health care serial murder: what can we learn from the Wettlaufer story? Can Fam Physician. 2020;66(10):719-722.
Liver cancer risk lingers even after HCV eradication
Although the risk for liver cancer diminishes for patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections for whom the virus is eliminated with direct-acting antiviral (DAA) drugs, these patients are not out of the woods, and those who do not have a sustained viral response (SVR) are at substantially higher risk of developing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), results of a large study show.
Among the patients with liver cirrhosis from HCV infections treated at 30 centers in Italy, a large percentage had an SVR after treatment with DAA drugs. Only a small percentage of this group subsequently developed HCC.
In contrast, not having an SVR was associated with a more than sevenfold higher risk for liver cancer, said Loreta A. Kondili, MD, PhD, from the Center for Global Health at the Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, during a presentation of the findings at The Liver Meeting 2021: American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD), held online.
“Failure to achieve SVR after DAA treatment is strongly associated with the probability of HCC development. Older age, [HCV] genotype 3, and low platelet counts and albumin levels are independent factors of HCC development despite viral eradication,” she said.
Cohort study
The study findings come from the PITER Cohort Study, a prospective, multicenter observational study of a representative sample of patients with HCV.
Dr. Kondili and colleagues assessed the medium- and long-term effects of DAA therapy on HCC rates among patients with HCV-induced liver cirrhosis. Patients who had undergone a liver transplant or who had been previously diagnosed with HCC were excluded.
The investigators identified a total of 2,214 DAA-treated patients, of whom 149 (6.7%) developed de novo HCC after a median follow-up of 30 months.
From the total group, 2,064 (93%) patients had an SVR, 119 of whom (5.8%) developed HCC. Of these patients who developed HCC, 80% were diagnosed with stage B or C disease in accordance with the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer staging system.
For the remaining 150 patients who did not have an SVR, 30 (20%) developed de novo HCC, a difference that translated into an adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) for HCC of 7.38 (P < .01).
The time from the end of DAA therapy to a diagnosis of HCC was shorter for patients who did not have an SVR. For these patients, the 2-year HCC-free survival rate was 81%, compared with 98% for patients who had an SVR (P < .001).
As reported by Dr. Kondili, among patients who achieved an SVR, the variables significantly associated with HCC risk included older age (aHR, 1.06), platelet counts greater than the reference limit of 150,000 μL (aHR, 2.43), albumin levels >3.5 g/dL (aHR, 2.36), and diabetes (aHR, 1.53; all these variables were significant by confidence intervals).
In all, 26% of these patients died during the follow-up period, and 7.6% underwent liver transplant.
Of the patients still alive at the end of the follow-up period, 38% had active HCC.
Long-term follow-up required
“It’s useful to think of hepatitis C as a viral infection on one hand [and] a liver disease on the other,” commented Raymond T. Chung, MD, director of the Hepatology and Liver Center and vice chief of gastroenterology at Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston.
“In terms of thinking of elimination, we can eradicate the virus in most patients with virtually 100% success with antivirals. This has given us a false sense of comfort that it’s a ‘one and done’ process, and patients can more or less enjoy the rest of their lives free of hepatitis C,” he said.
Dr. Chung, who was not involved in the study, emphasized that despite the elimination of the virus, patients may still have significant liver fibrosis or cirrhosis. It is imperative that these patients be monitored for signs of cancer, he said.
“This is what’s important about staging patients and understanding how severe their liver disease is, because if there is advanced fibrosis, bridging fibrosis, or cirrhosis, these are patients who are going to require long-term oncology care. Their infectious disease is eliminated, but the liver disease remains,” he said.
Dr. Chung also noted that rates of liver cancer, decompensation, and liver failure are higher among patients with untreated HCV than among patients whose HCV has been eradicated or suppressed with drug treatment. In addition, patients with untreated HCV are at greater risk of requiring transplant than are patients with HCV that was treated, and there remains a residual cancer risk for patients who become HCV seronegative.
The study was funded by the Italian Ministry of Health. Dr. Kondili has financial relationships with Gilead Science and AbbVie. Dr. Chung reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Although the risk for liver cancer diminishes for patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections for whom the virus is eliminated with direct-acting antiviral (DAA) drugs, these patients are not out of the woods, and those who do not have a sustained viral response (SVR) are at substantially higher risk of developing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), results of a large study show.
Among the patients with liver cirrhosis from HCV infections treated at 30 centers in Italy, a large percentage had an SVR after treatment with DAA drugs. Only a small percentage of this group subsequently developed HCC.
In contrast, not having an SVR was associated with a more than sevenfold higher risk for liver cancer, said Loreta A. Kondili, MD, PhD, from the Center for Global Health at the Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, during a presentation of the findings at The Liver Meeting 2021: American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD), held online.
“Failure to achieve SVR after DAA treatment is strongly associated with the probability of HCC development. Older age, [HCV] genotype 3, and low platelet counts and albumin levels are independent factors of HCC development despite viral eradication,” she said.
Cohort study
The study findings come from the PITER Cohort Study, a prospective, multicenter observational study of a representative sample of patients with HCV.
Dr. Kondili and colleagues assessed the medium- and long-term effects of DAA therapy on HCC rates among patients with HCV-induced liver cirrhosis. Patients who had undergone a liver transplant or who had been previously diagnosed with HCC were excluded.
The investigators identified a total of 2,214 DAA-treated patients, of whom 149 (6.7%) developed de novo HCC after a median follow-up of 30 months.
From the total group, 2,064 (93%) patients had an SVR, 119 of whom (5.8%) developed HCC. Of these patients who developed HCC, 80% were diagnosed with stage B or C disease in accordance with the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer staging system.
For the remaining 150 patients who did not have an SVR, 30 (20%) developed de novo HCC, a difference that translated into an adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) for HCC of 7.38 (P < .01).
The time from the end of DAA therapy to a diagnosis of HCC was shorter for patients who did not have an SVR. For these patients, the 2-year HCC-free survival rate was 81%, compared with 98% for patients who had an SVR (P < .001).
As reported by Dr. Kondili, among patients who achieved an SVR, the variables significantly associated with HCC risk included older age (aHR, 1.06), platelet counts greater than the reference limit of 150,000 μL (aHR, 2.43), albumin levels >3.5 g/dL (aHR, 2.36), and diabetes (aHR, 1.53; all these variables were significant by confidence intervals).
In all, 26% of these patients died during the follow-up period, and 7.6% underwent liver transplant.
Of the patients still alive at the end of the follow-up period, 38% had active HCC.
Long-term follow-up required
“It’s useful to think of hepatitis C as a viral infection on one hand [and] a liver disease on the other,” commented Raymond T. Chung, MD, director of the Hepatology and Liver Center and vice chief of gastroenterology at Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston.
“In terms of thinking of elimination, we can eradicate the virus in most patients with virtually 100% success with antivirals. This has given us a false sense of comfort that it’s a ‘one and done’ process, and patients can more or less enjoy the rest of their lives free of hepatitis C,” he said.
Dr. Chung, who was not involved in the study, emphasized that despite the elimination of the virus, patients may still have significant liver fibrosis or cirrhosis. It is imperative that these patients be monitored for signs of cancer, he said.
“This is what’s important about staging patients and understanding how severe their liver disease is, because if there is advanced fibrosis, bridging fibrosis, or cirrhosis, these are patients who are going to require long-term oncology care. Their infectious disease is eliminated, but the liver disease remains,” he said.
Dr. Chung also noted that rates of liver cancer, decompensation, and liver failure are higher among patients with untreated HCV than among patients whose HCV has been eradicated or suppressed with drug treatment. In addition, patients with untreated HCV are at greater risk of requiring transplant than are patients with HCV that was treated, and there remains a residual cancer risk for patients who become HCV seronegative.
The study was funded by the Italian Ministry of Health. Dr. Kondili has financial relationships with Gilead Science and AbbVie. Dr. Chung reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Although the risk for liver cancer diminishes for patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections for whom the virus is eliminated with direct-acting antiviral (DAA) drugs, these patients are not out of the woods, and those who do not have a sustained viral response (SVR) are at substantially higher risk of developing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), results of a large study show.
Among the patients with liver cirrhosis from HCV infections treated at 30 centers in Italy, a large percentage had an SVR after treatment with DAA drugs. Only a small percentage of this group subsequently developed HCC.
In contrast, not having an SVR was associated with a more than sevenfold higher risk for liver cancer, said Loreta A. Kondili, MD, PhD, from the Center for Global Health at the Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, during a presentation of the findings at The Liver Meeting 2021: American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD), held online.
“Failure to achieve SVR after DAA treatment is strongly associated with the probability of HCC development. Older age, [HCV] genotype 3, and low platelet counts and albumin levels are independent factors of HCC development despite viral eradication,” she said.
Cohort study
The study findings come from the PITER Cohort Study, a prospective, multicenter observational study of a representative sample of patients with HCV.
Dr. Kondili and colleagues assessed the medium- and long-term effects of DAA therapy on HCC rates among patients with HCV-induced liver cirrhosis. Patients who had undergone a liver transplant or who had been previously diagnosed with HCC were excluded.
The investigators identified a total of 2,214 DAA-treated patients, of whom 149 (6.7%) developed de novo HCC after a median follow-up of 30 months.
From the total group, 2,064 (93%) patients had an SVR, 119 of whom (5.8%) developed HCC. Of these patients who developed HCC, 80% were diagnosed with stage B or C disease in accordance with the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer staging system.
For the remaining 150 patients who did not have an SVR, 30 (20%) developed de novo HCC, a difference that translated into an adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) for HCC of 7.38 (P < .01).
The time from the end of DAA therapy to a diagnosis of HCC was shorter for patients who did not have an SVR. For these patients, the 2-year HCC-free survival rate was 81%, compared with 98% for patients who had an SVR (P < .001).
As reported by Dr. Kondili, among patients who achieved an SVR, the variables significantly associated with HCC risk included older age (aHR, 1.06), platelet counts greater than the reference limit of 150,000 μL (aHR, 2.43), albumin levels >3.5 g/dL (aHR, 2.36), and diabetes (aHR, 1.53; all these variables were significant by confidence intervals).
In all, 26% of these patients died during the follow-up period, and 7.6% underwent liver transplant.
Of the patients still alive at the end of the follow-up period, 38% had active HCC.
Long-term follow-up required
“It’s useful to think of hepatitis C as a viral infection on one hand [and] a liver disease on the other,” commented Raymond T. Chung, MD, director of the Hepatology and Liver Center and vice chief of gastroenterology at Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston.
“In terms of thinking of elimination, we can eradicate the virus in most patients with virtually 100% success with antivirals. This has given us a false sense of comfort that it’s a ‘one and done’ process, and patients can more or less enjoy the rest of their lives free of hepatitis C,” he said.
Dr. Chung, who was not involved in the study, emphasized that despite the elimination of the virus, patients may still have significant liver fibrosis or cirrhosis. It is imperative that these patients be monitored for signs of cancer, he said.
“This is what’s important about staging patients and understanding how severe their liver disease is, because if there is advanced fibrosis, bridging fibrosis, or cirrhosis, these are patients who are going to require long-term oncology care. Their infectious disease is eliminated, but the liver disease remains,” he said.
Dr. Chung also noted that rates of liver cancer, decompensation, and liver failure are higher among patients with untreated HCV than among patients whose HCV has been eradicated or suppressed with drug treatment. In addition, patients with untreated HCV are at greater risk of requiring transplant than are patients with HCV that was treated, and there remains a residual cancer risk for patients who become HCV seronegative.
The study was funded by the Italian Ministry of Health. Dr. Kondili has financial relationships with Gilead Science and AbbVie. Dr. Chung reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Bullying a ‘persistent, important’ problem for cardiology trainees
A high rate of bullying towards U.K. cardiology trainees by their superiors has been revealed in a new survey. More than 10% of doctors training to be cardiologists in the United Kingdom say they have been bullied in the last 4 weeks, and one-third report having witnessed bullying on a cardiology rotation, the survey reports.
In addition, 33% of cardiology trainees said they had been on the receiving end of inappropriate behavior, including having their opinions and views ignored, being made to feel worthless/useless, and being shouted at or targeted with spontaneous anger.
Senior doctors (consultants) in cardiology were cited as the main perpetrators of such bullying and inappropriate behavior.
Women trainee cardiologists and those who attended medical school outside the United Kingdom were more likely to report having been bullied, suggesting a sexist and racist element.
“In this large and repeated survey of British cardiology trainees, we have shown a persistent and important problem with bullying,” the authors conclude.
Results of the survey from the British Junior Cardiologists’ Association, were published online in a paper in Heart on Dec. 6, 2021.
Examples of such bullying behavior by consultant cardiologists toward their trainees reported in the survey included being belittled in front of others, having their filing cabinet drawer thrown across the room, use of foul language toward trainees, and using previous mistakes as an excuse to humiliate and ridicule them, lead author of the survey, Christian Fielder Camm, MD, Keble College, Oxford (England) University, told this news organization.
Trainees also reported being made to feel inadequate when struggling to achieve unrealistic tasks and being pressured into not taking holidays and study leave.
Many respondents said they did not report such behavior for fear of repercussions and in some cases because the perpetrators were known for their bullying behavior, and previous attempts to intervene had not resulted in any change.
Dr. Camm, who is a cardiology trainee himself, says he has not personally been the victim of bullying, but as secretary of the BJCA he regularly receives reports about it happening.
“We wanted to look at this issue in our survey as we had been hearing anecdotal reports of bullying from cardiology trainees for a number of years,” Dr. Camm said. “We wanted to put it out there that this is not just an isolated issue and shine a light on the problem.”
Noting that the U.K. General Medical Council’s annual survey has found that bullying is seen across all disciplines in medicine, Dr. Camm said that cardiology has the highest reported rate of bullying among the medical specialties.
“This is not a new story – it has been played out throughout history, but things are not magically improving. Over the 4 years of our survey, rates of reported bullying have stayed the same,” he noted. “Our survey is asking more questions about bullying to find more detail on what is happening.”
The current data come from the BJCA annual survey from 2017 to 2020. As part of the survey, trainee cardiologists were asked about direct and indirect experiences of bullying and inappropriate language/behavior in cardiology departments in the preceding 4 weeks.
In all, 2,057 responses were received, 73% were from men, and the average age of respondents was 33 years. Over half (59%) were working in a specialist center for cardiology (tertiary referral center), and 94% had a national training number, which guarantees a continued place on a training program, subject to performance.
“This project has upset me to realize what my colleagues are experiencing. This is the working environment we are creating, and it is not good enough,” Dr. Camm said.
At present, the bullying behavior is not often reported. “Usually, the only person to report it to is the senior person in the department, who is frequently the cause of the problem, so most people just put up with it until they move on to their next training rotation. The working environment should not be so difficult,” he said.
The authors noted that bullying has been shown to significantly affect trainees, with those subject to bullying being 70% more likely to report serious or potentially serious medical errors, and more likely to take time off work and cease direct patient care.
They stressed that addressing bullying of trainees needs to be a priority both to ensure patient safety and to reduce trainee attrition in a time of unprecedented workforce pressures.
Dr. Camm believes a national plan needs to be put in place to deal with this issue and said the BJCA is keen to work with the British Cardiovascular Society to develop a zero-tolerance policy, with a clear strategy to address allegations of bullying.
“The world is changing. Hopefully this publication will be the start of some change,” he added.
Bullying culture is ‘endemic’
In an accompanying editorial, consultant cardiologist Resham Baruah, MBBS, PhD, of Chelsea and Westminster Healthcare NHS Trust, London, and independent professional coach Emma Sedgwick said the findings offer a “sobering insight into current practice” and indicate that “a bullying culture is endemic in many U.K. cardiology departments.”
“These trainee cardiologists are actually quite senior doctors with many years of experience. They work extremely hard. These surveys show that we are not valuing them enough,” Dr. Baruah said in an interview.
“Cardiology is a really competitive specialty. There is a lot of pressure. All the way through training the message is competitive,” she said. “Being collegiate and working as a team is not rewarded. We have to rethink this as we train the next generation.”
“We believe that publishing these data acknowledges bullying is not going unnoticed, although this alone is not enough,” the editorialists said.
Noting that labels matter, they propose a rejection of the term “juniors” and a return to the old system of calling colleagues senior house officers, registrars, and senior registrars.
They also proposed sanctions for institutions that ignore bullying, but stress that better working conditions for all staff are needed.
“Bullies are usually feeling defensive, overwhelmed, and stressed and take these feelings out on others,” Dr. Baruah commented. “I think what we are seeing in this paper is not just restricted to cardiology but happens all though the NHS and is related to workload, lack of autonomy, and burnout. Work culture is crucial to well-being and job satisfaction. Nobody wants to work in a toxic environment.”
She emphasized that bullying behaviors must not be accepted. “They can have catastrophic consequences for the trainees and for patient safety. While working in high-pressure specialties and emergency situations may foster such behavior, it is vitally important to arm trainees with the recognition of bullying and how to deal with it. They must feel empowered to speak up in an appropriate way.”
The editorialists noted that the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists responded to high levels of bullying by creating behavior toolkits, workshops, and behavior champions. “This survey should act as a call to arms for cardiology to introduce similar initiatives,” they stated.
“While times are changing, the corporate environment has moved forward in encouraging positive workplace behavior faster than is happening in medicine,” Dr. Baruah said. “But there is an appetite for change. We have to have an environment where people can speak up.”
The study received no specific funding. The authors reported no competing interests.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
A high rate of bullying towards U.K. cardiology trainees by their superiors has been revealed in a new survey. More than 10% of doctors training to be cardiologists in the United Kingdom say they have been bullied in the last 4 weeks, and one-third report having witnessed bullying on a cardiology rotation, the survey reports.
In addition, 33% of cardiology trainees said they had been on the receiving end of inappropriate behavior, including having their opinions and views ignored, being made to feel worthless/useless, and being shouted at or targeted with spontaneous anger.
Senior doctors (consultants) in cardiology were cited as the main perpetrators of such bullying and inappropriate behavior.
Women trainee cardiologists and those who attended medical school outside the United Kingdom were more likely to report having been bullied, suggesting a sexist and racist element.
“In this large and repeated survey of British cardiology trainees, we have shown a persistent and important problem with bullying,” the authors conclude.
Results of the survey from the British Junior Cardiologists’ Association, were published online in a paper in Heart on Dec. 6, 2021.
Examples of such bullying behavior by consultant cardiologists toward their trainees reported in the survey included being belittled in front of others, having their filing cabinet drawer thrown across the room, use of foul language toward trainees, and using previous mistakes as an excuse to humiliate and ridicule them, lead author of the survey, Christian Fielder Camm, MD, Keble College, Oxford (England) University, told this news organization.
Trainees also reported being made to feel inadequate when struggling to achieve unrealistic tasks and being pressured into not taking holidays and study leave.
Many respondents said they did not report such behavior for fear of repercussions and in some cases because the perpetrators were known for their bullying behavior, and previous attempts to intervene had not resulted in any change.
Dr. Camm, who is a cardiology trainee himself, says he has not personally been the victim of bullying, but as secretary of the BJCA he regularly receives reports about it happening.
“We wanted to look at this issue in our survey as we had been hearing anecdotal reports of bullying from cardiology trainees for a number of years,” Dr. Camm said. “We wanted to put it out there that this is not just an isolated issue and shine a light on the problem.”
Noting that the U.K. General Medical Council’s annual survey has found that bullying is seen across all disciplines in medicine, Dr. Camm said that cardiology has the highest reported rate of bullying among the medical specialties.
“This is not a new story – it has been played out throughout history, but things are not magically improving. Over the 4 years of our survey, rates of reported bullying have stayed the same,” he noted. “Our survey is asking more questions about bullying to find more detail on what is happening.”
The current data come from the BJCA annual survey from 2017 to 2020. As part of the survey, trainee cardiologists were asked about direct and indirect experiences of bullying and inappropriate language/behavior in cardiology departments in the preceding 4 weeks.
In all, 2,057 responses were received, 73% were from men, and the average age of respondents was 33 years. Over half (59%) were working in a specialist center for cardiology (tertiary referral center), and 94% had a national training number, which guarantees a continued place on a training program, subject to performance.
“This project has upset me to realize what my colleagues are experiencing. This is the working environment we are creating, and it is not good enough,” Dr. Camm said.
At present, the bullying behavior is not often reported. “Usually, the only person to report it to is the senior person in the department, who is frequently the cause of the problem, so most people just put up with it until they move on to their next training rotation. The working environment should not be so difficult,” he said.
The authors noted that bullying has been shown to significantly affect trainees, with those subject to bullying being 70% more likely to report serious or potentially serious medical errors, and more likely to take time off work and cease direct patient care.
They stressed that addressing bullying of trainees needs to be a priority both to ensure patient safety and to reduce trainee attrition in a time of unprecedented workforce pressures.
Dr. Camm believes a national plan needs to be put in place to deal with this issue and said the BJCA is keen to work with the British Cardiovascular Society to develop a zero-tolerance policy, with a clear strategy to address allegations of bullying.
“The world is changing. Hopefully this publication will be the start of some change,” he added.
Bullying culture is ‘endemic’
In an accompanying editorial, consultant cardiologist Resham Baruah, MBBS, PhD, of Chelsea and Westminster Healthcare NHS Trust, London, and independent professional coach Emma Sedgwick said the findings offer a “sobering insight into current practice” and indicate that “a bullying culture is endemic in many U.K. cardiology departments.”
“These trainee cardiologists are actually quite senior doctors with many years of experience. They work extremely hard. These surveys show that we are not valuing them enough,” Dr. Baruah said in an interview.
“Cardiology is a really competitive specialty. There is a lot of pressure. All the way through training the message is competitive,” she said. “Being collegiate and working as a team is not rewarded. We have to rethink this as we train the next generation.”
“We believe that publishing these data acknowledges bullying is not going unnoticed, although this alone is not enough,” the editorialists said.
Noting that labels matter, they propose a rejection of the term “juniors” and a return to the old system of calling colleagues senior house officers, registrars, and senior registrars.
They also proposed sanctions for institutions that ignore bullying, but stress that better working conditions for all staff are needed.
“Bullies are usually feeling defensive, overwhelmed, and stressed and take these feelings out on others,” Dr. Baruah commented. “I think what we are seeing in this paper is not just restricted to cardiology but happens all though the NHS and is related to workload, lack of autonomy, and burnout. Work culture is crucial to well-being and job satisfaction. Nobody wants to work in a toxic environment.”
She emphasized that bullying behaviors must not be accepted. “They can have catastrophic consequences for the trainees and for patient safety. While working in high-pressure specialties and emergency situations may foster such behavior, it is vitally important to arm trainees with the recognition of bullying and how to deal with it. They must feel empowered to speak up in an appropriate way.”
The editorialists noted that the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists responded to high levels of bullying by creating behavior toolkits, workshops, and behavior champions. “This survey should act as a call to arms for cardiology to introduce similar initiatives,” they stated.
“While times are changing, the corporate environment has moved forward in encouraging positive workplace behavior faster than is happening in medicine,” Dr. Baruah said. “But there is an appetite for change. We have to have an environment where people can speak up.”
The study received no specific funding. The authors reported no competing interests.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
A high rate of bullying towards U.K. cardiology trainees by their superiors has been revealed in a new survey. More than 10% of doctors training to be cardiologists in the United Kingdom say they have been bullied in the last 4 weeks, and one-third report having witnessed bullying on a cardiology rotation, the survey reports.
In addition, 33% of cardiology trainees said they had been on the receiving end of inappropriate behavior, including having their opinions and views ignored, being made to feel worthless/useless, and being shouted at or targeted with spontaneous anger.
Senior doctors (consultants) in cardiology were cited as the main perpetrators of such bullying and inappropriate behavior.
Women trainee cardiologists and those who attended medical school outside the United Kingdom were more likely to report having been bullied, suggesting a sexist and racist element.
“In this large and repeated survey of British cardiology trainees, we have shown a persistent and important problem with bullying,” the authors conclude.
Results of the survey from the British Junior Cardiologists’ Association, were published online in a paper in Heart on Dec. 6, 2021.
Examples of such bullying behavior by consultant cardiologists toward their trainees reported in the survey included being belittled in front of others, having their filing cabinet drawer thrown across the room, use of foul language toward trainees, and using previous mistakes as an excuse to humiliate and ridicule them, lead author of the survey, Christian Fielder Camm, MD, Keble College, Oxford (England) University, told this news organization.
Trainees also reported being made to feel inadequate when struggling to achieve unrealistic tasks and being pressured into not taking holidays and study leave.
Many respondents said they did not report such behavior for fear of repercussions and in some cases because the perpetrators were known for their bullying behavior, and previous attempts to intervene had not resulted in any change.
Dr. Camm, who is a cardiology trainee himself, says he has not personally been the victim of bullying, but as secretary of the BJCA he regularly receives reports about it happening.
“We wanted to look at this issue in our survey as we had been hearing anecdotal reports of bullying from cardiology trainees for a number of years,” Dr. Camm said. “We wanted to put it out there that this is not just an isolated issue and shine a light on the problem.”
Noting that the U.K. General Medical Council’s annual survey has found that bullying is seen across all disciplines in medicine, Dr. Camm said that cardiology has the highest reported rate of bullying among the medical specialties.
“This is not a new story – it has been played out throughout history, but things are not magically improving. Over the 4 years of our survey, rates of reported bullying have stayed the same,” he noted. “Our survey is asking more questions about bullying to find more detail on what is happening.”
The current data come from the BJCA annual survey from 2017 to 2020. As part of the survey, trainee cardiologists were asked about direct and indirect experiences of bullying and inappropriate language/behavior in cardiology departments in the preceding 4 weeks.
In all, 2,057 responses were received, 73% were from men, and the average age of respondents was 33 years. Over half (59%) were working in a specialist center for cardiology (tertiary referral center), and 94% had a national training number, which guarantees a continued place on a training program, subject to performance.
“This project has upset me to realize what my colleagues are experiencing. This is the working environment we are creating, and it is not good enough,” Dr. Camm said.
At present, the bullying behavior is not often reported. “Usually, the only person to report it to is the senior person in the department, who is frequently the cause of the problem, so most people just put up with it until they move on to their next training rotation. The working environment should not be so difficult,” he said.
The authors noted that bullying has been shown to significantly affect trainees, with those subject to bullying being 70% more likely to report serious or potentially serious medical errors, and more likely to take time off work and cease direct patient care.
They stressed that addressing bullying of trainees needs to be a priority both to ensure patient safety and to reduce trainee attrition in a time of unprecedented workforce pressures.
Dr. Camm believes a national plan needs to be put in place to deal with this issue and said the BJCA is keen to work with the British Cardiovascular Society to develop a zero-tolerance policy, with a clear strategy to address allegations of bullying.
“The world is changing. Hopefully this publication will be the start of some change,” he added.
Bullying culture is ‘endemic’
In an accompanying editorial, consultant cardiologist Resham Baruah, MBBS, PhD, of Chelsea and Westminster Healthcare NHS Trust, London, and independent professional coach Emma Sedgwick said the findings offer a “sobering insight into current practice” and indicate that “a bullying culture is endemic in many U.K. cardiology departments.”
“These trainee cardiologists are actually quite senior doctors with many years of experience. They work extremely hard. These surveys show that we are not valuing them enough,” Dr. Baruah said in an interview.
“Cardiology is a really competitive specialty. There is a lot of pressure. All the way through training the message is competitive,” she said. “Being collegiate and working as a team is not rewarded. We have to rethink this as we train the next generation.”
“We believe that publishing these data acknowledges bullying is not going unnoticed, although this alone is not enough,” the editorialists said.
Noting that labels matter, they propose a rejection of the term “juniors” and a return to the old system of calling colleagues senior house officers, registrars, and senior registrars.
They also proposed sanctions for institutions that ignore bullying, but stress that better working conditions for all staff are needed.
“Bullies are usually feeling defensive, overwhelmed, and stressed and take these feelings out on others,” Dr. Baruah commented. “I think what we are seeing in this paper is not just restricted to cardiology but happens all though the NHS and is related to workload, lack of autonomy, and burnout. Work culture is crucial to well-being and job satisfaction. Nobody wants to work in a toxic environment.”
She emphasized that bullying behaviors must not be accepted. “They can have catastrophic consequences for the trainees and for patient safety. While working in high-pressure specialties and emergency situations may foster such behavior, it is vitally important to arm trainees with the recognition of bullying and how to deal with it. They must feel empowered to speak up in an appropriate way.”
The editorialists noted that the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists responded to high levels of bullying by creating behavior toolkits, workshops, and behavior champions. “This survey should act as a call to arms for cardiology to introduce similar initiatives,” they stated.
“While times are changing, the corporate environment has moved forward in encouraging positive workplace behavior faster than is happening in medicine,” Dr. Baruah said. “But there is an appetite for change. We have to have an environment where people can speak up.”
The study received no specific funding. The authors reported no competing interests.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM HEART
Reflecting on 2021, looking forward to 2022
This month marks the end of my first full calendar year as SHM CEO. Over the years, I have made it a habit to take time to reflect during the month of December, assessing the previous year by reviewing what went well and what could have gone better, and how I can grow and change to meet the needs of future challenges. This reflection sets the stage for my personal and professional “New Year” goals.
This year, 2021, is certainly a year deserving of reflection, and I believe 2022 (and beyond) will need ambitious goals made by dedicated leaders, hospitalists included. Here are my thoughts on what went well in 2021 and what I wish went better – from our greater society to our specialty, to SHM.
Society (as in the larger society)
What went well: Vaccines
There is a lot to be impressed with in 2021, and for me, at the top of that list are the COVID-19 vaccines. I realize the research for mRNA vaccines started more than 20 years ago, and the most successful mRNA vaccine companies have been around for more than a decade, but to roll out a COVID-19 vaccine in less than a year is still just incredible. To take a disease with a 2% mortality rate for someone like myself and effectively reduce that to near zero is something historians will be writing about for years to come.
What I wish went better: Open dialogue
I can’t remember when we stopped listening to each other, and by that, I mean listening to those who do not think exactly like ourselves. As a kid, I was taught to be careful about discussing topics at social events that could go sideways. That usually involved politics, money, or strong beliefs, but wow – now, that list is much longer. Talking about the weather used to be safe, but not anymore. If I were to show pictures of the recent flooding in Annapolis? There would almost certainly be a debate about climate change. At least we can agree on Ted Lasso as a safe topic.
Our specialty
What went well: Hospitalists are vital
There are many, many professions that deserve “hero” status for their part in taming this pandemic: nurses, doctors, emergency medical services, physical therapists, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, administrators, and more. But in the doctor category, hospitalists are at the top. Along with our emergency department and intensivist colleagues, hospitalists are one of the pillars of the inpatient response to COVID. More than 3.2 million COVID-19 hospitalizations have occurred, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, with numerous state dashboards showing three-quarters of those are cared for on general medical wards, the domain of hospitalists (for example, see my own state of Maryland’s COVID-19 dashboard: https://coronavirus.maryland.gov).
We’ve always had “two patients” – the patient in the bed and the health care system. Many hospitalists have helped their institutions by building COVID care teams, COVID wards, or in the case of Dr. Mindy Kantsiper, building an entire COVID field hospital in a convention center. Without hospitalists, both patients and the system that serves them would have fared much worse in this pandemic. Hospitalists are vital to patients and the health care system. The end. Period. End of story.
What I wish went better: Getting credit
As a profession, we need to be more deliberate about getting credit for the fantastic work we have done to care for COVID-19 patients, as well as inpatients in general. SHM can and must focus more on how to highlight the great work hospitalists have done and will continue to do. A greater understanding by the health care industry – as well as the general public – regarding the important role we play for patient care will help add autonomy in our profession, which in turn adds to resilience during these challenging times.
SHM
What went well: Membership grew
This is the one thing that we at SHM – and I personally – are most proud of. SHM is a membership society; it is the single most important metric for me personally. If physicians aren’t joining, then we are not meeting our core mission to provide value to hospitalists. My sense is the services SHM provides to hospitalists continue to be of value – even during these strenuous times of the pandemic when we had to be physically distant.
Whether it’s our Government Relations Department advocating for hospitalists in Washington, or the Journal of Hospital Medicine, or this very magazine, The Hospitalist, or SHM’s numerous educational offerings, chapter events, and SHM national meetings (Converge, Pediatric Hospital Medicine, Leadership Academies, Academic Hospitalist Academy, and more), SHM continues to provide hospitalists with vital tools to help you in your career.
This is also very much a two-way street. If you are reading this, know that without you, our members, our success would not be possible. Your passion and partnership drive us to innovate to meet your needs and those of the patients you serve every day. Thank you for your continued support and inspiration.
What could have gone better: Seeing more of you, in person
This is a tough one for me. Everything I worried about going wrong for SHM in 2021 never materialized. A year ago, my fears for SHM were that membership would shrink, finances would dry up, and the SHM staff would leave (by furlough or by choice). Thankfully, membership grew, our finances are in very good shape for any year, let alone a pandemic year, and the staff have remained at SHM and are engaged and dedicated! SHM even received a “Best Place to Work” award from the Philadelphia Business Journal.
Maybe the one regret I have is that we could not do more in-person events. But even there, I think we did better than most. We had some chapter meetings in person, and the October 2021 Leadership Academy hosted 110 hospitalist leaders, in person, at Amelia Island, Fla. That Leadership Academy went off without a hitch, and the early reviews are superb. I am very optimistic about 2022 in-person events!
Looking forward: 2022 and beyond
I have no illusions that 2022 is going to be easy. I know that the pandemic will not be gone (even though cases are falling nationwide as of this writing), that our nation will struggle with how to deal with polarization, and the workplace will continue to be redefined. Yet, I can’t help but be optimistic.
The pandemic will end eventually; all pandemics do. My hope is that young leaders will step forward to help our nation work through the divisive challenges, and some of those leaders will even be hospitalists! I also know that our profession is more vital than ever, for both patients and the health care system. We’re even getting ready to celebrate SHM’s 25th anniversary, and we can’t wait to revisit our humble beginnings while looking at the bright future of our society and our field.
I am working on my 2022 “New Year” goals, but you can be pretty sure they will revolve around making the world a better place, investing in people, and being ethical and transparent.
Dr. Howell is the CEO of the Society of Hospital Medicine.
This month marks the end of my first full calendar year as SHM CEO. Over the years, I have made it a habit to take time to reflect during the month of December, assessing the previous year by reviewing what went well and what could have gone better, and how I can grow and change to meet the needs of future challenges. This reflection sets the stage for my personal and professional “New Year” goals.
This year, 2021, is certainly a year deserving of reflection, and I believe 2022 (and beyond) will need ambitious goals made by dedicated leaders, hospitalists included. Here are my thoughts on what went well in 2021 and what I wish went better – from our greater society to our specialty, to SHM.
Society (as in the larger society)
What went well: Vaccines
There is a lot to be impressed with in 2021, and for me, at the top of that list are the COVID-19 vaccines. I realize the research for mRNA vaccines started more than 20 years ago, and the most successful mRNA vaccine companies have been around for more than a decade, but to roll out a COVID-19 vaccine in less than a year is still just incredible. To take a disease with a 2% mortality rate for someone like myself and effectively reduce that to near zero is something historians will be writing about for years to come.
What I wish went better: Open dialogue
I can’t remember when we stopped listening to each other, and by that, I mean listening to those who do not think exactly like ourselves. As a kid, I was taught to be careful about discussing topics at social events that could go sideways. That usually involved politics, money, or strong beliefs, but wow – now, that list is much longer. Talking about the weather used to be safe, but not anymore. If I were to show pictures of the recent flooding in Annapolis? There would almost certainly be a debate about climate change. At least we can agree on Ted Lasso as a safe topic.
Our specialty
What went well: Hospitalists are vital
There are many, many professions that deserve “hero” status for their part in taming this pandemic: nurses, doctors, emergency medical services, physical therapists, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, administrators, and more. But in the doctor category, hospitalists are at the top. Along with our emergency department and intensivist colleagues, hospitalists are one of the pillars of the inpatient response to COVID. More than 3.2 million COVID-19 hospitalizations have occurred, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, with numerous state dashboards showing three-quarters of those are cared for on general medical wards, the domain of hospitalists (for example, see my own state of Maryland’s COVID-19 dashboard: https://coronavirus.maryland.gov).
We’ve always had “two patients” – the patient in the bed and the health care system. Many hospitalists have helped their institutions by building COVID care teams, COVID wards, or in the case of Dr. Mindy Kantsiper, building an entire COVID field hospital in a convention center. Without hospitalists, both patients and the system that serves them would have fared much worse in this pandemic. Hospitalists are vital to patients and the health care system. The end. Period. End of story.
What I wish went better: Getting credit
As a profession, we need to be more deliberate about getting credit for the fantastic work we have done to care for COVID-19 patients, as well as inpatients in general. SHM can and must focus more on how to highlight the great work hospitalists have done and will continue to do. A greater understanding by the health care industry – as well as the general public – regarding the important role we play for patient care will help add autonomy in our profession, which in turn adds to resilience during these challenging times.
SHM
What went well: Membership grew
This is the one thing that we at SHM – and I personally – are most proud of. SHM is a membership society; it is the single most important metric for me personally. If physicians aren’t joining, then we are not meeting our core mission to provide value to hospitalists. My sense is the services SHM provides to hospitalists continue to be of value – even during these strenuous times of the pandemic when we had to be physically distant.
Whether it’s our Government Relations Department advocating for hospitalists in Washington, or the Journal of Hospital Medicine, or this very magazine, The Hospitalist, or SHM’s numerous educational offerings, chapter events, and SHM national meetings (Converge, Pediatric Hospital Medicine, Leadership Academies, Academic Hospitalist Academy, and more), SHM continues to provide hospitalists with vital tools to help you in your career.
This is also very much a two-way street. If you are reading this, know that without you, our members, our success would not be possible. Your passion and partnership drive us to innovate to meet your needs and those of the patients you serve every day. Thank you for your continued support and inspiration.
What could have gone better: Seeing more of you, in person
This is a tough one for me. Everything I worried about going wrong for SHM in 2021 never materialized. A year ago, my fears for SHM were that membership would shrink, finances would dry up, and the SHM staff would leave (by furlough or by choice). Thankfully, membership grew, our finances are in very good shape for any year, let alone a pandemic year, and the staff have remained at SHM and are engaged and dedicated! SHM even received a “Best Place to Work” award from the Philadelphia Business Journal.
Maybe the one regret I have is that we could not do more in-person events. But even there, I think we did better than most. We had some chapter meetings in person, and the October 2021 Leadership Academy hosted 110 hospitalist leaders, in person, at Amelia Island, Fla. That Leadership Academy went off without a hitch, and the early reviews are superb. I am very optimistic about 2022 in-person events!
Looking forward: 2022 and beyond
I have no illusions that 2022 is going to be easy. I know that the pandemic will not be gone (even though cases are falling nationwide as of this writing), that our nation will struggle with how to deal with polarization, and the workplace will continue to be redefined. Yet, I can’t help but be optimistic.
The pandemic will end eventually; all pandemics do. My hope is that young leaders will step forward to help our nation work through the divisive challenges, and some of those leaders will even be hospitalists! I also know that our profession is more vital than ever, for both patients and the health care system. We’re even getting ready to celebrate SHM’s 25th anniversary, and we can’t wait to revisit our humble beginnings while looking at the bright future of our society and our field.
I am working on my 2022 “New Year” goals, but you can be pretty sure they will revolve around making the world a better place, investing in people, and being ethical and transparent.
Dr. Howell is the CEO of the Society of Hospital Medicine.
This month marks the end of my first full calendar year as SHM CEO. Over the years, I have made it a habit to take time to reflect during the month of December, assessing the previous year by reviewing what went well and what could have gone better, and how I can grow and change to meet the needs of future challenges. This reflection sets the stage for my personal and professional “New Year” goals.
This year, 2021, is certainly a year deserving of reflection, and I believe 2022 (and beyond) will need ambitious goals made by dedicated leaders, hospitalists included. Here are my thoughts on what went well in 2021 and what I wish went better – from our greater society to our specialty, to SHM.
Society (as in the larger society)
What went well: Vaccines
There is a lot to be impressed with in 2021, and for me, at the top of that list are the COVID-19 vaccines. I realize the research for mRNA vaccines started more than 20 years ago, and the most successful mRNA vaccine companies have been around for more than a decade, but to roll out a COVID-19 vaccine in less than a year is still just incredible. To take a disease with a 2% mortality rate for someone like myself and effectively reduce that to near zero is something historians will be writing about for years to come.
What I wish went better: Open dialogue
I can’t remember when we stopped listening to each other, and by that, I mean listening to those who do not think exactly like ourselves. As a kid, I was taught to be careful about discussing topics at social events that could go sideways. That usually involved politics, money, or strong beliefs, but wow – now, that list is much longer. Talking about the weather used to be safe, but not anymore. If I were to show pictures of the recent flooding in Annapolis? There would almost certainly be a debate about climate change. At least we can agree on Ted Lasso as a safe topic.
Our specialty
What went well: Hospitalists are vital
There are many, many professions that deserve “hero” status for their part in taming this pandemic: nurses, doctors, emergency medical services, physical therapists, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, administrators, and more. But in the doctor category, hospitalists are at the top. Along with our emergency department and intensivist colleagues, hospitalists are one of the pillars of the inpatient response to COVID. More than 3.2 million COVID-19 hospitalizations have occurred, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, with numerous state dashboards showing three-quarters of those are cared for on general medical wards, the domain of hospitalists (for example, see my own state of Maryland’s COVID-19 dashboard: https://coronavirus.maryland.gov).
We’ve always had “two patients” – the patient in the bed and the health care system. Many hospitalists have helped their institutions by building COVID care teams, COVID wards, or in the case of Dr. Mindy Kantsiper, building an entire COVID field hospital in a convention center. Without hospitalists, both patients and the system that serves them would have fared much worse in this pandemic. Hospitalists are vital to patients and the health care system. The end. Period. End of story.
What I wish went better: Getting credit
As a profession, we need to be more deliberate about getting credit for the fantastic work we have done to care for COVID-19 patients, as well as inpatients in general. SHM can and must focus more on how to highlight the great work hospitalists have done and will continue to do. A greater understanding by the health care industry – as well as the general public – regarding the important role we play for patient care will help add autonomy in our profession, which in turn adds to resilience during these challenging times.
SHM
What went well: Membership grew
This is the one thing that we at SHM – and I personally – are most proud of. SHM is a membership society; it is the single most important metric for me personally. If physicians aren’t joining, then we are not meeting our core mission to provide value to hospitalists. My sense is the services SHM provides to hospitalists continue to be of value – even during these strenuous times of the pandemic when we had to be physically distant.
Whether it’s our Government Relations Department advocating for hospitalists in Washington, or the Journal of Hospital Medicine, or this very magazine, The Hospitalist, or SHM’s numerous educational offerings, chapter events, and SHM national meetings (Converge, Pediatric Hospital Medicine, Leadership Academies, Academic Hospitalist Academy, and more), SHM continues to provide hospitalists with vital tools to help you in your career.
This is also very much a two-way street. If you are reading this, know that without you, our members, our success would not be possible. Your passion and partnership drive us to innovate to meet your needs and those of the patients you serve every day. Thank you for your continued support and inspiration.
What could have gone better: Seeing more of you, in person
This is a tough one for me. Everything I worried about going wrong for SHM in 2021 never materialized. A year ago, my fears for SHM were that membership would shrink, finances would dry up, and the SHM staff would leave (by furlough or by choice). Thankfully, membership grew, our finances are in very good shape for any year, let alone a pandemic year, and the staff have remained at SHM and are engaged and dedicated! SHM even received a “Best Place to Work” award from the Philadelphia Business Journal.
Maybe the one regret I have is that we could not do more in-person events. But even there, I think we did better than most. We had some chapter meetings in person, and the October 2021 Leadership Academy hosted 110 hospitalist leaders, in person, at Amelia Island, Fla. That Leadership Academy went off without a hitch, and the early reviews are superb. I am very optimistic about 2022 in-person events!
Looking forward: 2022 and beyond
I have no illusions that 2022 is going to be easy. I know that the pandemic will not be gone (even though cases are falling nationwide as of this writing), that our nation will struggle with how to deal with polarization, and the workplace will continue to be redefined. Yet, I can’t help but be optimistic.
The pandemic will end eventually; all pandemics do. My hope is that young leaders will step forward to help our nation work through the divisive challenges, and some of those leaders will even be hospitalists! I also know that our profession is more vital than ever, for both patients and the health care system. We’re even getting ready to celebrate SHM’s 25th anniversary, and we can’t wait to revisit our humble beginnings while looking at the bright future of our society and our field.
I am working on my 2022 “New Year” goals, but you can be pretty sure they will revolve around making the world a better place, investing in people, and being ethical and transparent.
Dr. Howell is the CEO of the Society of Hospital Medicine.
ACC, AHA issue new coronary revascularization guideline
Clinicians should approach decisions regarding coronary revascularization based on clinical indications without an eye toward sex, race, or ethnicity, advises a joint clinical practice guideline released Dec. 8 by the American Heart Association and American College of Cardiology.
The new class 1 recommendation leads off the 109-page document and reflects evidence demonstrating that revascularization is equally beneficial for all patients. Still, studies show that women and non-White patients are less likely to receive reperfusion therapy or revascularization.
“This was extremely important to all the committee members because of all of the disparities that have been documented not only in diagnosis but [in] the care provided to underrepresented minorities, women, and other ethnic groups,” said Jennifer S. Lawton, MD, chief of cardiac surgery at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, and guideline writing committee chair.
“We wanted to make it clear right at the beginning of the document that these guidelines apply to everyone, and we want it to be known that care should be the same for everyone,” she said in an interview.
The guideline was simultaneously published Dec. 9, 2021, in the journal Circulation and the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.
It updates and consolidates the ACC/AHA 2011 coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) guideline and the ACC/AHA/Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions 2011 and 2015 percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) guidelines.
The new document emphasizes in a class 1 recommendation the importance of the multidisciplinary heart team in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) where the best treatment strategy is unclear. But it also stresses that treatment decisions should be patient centered – taking into account patient preferences and goals, cultural beliefs, health literacy, and social determinants of cardiovascular health – and made in collaboration with the patient’s support system.
“Oftentimes we recommend a strategy of revascularization that may not be what the patient wants or hasn’t taken into account the patient’s preferences and also the family members,” Dr. Lawson said. “So we felt that was very important.”
Patients should also be provided with available evidence for various treatment options, including risks and benefits of each option, for informed consent. The two new class 1 recommendations are highlighted in a figure illustrating the shared decision-making algorithm that, by design, features a female clinician and Black patient.
“We spent 2 years debating the best revascularization strategies and we’re considered experts in the field – but when we talk to our patients, they really don’t know the benefits and risks,” she said. “In order to translate it to the layperson in basic terms, it’s important to say, ‘If you choose this option, you will likely live longer’ rather than using the jargon.”
DAPT, staged PCI, stable IHD
Among the top 10 take-home messages highlighted by the authors is a 2a recommendation that 1-3 months of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after PCI with a transition to P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy is “reasonable” in selected patients to reduce the risk of bleeding events. Previous recommendations called for 6 or 12 months of DAPT.
“We really respect all of the clinical trials that came out showing that a shorter duration of DAPT is not inferior in terms of ischemic events but less bleeding, yet I don’t know how many clinicians are actually just using 3 months of DAPT followed by P2Y12 monotherapy,” guideline committee vice chair Jacqueline Tamis-Holland, MD, professor of medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, said in an interview. “So while it’s not a big, glaring giant recommendation, I think it will change a lot of practice.”
Similarly, she suggested that practice may shift as a result of a class 1 recommendation for staged PCI of a significantly stenosed nonculprit artery to reduce the risk for death or MI in selected hemodynamically stable patients presenting with ST-segment elevation MI and multivessel disease. “When you survey physicians, 75% of them do staged PCI but I think there will probably be more of an approach to staged PCI, as opposed to doing multivessel PCI at the time of primary PCI.”
Newer evidence from meta-analyses and the landmark ISCHEMIA trial showing no advantage of CABG over medical therapy in stable ischemic heart disease is reflected in a new class 2b recommendation – downgraded from class 1 in 2011 – that CABG “may be reasonable” to improve survival in stable patients with triple-vessel CAD.
The writing committee concluded that the ability of PCI to improve survival, compared with medical therapy in multivessel CAD “remains uncertain.”
Other recommendations likely to be of interest are that the radial artery is preferred, after the left internal mammary artery, as a surgical revascularization conduit over use of a saphenous vein conduit. Benefits include superior patency, fewer adverse cardiac events, and improved survival, the committee noted.
The radial artery is also recommended (class 1) in patients undergoing PCI who have acute coronary syndromes or stable ischemic heart disease to reduce bleeding and vascular complications compared with a femoral approach.
“Having both new radial recommendations sort of makes a bit of tension because the interventionalist is going to want to use the radial artery, but also the surgeon is too,” observed Dr. Tamis-Holland. “We see that in our own practice, so we try to have a collaborative approach to the patient to say: ‘Maybe do the cardiac cath in the dominant radial and then we can use the nondominant radial for a bypass conduit,’ but using both for each revascularization strategy will benefit the patient.
“So, we just have to remember that we’re going to talk together as a heart team and try to make the best decisions for each patient.”
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Clinicians should approach decisions regarding coronary revascularization based on clinical indications without an eye toward sex, race, or ethnicity, advises a joint clinical practice guideline released Dec. 8 by the American Heart Association and American College of Cardiology.
The new class 1 recommendation leads off the 109-page document and reflects evidence demonstrating that revascularization is equally beneficial for all patients. Still, studies show that women and non-White patients are less likely to receive reperfusion therapy or revascularization.
“This was extremely important to all the committee members because of all of the disparities that have been documented not only in diagnosis but [in] the care provided to underrepresented minorities, women, and other ethnic groups,” said Jennifer S. Lawton, MD, chief of cardiac surgery at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, and guideline writing committee chair.
“We wanted to make it clear right at the beginning of the document that these guidelines apply to everyone, and we want it to be known that care should be the same for everyone,” she said in an interview.
The guideline was simultaneously published Dec. 9, 2021, in the journal Circulation and the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.
It updates and consolidates the ACC/AHA 2011 coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) guideline and the ACC/AHA/Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions 2011 and 2015 percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) guidelines.
The new document emphasizes in a class 1 recommendation the importance of the multidisciplinary heart team in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) where the best treatment strategy is unclear. But it also stresses that treatment decisions should be patient centered – taking into account patient preferences and goals, cultural beliefs, health literacy, and social determinants of cardiovascular health – and made in collaboration with the patient’s support system.
“Oftentimes we recommend a strategy of revascularization that may not be what the patient wants or hasn’t taken into account the patient’s preferences and also the family members,” Dr. Lawson said. “So we felt that was very important.”
Patients should also be provided with available evidence for various treatment options, including risks and benefits of each option, for informed consent. The two new class 1 recommendations are highlighted in a figure illustrating the shared decision-making algorithm that, by design, features a female clinician and Black patient.
“We spent 2 years debating the best revascularization strategies and we’re considered experts in the field – but when we talk to our patients, they really don’t know the benefits and risks,” she said. “In order to translate it to the layperson in basic terms, it’s important to say, ‘If you choose this option, you will likely live longer’ rather than using the jargon.”
DAPT, staged PCI, stable IHD
Among the top 10 take-home messages highlighted by the authors is a 2a recommendation that 1-3 months of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after PCI with a transition to P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy is “reasonable” in selected patients to reduce the risk of bleeding events. Previous recommendations called for 6 or 12 months of DAPT.
“We really respect all of the clinical trials that came out showing that a shorter duration of DAPT is not inferior in terms of ischemic events but less bleeding, yet I don’t know how many clinicians are actually just using 3 months of DAPT followed by P2Y12 monotherapy,” guideline committee vice chair Jacqueline Tamis-Holland, MD, professor of medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, said in an interview. “So while it’s not a big, glaring giant recommendation, I think it will change a lot of practice.”
Similarly, she suggested that practice may shift as a result of a class 1 recommendation for staged PCI of a significantly stenosed nonculprit artery to reduce the risk for death or MI in selected hemodynamically stable patients presenting with ST-segment elevation MI and multivessel disease. “When you survey physicians, 75% of them do staged PCI but I think there will probably be more of an approach to staged PCI, as opposed to doing multivessel PCI at the time of primary PCI.”
Newer evidence from meta-analyses and the landmark ISCHEMIA trial showing no advantage of CABG over medical therapy in stable ischemic heart disease is reflected in a new class 2b recommendation – downgraded from class 1 in 2011 – that CABG “may be reasonable” to improve survival in stable patients with triple-vessel CAD.
The writing committee concluded that the ability of PCI to improve survival, compared with medical therapy in multivessel CAD “remains uncertain.”
Other recommendations likely to be of interest are that the radial artery is preferred, after the left internal mammary artery, as a surgical revascularization conduit over use of a saphenous vein conduit. Benefits include superior patency, fewer adverse cardiac events, and improved survival, the committee noted.
The radial artery is also recommended (class 1) in patients undergoing PCI who have acute coronary syndromes or stable ischemic heart disease to reduce bleeding and vascular complications compared with a femoral approach.
“Having both new radial recommendations sort of makes a bit of tension because the interventionalist is going to want to use the radial artery, but also the surgeon is too,” observed Dr. Tamis-Holland. “We see that in our own practice, so we try to have a collaborative approach to the patient to say: ‘Maybe do the cardiac cath in the dominant radial and then we can use the nondominant radial for a bypass conduit,’ but using both for each revascularization strategy will benefit the patient.
“So, we just have to remember that we’re going to talk together as a heart team and try to make the best decisions for each patient.”
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Clinicians should approach decisions regarding coronary revascularization based on clinical indications without an eye toward sex, race, or ethnicity, advises a joint clinical practice guideline released Dec. 8 by the American Heart Association and American College of Cardiology.
The new class 1 recommendation leads off the 109-page document and reflects evidence demonstrating that revascularization is equally beneficial for all patients. Still, studies show that women and non-White patients are less likely to receive reperfusion therapy or revascularization.
“This was extremely important to all the committee members because of all of the disparities that have been documented not only in diagnosis but [in] the care provided to underrepresented minorities, women, and other ethnic groups,” said Jennifer S. Lawton, MD, chief of cardiac surgery at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, and guideline writing committee chair.
“We wanted to make it clear right at the beginning of the document that these guidelines apply to everyone, and we want it to be known that care should be the same for everyone,” she said in an interview.
The guideline was simultaneously published Dec. 9, 2021, in the journal Circulation and the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.
It updates and consolidates the ACC/AHA 2011 coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) guideline and the ACC/AHA/Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions 2011 and 2015 percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) guidelines.
The new document emphasizes in a class 1 recommendation the importance of the multidisciplinary heart team in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) where the best treatment strategy is unclear. But it also stresses that treatment decisions should be patient centered – taking into account patient preferences and goals, cultural beliefs, health literacy, and social determinants of cardiovascular health – and made in collaboration with the patient’s support system.
“Oftentimes we recommend a strategy of revascularization that may not be what the patient wants or hasn’t taken into account the patient’s preferences and also the family members,” Dr. Lawson said. “So we felt that was very important.”
Patients should also be provided with available evidence for various treatment options, including risks and benefits of each option, for informed consent. The two new class 1 recommendations are highlighted in a figure illustrating the shared decision-making algorithm that, by design, features a female clinician and Black patient.
“We spent 2 years debating the best revascularization strategies and we’re considered experts in the field – but when we talk to our patients, they really don’t know the benefits and risks,” she said. “In order to translate it to the layperson in basic terms, it’s important to say, ‘If you choose this option, you will likely live longer’ rather than using the jargon.”
DAPT, staged PCI, stable IHD
Among the top 10 take-home messages highlighted by the authors is a 2a recommendation that 1-3 months of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after PCI with a transition to P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy is “reasonable” in selected patients to reduce the risk of bleeding events. Previous recommendations called for 6 or 12 months of DAPT.
“We really respect all of the clinical trials that came out showing that a shorter duration of DAPT is not inferior in terms of ischemic events but less bleeding, yet I don’t know how many clinicians are actually just using 3 months of DAPT followed by P2Y12 monotherapy,” guideline committee vice chair Jacqueline Tamis-Holland, MD, professor of medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, said in an interview. “So while it’s not a big, glaring giant recommendation, I think it will change a lot of practice.”
Similarly, she suggested that practice may shift as a result of a class 1 recommendation for staged PCI of a significantly stenosed nonculprit artery to reduce the risk for death or MI in selected hemodynamically stable patients presenting with ST-segment elevation MI and multivessel disease. “When you survey physicians, 75% of them do staged PCI but I think there will probably be more of an approach to staged PCI, as opposed to doing multivessel PCI at the time of primary PCI.”
Newer evidence from meta-analyses and the landmark ISCHEMIA trial showing no advantage of CABG over medical therapy in stable ischemic heart disease is reflected in a new class 2b recommendation – downgraded from class 1 in 2011 – that CABG “may be reasonable” to improve survival in stable patients with triple-vessel CAD.
The writing committee concluded that the ability of PCI to improve survival, compared with medical therapy in multivessel CAD “remains uncertain.”
Other recommendations likely to be of interest are that the radial artery is preferred, after the left internal mammary artery, as a surgical revascularization conduit over use of a saphenous vein conduit. Benefits include superior patency, fewer adverse cardiac events, and improved survival, the committee noted.
The radial artery is also recommended (class 1) in patients undergoing PCI who have acute coronary syndromes or stable ischemic heart disease to reduce bleeding and vascular complications compared with a femoral approach.
“Having both new radial recommendations sort of makes a bit of tension because the interventionalist is going to want to use the radial artery, but also the surgeon is too,” observed Dr. Tamis-Holland. “We see that in our own practice, so we try to have a collaborative approach to the patient to say: ‘Maybe do the cardiac cath in the dominant radial and then we can use the nondominant radial for a bypass conduit,’ but using both for each revascularization strategy will benefit the patient.
“So, we just have to remember that we’re going to talk together as a heart team and try to make the best decisions for each patient.”
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Genomic instability varies between breast cancer subtypes
More than 1,000 patients with TNBC, ER+ breast cancer, or ovarian cancer from five cohorts were examined for genomic instability scores (GIS) and the presence of BRCA deficiency, which showed that, while GIS was similar in BRCA-deficient TNBC and ovarian cancer, it was significantly different in ER+ breast cancer.
The analysis, presented at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, showed that the genomic instability scores threshold, which could be used to dictate a patient’s treatment, should be lower for ER+ breast cancer than for TNBC.
“This indicates that different GIS thresholds are appropriate for breast cancer subtypes, and that the GIS threshold developed for ovarian caner is not appropriate for ER+ breast cancer,” said lead author Kirsten Timms, PhD, from Myriad Genetics.
This, she noted, is “consistent with the fact that ovarian cancer and TNBC are known to have similar molecular signatures.”
The researchers suggest that the “more inclusive” thresholds assessed in the study should be examined in further studies “to determine whether these cutoffs are associated with a benefit from treatment with DNA-targeting agents,” such as poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors.
Thomas P. Slavin, MD, chief medical officer at Myriad Genetics, said in an interview that there is “not a one size fits all” for GIS thresholds.
“When you look at ER+ breast cancer you see we need a different cutoff because it’s probably not as driven by homologous recombination deficiency [HRD], as least as a whole, compared to the other two,” he said. “There’s a little less genomic instability.”
He continued that their results suggest around half of TNBC patients have a GIS score that indicates the presence of significant HRD, which is “spot on for what we see with ovarian cancer” and “those people should respond pretty well to PARP-inhibitor therapies,” which is currently being investigated in clinical trials.
“But even in the ER+ group, when we look at the thresholds we used in this research, still about a third have what looks like a substantial amount of HRD, so that’s a huge biomarker,” Dr. Slavin said.
He explained that the importance of their score is that, rather than looking for the causes of HRD, they are looking for the consequences.
“We don’t know all the causes of why, all of a sudden, a tumor cell looks like it can’t replicate through homologous combination [but] what this test does is it says: ‘We don’t really care what the cause is ... we can just look at the genomic scarring and the consequences.’ ”
Elena Provenzano, MD, CRUK Therapeutic Discovery Laboratories, Cambridge (England) University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, who was not involved in the study, said in an interview it is “interesting work.”
“We have a personalized breast cancer program here in Cambridge and we’re running trials where we use PARP inhibitors and platinum-based therapy, and what we’re using to make these sorts of decisions is COSMIC mutational signatures associated with genetic instability. And I guess we also look at the total mutational burden,” Dr. Provenzano said.
She continued that the GIS is one of several ways of measuring HRD. “So the question is how it compares with the other measures that are being used to assess whether or not patients are suitable for PARP inhibitor and platinum-based therapy.”
Dr. Provenzano underlined that it has been known since the “early 2000s” that breast cancer is a group of different diseases. “Even within those categories there’s quite a lot of tumor types,” so it “makes sense you need to adjust the threshold slightly for it to become relevant to types of breast cancer.”
She added that the “holy grail in oncology is this concept of personalized medicine, so all these tests help us make sure that the right patient is getting the right treatment.
“At the moment TNBC is often getting treated in a similar way, although we know that there are different biological subtypes, so while there’s a significant group that falls into this BRCA-deficient group that are going to respond to PARPs there are other types that don’t.
“So these sorts of tests help us decide which subset are going to help us the most, and for the others ones we potentially need to identify other treatments as being optimal,” Dr. Provenzano said.
Previous studies have shown that HR-deficient tumors may benefit from treatment with DNA-damaging agents, and that tools such as the three-biomarker GIS can be used to identify HR deficiency.
The Food and Drug Administration has already approved a GIS threshold for identifying HR deficiency in ovarian cancer of 42, which was set as the 5th percentile for BRCA-deficient tumors. However, a recent published in Molecular Cancer Research, and a second published on MDPI Open Access Journals, indicated that a lower, first percentile, cutoff of at least 33 was associated with improved outcomes after platinum-based treatment.
As TNBC is known to have a similar molecular profile to ovarian cancer, the researchers investigated whether it has a different GIS threshold to that in ER+ breast cancer, gathering data on patients newly diagnosed with ovarian cancer, TNBC, or ER+ breast cancer from across five cohorts.
They included 127 ovarian cancer patients from Nature, 434 ovarian cancer, 44 TNBC, and 213 ER+ breast cancer patients from The Cancer Genome Atlas, 55 TNBC and 112 ER+ breast cancer patients from Breast Cancer Research, 19 TNBC and 25 ER+ breast cancer patients from TBCRC 008, and 56 ER+ breast cancer patients from OlympiAD.
GIS was defined as a combination of loss of heterozygosity, telomeric-allellic imbalance, and large-scale state transitions, identified through next-generation sequencing, and GIS distributions were compared between cancer types and subtypes.
The team also determined the presence of BRCA deficiency, finding that, among BRCA deficient tumors, the GIS distribution among patients with ER+ breast cancer was significantly different from that seen in both ovarian cancer (P = 9.6 x 10–5) and TNBC (P = 2.1 x 10–4).
The first percentile of a normal distribution of BRCA-deficient ER+ breast cancers indicated a GIS threshold of 24, with 45.1% of all ER+ tumors at or above this threshold found to be GIS positive. This translated into 98.7% of BRCA-deficient tumors and 32.7% that were BRCA intact.
The results also showed, however, that the GIS distribution for TNBC was not significantly different from that seen in ovarian cancer (P = .72), with the threshold of at least 33 Identifying 64.4% of TNBC tumors as GIS positive. This equated to 100% of BRCA-deficient tumors and 41.7% that were BRCA intact.
Dr. Timms and Dr. Slavin are employed by Myriad Genetics, who funded the study.
More than 1,000 patients with TNBC, ER+ breast cancer, or ovarian cancer from five cohorts were examined for genomic instability scores (GIS) and the presence of BRCA deficiency, which showed that, while GIS was similar in BRCA-deficient TNBC and ovarian cancer, it was significantly different in ER+ breast cancer.
The analysis, presented at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, showed that the genomic instability scores threshold, which could be used to dictate a patient’s treatment, should be lower for ER+ breast cancer than for TNBC.
“This indicates that different GIS thresholds are appropriate for breast cancer subtypes, and that the GIS threshold developed for ovarian caner is not appropriate for ER+ breast cancer,” said lead author Kirsten Timms, PhD, from Myriad Genetics.
This, she noted, is “consistent with the fact that ovarian cancer and TNBC are known to have similar molecular signatures.”
The researchers suggest that the “more inclusive” thresholds assessed in the study should be examined in further studies “to determine whether these cutoffs are associated with a benefit from treatment with DNA-targeting agents,” such as poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors.
Thomas P. Slavin, MD, chief medical officer at Myriad Genetics, said in an interview that there is “not a one size fits all” for GIS thresholds.
“When you look at ER+ breast cancer you see we need a different cutoff because it’s probably not as driven by homologous recombination deficiency [HRD], as least as a whole, compared to the other two,” he said. “There’s a little less genomic instability.”
He continued that their results suggest around half of TNBC patients have a GIS score that indicates the presence of significant HRD, which is “spot on for what we see with ovarian cancer” and “those people should respond pretty well to PARP-inhibitor therapies,” which is currently being investigated in clinical trials.
“But even in the ER+ group, when we look at the thresholds we used in this research, still about a third have what looks like a substantial amount of HRD, so that’s a huge biomarker,” Dr. Slavin said.
He explained that the importance of their score is that, rather than looking for the causes of HRD, they are looking for the consequences.
“We don’t know all the causes of why, all of a sudden, a tumor cell looks like it can’t replicate through homologous combination [but] what this test does is it says: ‘We don’t really care what the cause is ... we can just look at the genomic scarring and the consequences.’ ”
Elena Provenzano, MD, CRUK Therapeutic Discovery Laboratories, Cambridge (England) University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, who was not involved in the study, said in an interview it is “interesting work.”
“We have a personalized breast cancer program here in Cambridge and we’re running trials where we use PARP inhibitors and platinum-based therapy, and what we’re using to make these sorts of decisions is COSMIC mutational signatures associated with genetic instability. And I guess we also look at the total mutational burden,” Dr. Provenzano said.
She continued that the GIS is one of several ways of measuring HRD. “So the question is how it compares with the other measures that are being used to assess whether or not patients are suitable for PARP inhibitor and platinum-based therapy.”
Dr. Provenzano underlined that it has been known since the “early 2000s” that breast cancer is a group of different diseases. “Even within those categories there’s quite a lot of tumor types,” so it “makes sense you need to adjust the threshold slightly for it to become relevant to types of breast cancer.”
She added that the “holy grail in oncology is this concept of personalized medicine, so all these tests help us make sure that the right patient is getting the right treatment.
“At the moment TNBC is often getting treated in a similar way, although we know that there are different biological subtypes, so while there’s a significant group that falls into this BRCA-deficient group that are going to respond to PARPs there are other types that don’t.
“So these sorts of tests help us decide which subset are going to help us the most, and for the others ones we potentially need to identify other treatments as being optimal,” Dr. Provenzano said.
Previous studies have shown that HR-deficient tumors may benefit from treatment with DNA-damaging agents, and that tools such as the three-biomarker GIS can be used to identify HR deficiency.
The Food and Drug Administration has already approved a GIS threshold for identifying HR deficiency in ovarian cancer of 42, which was set as the 5th percentile for BRCA-deficient tumors. However, a recent published in Molecular Cancer Research, and a second published on MDPI Open Access Journals, indicated that a lower, first percentile, cutoff of at least 33 was associated with improved outcomes after platinum-based treatment.
As TNBC is known to have a similar molecular profile to ovarian cancer, the researchers investigated whether it has a different GIS threshold to that in ER+ breast cancer, gathering data on patients newly diagnosed with ovarian cancer, TNBC, or ER+ breast cancer from across five cohorts.
They included 127 ovarian cancer patients from Nature, 434 ovarian cancer, 44 TNBC, and 213 ER+ breast cancer patients from The Cancer Genome Atlas, 55 TNBC and 112 ER+ breast cancer patients from Breast Cancer Research, 19 TNBC and 25 ER+ breast cancer patients from TBCRC 008, and 56 ER+ breast cancer patients from OlympiAD.
GIS was defined as a combination of loss of heterozygosity, telomeric-allellic imbalance, and large-scale state transitions, identified through next-generation sequencing, and GIS distributions were compared between cancer types and subtypes.
The team also determined the presence of BRCA deficiency, finding that, among BRCA deficient tumors, the GIS distribution among patients with ER+ breast cancer was significantly different from that seen in both ovarian cancer (P = 9.6 x 10–5) and TNBC (P = 2.1 x 10–4).
The first percentile of a normal distribution of BRCA-deficient ER+ breast cancers indicated a GIS threshold of 24, with 45.1% of all ER+ tumors at or above this threshold found to be GIS positive. This translated into 98.7% of BRCA-deficient tumors and 32.7% that were BRCA intact.
The results also showed, however, that the GIS distribution for TNBC was not significantly different from that seen in ovarian cancer (P = .72), with the threshold of at least 33 Identifying 64.4% of TNBC tumors as GIS positive. This equated to 100% of BRCA-deficient tumors and 41.7% that were BRCA intact.
Dr. Timms and Dr. Slavin are employed by Myriad Genetics, who funded the study.
More than 1,000 patients with TNBC, ER+ breast cancer, or ovarian cancer from five cohorts were examined for genomic instability scores (GIS) and the presence of BRCA deficiency, which showed that, while GIS was similar in BRCA-deficient TNBC and ovarian cancer, it was significantly different in ER+ breast cancer.
The analysis, presented at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, showed that the genomic instability scores threshold, which could be used to dictate a patient’s treatment, should be lower for ER+ breast cancer than for TNBC.
“This indicates that different GIS thresholds are appropriate for breast cancer subtypes, and that the GIS threshold developed for ovarian caner is not appropriate for ER+ breast cancer,” said lead author Kirsten Timms, PhD, from Myriad Genetics.
This, she noted, is “consistent with the fact that ovarian cancer and TNBC are known to have similar molecular signatures.”
The researchers suggest that the “more inclusive” thresholds assessed in the study should be examined in further studies “to determine whether these cutoffs are associated with a benefit from treatment with DNA-targeting agents,” such as poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors.
Thomas P. Slavin, MD, chief medical officer at Myriad Genetics, said in an interview that there is “not a one size fits all” for GIS thresholds.
“When you look at ER+ breast cancer you see we need a different cutoff because it’s probably not as driven by homologous recombination deficiency [HRD], as least as a whole, compared to the other two,” he said. “There’s a little less genomic instability.”
He continued that their results suggest around half of TNBC patients have a GIS score that indicates the presence of significant HRD, which is “spot on for what we see with ovarian cancer” and “those people should respond pretty well to PARP-inhibitor therapies,” which is currently being investigated in clinical trials.
“But even in the ER+ group, when we look at the thresholds we used in this research, still about a third have what looks like a substantial amount of HRD, so that’s a huge biomarker,” Dr. Slavin said.
He explained that the importance of their score is that, rather than looking for the causes of HRD, they are looking for the consequences.
“We don’t know all the causes of why, all of a sudden, a tumor cell looks like it can’t replicate through homologous combination [but] what this test does is it says: ‘We don’t really care what the cause is ... we can just look at the genomic scarring and the consequences.’ ”
Elena Provenzano, MD, CRUK Therapeutic Discovery Laboratories, Cambridge (England) University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, who was not involved in the study, said in an interview it is “interesting work.”
“We have a personalized breast cancer program here in Cambridge and we’re running trials where we use PARP inhibitors and platinum-based therapy, and what we’re using to make these sorts of decisions is COSMIC mutational signatures associated with genetic instability. And I guess we also look at the total mutational burden,” Dr. Provenzano said.
She continued that the GIS is one of several ways of measuring HRD. “So the question is how it compares with the other measures that are being used to assess whether or not patients are suitable for PARP inhibitor and platinum-based therapy.”
Dr. Provenzano underlined that it has been known since the “early 2000s” that breast cancer is a group of different diseases. “Even within those categories there’s quite a lot of tumor types,” so it “makes sense you need to adjust the threshold slightly for it to become relevant to types of breast cancer.”
She added that the “holy grail in oncology is this concept of personalized medicine, so all these tests help us make sure that the right patient is getting the right treatment.
“At the moment TNBC is often getting treated in a similar way, although we know that there are different biological subtypes, so while there’s a significant group that falls into this BRCA-deficient group that are going to respond to PARPs there are other types that don’t.
“So these sorts of tests help us decide which subset are going to help us the most, and for the others ones we potentially need to identify other treatments as being optimal,” Dr. Provenzano said.
Previous studies have shown that HR-deficient tumors may benefit from treatment with DNA-damaging agents, and that tools such as the three-biomarker GIS can be used to identify HR deficiency.
The Food and Drug Administration has already approved a GIS threshold for identifying HR deficiency in ovarian cancer of 42, which was set as the 5th percentile for BRCA-deficient tumors. However, a recent published in Molecular Cancer Research, and a second published on MDPI Open Access Journals, indicated that a lower, first percentile, cutoff of at least 33 was associated with improved outcomes after platinum-based treatment.
As TNBC is known to have a similar molecular profile to ovarian cancer, the researchers investigated whether it has a different GIS threshold to that in ER+ breast cancer, gathering data on patients newly diagnosed with ovarian cancer, TNBC, or ER+ breast cancer from across five cohorts.
They included 127 ovarian cancer patients from Nature, 434 ovarian cancer, 44 TNBC, and 213 ER+ breast cancer patients from The Cancer Genome Atlas, 55 TNBC and 112 ER+ breast cancer patients from Breast Cancer Research, 19 TNBC and 25 ER+ breast cancer patients from TBCRC 008, and 56 ER+ breast cancer patients from OlympiAD.
GIS was defined as a combination of loss of heterozygosity, telomeric-allellic imbalance, and large-scale state transitions, identified through next-generation sequencing, and GIS distributions were compared between cancer types and subtypes.
The team also determined the presence of BRCA deficiency, finding that, among BRCA deficient tumors, the GIS distribution among patients with ER+ breast cancer was significantly different from that seen in both ovarian cancer (P = 9.6 x 10–5) and TNBC (P = 2.1 x 10–4).
The first percentile of a normal distribution of BRCA-deficient ER+ breast cancers indicated a GIS threshold of 24, with 45.1% of all ER+ tumors at or above this threshold found to be GIS positive. This translated into 98.7% of BRCA-deficient tumors and 32.7% that were BRCA intact.
The results also showed, however, that the GIS distribution for TNBC was not significantly different from that seen in ovarian cancer (P = .72), with the threshold of at least 33 Identifying 64.4% of TNBC tumors as GIS positive. This equated to 100% of BRCA-deficient tumors and 41.7% that were BRCA intact.
Dr. Timms and Dr. Slavin are employed by Myriad Genetics, who funded the study.
FROM SABCS 2021
What is the diagnosis?
As the lesion was growing, getting more violaceous and indurated, a biopsy was performed. The biopsy showed multiple discrete lobules of dermal capillaries with slight extension into the superficial subcutis. Capillary lobules demonstrate the “cannonball-like” architecture often associated with tufted angioma, and some lobules showed bulging into adjacent thin-walled vessels. Spindled endothelial cells lining slit-like vessels were present in the mid dermis, although this comprises a minority of the lesion. The majority of the subcutis was uninvolved. The findings are overall most consistent with a tufted angioma.
Kaposiform hemangioendothelioma (KHE) has been considered given the presence of occasional slit-like vascular spaces; however, the lesion is predominantly superficial and therefore the lesion is best classified as tufted angioma. GLUT–1 staining was negative.
At the time of biopsy, blood work was ordered, which showed a normal complete blood count with normal number of platelets, slightly elevated D-dimer, and slightly low fibrinogen. Several repeat blood counts and coagulation tests once a week for a few weeks revealed no changes.
The patient was started on aspirin at a dose of 5 mg/kg per day. After a week on the medication the lesion was starting to get smaller and less red.
Tufted angiomas are a rare type of vascular tumor within the spectrum of kaposiform hemangioendotheliomas. Most cases present within the first year of life; some occur at birth. They usually present as papules, plaques, or erythematous, violaceous indurated nodules on the face, neck, trunk, and extremities. The lesions can also be present with hyperhidrosis and hypertrichosis. Clinically, the lesions will have to be differentiated from other vascular tumors such as infantile hemangiomas, congenital hemangiomas, and Kaposi’s sarcoma, as well as subcutaneous fat necrosis of the newborn, cellulitis, and nonaccidental trauma.
Pathogenesis of tufted angiomas is poorly understood. A recent case report found a somatic mutation on GNA14.This protein regulates Ras activity and modulates endothelial cell permeability and migration in response to FGF2 and VEGFA. The p.205L mutation causes activation of GNA14, which upregulates pERK-MAPK pathway, suggesting MAPK inhibition as a potential target for therapy. Clinically, tufted angioma can present in three patterns: uncomplicated tufted angioma (most common type); tufted angioma without thrombocytopenia but with chronic coagulopathy, as it was seen in our patient; and tufted angioma associated with Kasabach-Merritt phenomenon (KMP). KMP is characterized by thrombocytopenia in association with microangiopathic hemolytic anemia, consumptive coagulopathy, and enlarging vascular tumor. Treatment of uncomplicated tufted angioma will depend on symptomatology, size, and location of the lesion. Smaller lesions in noncosmetically sensitive areas can be treated with surgical excision. Cases that are not amenable to excision can be treated with aspirin. There are also reports of response to topical modalities including tacrolimus and timolol. For complicated cases associated with KMP, sirolimus, systemic corticosteroids, ticlopidine, interferon, or vincristine are recommended. Some lesions may demonstrate spontaneous regression.
Dr. Matiz is a pediatric dermatologist at Southern California Permanente Medical Group, San Diego.
References
Cohen S et al. Dermatol Online J. 2019 Sep 15;25(9):13030/qt6pv254mc.
Lim YH et al. Pediatr Dermatol. 2019 Nov;36(6):963-4.
Prasuna A, Rao PN. Indian Dermatol Online J. 2015;6:266-8.
As the lesion was growing, getting more violaceous and indurated, a biopsy was performed. The biopsy showed multiple discrete lobules of dermal capillaries with slight extension into the superficial subcutis. Capillary lobules demonstrate the “cannonball-like” architecture often associated with tufted angioma, and some lobules showed bulging into adjacent thin-walled vessels. Spindled endothelial cells lining slit-like vessels were present in the mid dermis, although this comprises a minority of the lesion. The majority of the subcutis was uninvolved. The findings are overall most consistent with a tufted angioma.
Kaposiform hemangioendothelioma (KHE) has been considered given the presence of occasional slit-like vascular spaces; however, the lesion is predominantly superficial and therefore the lesion is best classified as tufted angioma. GLUT–1 staining was negative.
At the time of biopsy, blood work was ordered, which showed a normal complete blood count with normal number of platelets, slightly elevated D-dimer, and slightly low fibrinogen. Several repeat blood counts and coagulation tests once a week for a few weeks revealed no changes.
The patient was started on aspirin at a dose of 5 mg/kg per day. After a week on the medication the lesion was starting to get smaller and less red.
Tufted angiomas are a rare type of vascular tumor within the spectrum of kaposiform hemangioendotheliomas. Most cases present within the first year of life; some occur at birth. They usually present as papules, plaques, or erythematous, violaceous indurated nodules on the face, neck, trunk, and extremities. The lesions can also be present with hyperhidrosis and hypertrichosis. Clinically, the lesions will have to be differentiated from other vascular tumors such as infantile hemangiomas, congenital hemangiomas, and Kaposi’s sarcoma, as well as subcutaneous fat necrosis of the newborn, cellulitis, and nonaccidental trauma.
Pathogenesis of tufted angiomas is poorly understood. A recent case report found a somatic mutation on GNA14.This protein regulates Ras activity and modulates endothelial cell permeability and migration in response to FGF2 and VEGFA. The p.205L mutation causes activation of GNA14, which upregulates pERK-MAPK pathway, suggesting MAPK inhibition as a potential target for therapy. Clinically, tufted angioma can present in three patterns: uncomplicated tufted angioma (most common type); tufted angioma without thrombocytopenia but with chronic coagulopathy, as it was seen in our patient; and tufted angioma associated with Kasabach-Merritt phenomenon (KMP). KMP is characterized by thrombocytopenia in association with microangiopathic hemolytic anemia, consumptive coagulopathy, and enlarging vascular tumor. Treatment of uncomplicated tufted angioma will depend on symptomatology, size, and location of the lesion. Smaller lesions in noncosmetically sensitive areas can be treated with surgical excision. Cases that are not amenable to excision can be treated with aspirin. There are also reports of response to topical modalities including tacrolimus and timolol. For complicated cases associated with KMP, sirolimus, systemic corticosteroids, ticlopidine, interferon, or vincristine are recommended. Some lesions may demonstrate spontaneous regression.
Dr. Matiz is a pediatric dermatologist at Southern California Permanente Medical Group, San Diego.
References
Cohen S et al. Dermatol Online J. 2019 Sep 15;25(9):13030/qt6pv254mc.
Lim YH et al. Pediatr Dermatol. 2019 Nov;36(6):963-4.
Prasuna A, Rao PN. Indian Dermatol Online J. 2015;6:266-8.
As the lesion was growing, getting more violaceous and indurated, a biopsy was performed. The biopsy showed multiple discrete lobules of dermal capillaries with slight extension into the superficial subcutis. Capillary lobules demonstrate the “cannonball-like” architecture often associated with tufted angioma, and some lobules showed bulging into adjacent thin-walled vessels. Spindled endothelial cells lining slit-like vessels were present in the mid dermis, although this comprises a minority of the lesion. The majority of the subcutis was uninvolved. The findings are overall most consistent with a tufted angioma.
Kaposiform hemangioendothelioma (KHE) has been considered given the presence of occasional slit-like vascular spaces; however, the lesion is predominantly superficial and therefore the lesion is best classified as tufted angioma. GLUT–1 staining was negative.
At the time of biopsy, blood work was ordered, which showed a normal complete blood count with normal number of platelets, slightly elevated D-dimer, and slightly low fibrinogen. Several repeat blood counts and coagulation tests once a week for a few weeks revealed no changes.
The patient was started on aspirin at a dose of 5 mg/kg per day. After a week on the medication the lesion was starting to get smaller and less red.
Tufted angiomas are a rare type of vascular tumor within the spectrum of kaposiform hemangioendotheliomas. Most cases present within the first year of life; some occur at birth. They usually present as papules, plaques, or erythematous, violaceous indurated nodules on the face, neck, trunk, and extremities. The lesions can also be present with hyperhidrosis and hypertrichosis. Clinically, the lesions will have to be differentiated from other vascular tumors such as infantile hemangiomas, congenital hemangiomas, and Kaposi’s sarcoma, as well as subcutaneous fat necrosis of the newborn, cellulitis, and nonaccidental trauma.
Pathogenesis of tufted angiomas is poorly understood. A recent case report found a somatic mutation on GNA14.This protein regulates Ras activity and modulates endothelial cell permeability and migration in response to FGF2 and VEGFA. The p.205L mutation causes activation of GNA14, which upregulates pERK-MAPK pathway, suggesting MAPK inhibition as a potential target for therapy. Clinically, tufted angioma can present in three patterns: uncomplicated tufted angioma (most common type); tufted angioma without thrombocytopenia but with chronic coagulopathy, as it was seen in our patient; and tufted angioma associated with Kasabach-Merritt phenomenon (KMP). KMP is characterized by thrombocytopenia in association with microangiopathic hemolytic anemia, consumptive coagulopathy, and enlarging vascular tumor. Treatment of uncomplicated tufted angioma will depend on symptomatology, size, and location of the lesion. Smaller lesions in noncosmetically sensitive areas can be treated with surgical excision. Cases that are not amenable to excision can be treated with aspirin. There are also reports of response to topical modalities including tacrolimus and timolol. For complicated cases associated with KMP, sirolimus, systemic corticosteroids, ticlopidine, interferon, or vincristine are recommended. Some lesions may demonstrate spontaneous regression.
Dr. Matiz is a pediatric dermatologist at Southern California Permanente Medical Group, San Diego.
References
Cohen S et al. Dermatol Online J. 2019 Sep 15;25(9):13030/qt6pv254mc.
Lim YH et al. Pediatr Dermatol. 2019 Nov;36(6):963-4.
Prasuna A, Rao PN. Indian Dermatol Online J. 2015;6:266-8.
A 35-day-old female was referred to our pediatric dermatology clinic for evaluation of a red lesion on the right arm. The lesion presented at about 4 days of life as a red plaque (image 1 at 8 days of life).

On the following days, the lesion started growing but it didn't seem to be tender or bothersome to the patient (image 2, at 35 days of life).

At a 2-week follow up the lesion was getting fuller and more violaceous. There was no history of fever and the lesion didn't appear tender to the touch.
She was born via normal spontaneous vaginal delivery. There were no complications and the mother received prenatal care.
On exam she had a red to violaceous nodule on the right arm (image 3 at 45 days of life).














