The American journal of medicine
-
Two recently reported studies of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), the Omeprazole versus Misoprostol for NSAID-induced Ulcer Management and the Acid Suppression Trial: Ranitidine versus Omeprazole for NSAID-associated Ulcer Treatment studies, concluded that omeprazole was superior to a subtherapeutic misoprostol or an ineffective dose of ranitidine for the endpoint, prevention of gastroduodenal ulcers in chronic NSAID users. Helicobacter pylori status was collected prospectively but was not reported. We report separate analyses for patients with unequivocal NSAID ulcers (H. pylori negative) and patients whose NSAID use was complicated by the presence of an active H. pylori infection. ⋯ That the Misoprostol Ulcer Complications Outcomes Safety Assessment (MUCOSA) trial found full-dose misoprostol to be more effective in ulcer prevention than it was in prevention of ulcer complications suggests that either many of the ulcer complications were related to H. pylori ulcers or that more antisecretory activity than can be provided with misoprostol is needed, or both. The question remains whether the combination of low-dose misoprostol plus an antisecretory drug (either an H(2)-receptor antagonist or a proton pump inhibitor) would provide superior results compared with either alone. That omeprazole was not superior to one half the dose of misoprostol used in the ulcer complication prevention, or MUCOSA, study indicates that it would not be prudent to suggest that ulcer prevention with omeprazole alone would be able to provide similar protection to misoprostol.
-
Little is known about physicians' use of inpatient cardiac telemetry units among emergency department patients at risk for cardiac complications. We therefore studied the outcomes of patients admitted to inpatient telemetry beds to identify a subset of patients from whom cardiac monitoring could be withheld safely. ⋯ The prediction rule accurately identified patients with or without chest pain who were at very low risk of major complications, identifying a subset from whom cardiac monitoring could be withheld safely.
-
Comparative Study
Comparison of four strategies for diagnosing deep vein thrombosis: a cost-effectiveness analysis.
Four strategies for the diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis have been validated recently. The strategies use various combinations of assessment of a patient's clinical probability of having deep venous thrombosis, serial lower limb venous compression ultrasonography, and measurement of plasma D-dimer levels. We compared the cost-effectiveness of these diagnostic strategies. ⋯ Combining clinical probability and D-dimer with a single ultrasound in the diagnostic workup of patients with possible deep vein thrombosis is highly cost-effective, allowing a reduction in costs and resource use without any substantial increase in mortality. Serial ultrasonography is less cost-effective.