What’s the connection between severe hypoglycemia and hypothermia?

The association of severe hypoglycemia and low body temperatures has been well documented at least since 1960s.  Hypothermia is thought to be caused by low blood glucose in the brain (neuroglucopenia) which may serve as a protective mechanism for decreasing energy demand during glucose deprivation.1-2

A 2012 retrospective study involving mostly patients with diabetes mellitus with severe hypoglycemia (majority with serum glucose 18-54 mg/dl) found that 23% of patients had hypothermia (defined as body temperature < 95◦F or 35◦C). The incidence of hypothermia was not affected by age, diabetes, season or time of day.  Two patients had extremely low temperatures (<90◦F).  There was an association between hypothermia and severity of hypoglycemia.1

An older experimental study (1974) involving 36 recumbent nude men in thermoneutral environment found that that insulin-induced hypoglycemia was associated with rectal temperatures below 96.2◦F (36◦C) in 33%.  Cooling was attributed to reduction in heat production and to secretion of sweat, peripheral vasodilatation and hyperventilation.2

But before you attribute hypothermia to hypoglycemia, make sure other causes of hypothermia such as sepsis, hypoadrenalism, hypothyroidism, alcohol and stroke are ruled out.3  

Bonus Pearl: Did you know that heat production is accomplished by shivering, which can increase the normal basal metabolic rate by 2-5 times as well as via non-shivering thermogenesis through increased levels of thyroxine and epinephrine?3

Liked this post? Download the app on your smart phone and sign up below to catch future pearls right into your inbox, all for free!

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

References

  1. Tran C, Gariani K, Hermann FR, et al. Hypothermia is a frequent sign of severe hypoglycaemia in patients with diabetes. Diab Metab 2012;38:370-72. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1262363612000535?via%3Dihub
  2. Strauch BS, Felig P, Baxter JD, et al. Hypothermia in hypoglycemia. JAMA 1969;210:345-46. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/349081
  3. McCullough L, Arora S. Diagnosis and treatment of hypothermia. Am Fam Physician 2004;70:2325-2332. https://www.aafp.org/afp/2004/1215/p2325.html

Disclosures: The listed questions and answers are solely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of Mercy Hospital-St. Louis or its affiliate healthcare centers, Mass General Hospital, Harvard Medical School or its affiliated institutions. Although every effort has been made to provide accurate information, the author is far from being perfect. The reader is urged to verify the content of the material with other sources as deemed appropriate and exercise clinical judgment in the interpretation and application of the information provided herein. No responsibility for an adverse outcome or guarantees for a favorable clinical result is assumed by the author. Thank you!

What’s the connection between severe hypoglycemia and hypothermia?

Is my patient with varicose veins at higher risk of venous thromboembolism?

Although varicose veins are common and usually not associated with serious health complications, increasing scientific evidence suggests that they are associated with increased risk of subsequent incident deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE). 1-3

A 2018 retrospective cohort study involving patients with the diagnosis of varicose veins and controls (>200,000 subjects each) based on claims data from Taiwan found a higher incidence rate of DVT among cases (hazard ratio [HR] 5.3, 95%C.I. 5.1-5.6). Increased risk of DVT with varicose veins was reported in all age groups but decreased with increasing age.  The HR was higher within the first year of the diagnosis of varicose veins. 1

In the same study, the incidence of PE was higher among participants with varicose veins (HR 1.7 95% C.I. 1.5-1.9).  Again, the association did not significantly differ by age.1  Other smaller studies have found similar association between DVT and varicose veins. 2,3

Although these studies at best demonstrate an association (not necessarily a cause and effect relationship) between varicose veins and venous thromboembolism, several possible explanations have been posited. Animal studies have demonstrated higher concentrations of macrophages, monocytes, neutrophils, lymphocytes, and matrix metalloproteinases in venous valves exposed to high pressure for prolonged periods.  The resultant inflammatory state in patients with varicose veins may in turn promote a prothrombotic state contributing to venous thromboembolism. 1,4

Bonus Pearl: Did you know that nearly 1 of 4  adults in the United States have been reported to have varicose veins?

Liked this post? Download the app on your smart phone and sign up below to catch future pearls right into your inbox, all for free!

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

References

  1. Chang SL, Huang YL, Lee MC, et al. Association of varicose veins with incident venous thromboembolism and peripheral artery disease. JAMA 208;319:807-817. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2673551
  2. Muller-Buhl U, Leutgeb R, et al. Varicose veins are a risk factor for deep venous thrombosis in general practice patients. Vasa 2012;41:360-65. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22915533/
  3. Engbers MJ, Karasu A, Blom JW, et al. Clinical features of venous insufficiency and the risk of venous thrombosis in older people. Br J Haematol 2015;171:417-23. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26221838/
  4. Riva N, Donadini MP, Ageno W. Epidemiology and pathophysiology of venous thromboembolism: similarities with atherothrombosis and the role of inflammation. Thromb Haemost 2015;113:1176-1183. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25472800/

Disclosures: The listed questions and answers are solely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of Mercy Hospital-St. Louis or its affiliate healthcare centers, Mass General Hospital, Harvard Medical School or its affiliated institutions. Although every effort has been made to provide accurate information, the author is far from being perfect. The reader is urged to verify the content of the material with other sources as deemed appropriate and exercise clinical judgment in the interpretation and application of the information provided herein. No responsibility for an adverse outcome or guarantees for a favorable clinical result is assumed by the author. Thank you!

Is my patient with varicose veins at higher risk of venous thromboembolism?

How effective are the mRNA Covid-19 vaccines in reducing the risk of hospitalization among adults 65 years of age or older?

The mRNA vaccines by Pfizer and Moderna seem very effective in not only reducing risk of symptomatic Covid-19 but also risk of hospitalization among adults 65 years of age or older.   A CDC study published on April 28, 2021, showed a vaccine efficacy of 94% among fully immunized and 64% among partially immunized adults ≥ 65 years of age  with approximately one-half of subjects  ≥75 years old.1

This study was carried out in 24 hospitals in 14 states in the U.S. during January 1, 2021-March 26, 2021, and involved 417 patients: 187 case-patients with Covid-19 and 230 controls with negative SARS-CoV-2 PCR test.  Among patients with Covid-19, 10% were partially immunized (vs 27% among controls) and 0.5% were fully immunized (vs. 8% among controls). 1

An Israeli study in a nationwide mass vaccination setting involving persons (28% ≥ 60 y) receiving Pfizer mRNA vaccine similarly found a vaccine efficacy of 74% for hospitalization for partially immunized and 87% for fully immunized persons.2

The high effectiveness of mRNA vaccines against more severe Covid-19 requiring hospitalization is great news, of course, as advanced age is by far the greatest risk factor for death from Covid-19, independent of underlying comorbidities.3   

Bonus Pearl: Did you know that prior to the availability of effective Covid-19 vaccination, adults over 65 years of age represented 80% of hospitalizations and had a 23-fold greater risk of death than those under 65?3

Liked this post? Download the app on your smart phone and sign up below to catch future pearls right into your inbox, all for free!

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

References

  1. Tenforde MW, Olson SM, Self WH, et al. Effectiveness of Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines against COVID-19 among hospitalized adults aged ≥65 years-United States, January-March 2021. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7018e1.htm?s_cid=mm7018e1_w
  2. Dagan N, Barda N, Kepten E, et al. BNT162b2mRNA Covid-19 vaccine in a nationwide mass vaccination setting. N Engl J Med 2021;384:1412-1423. https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2101765
  3. Mueller AL, McNamara MS, Sinclair DA. Why does COVID-19 disproportionately affect older people. Aging (Albany NY) 2020;12:9959-9981. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7288963/

Disclosures: The listed questions and answers are solely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of Mercy Hospital-St. Louis or its affiliate healthcare centers, Mass General Hospital, Harvard Medical School or its affiliated institutions. Although every effort has been made to provide accurate information, the author is far from being perfect. The reader is urged to verify the content of the material with other sources as deemed appropriate and exercise clinical judgment in the interpretation and application of the information provided herein. No responsibility for an adverse outcome or guarantees for a favorable clinical result is assumed by the author. Thank you!

How effective are the mRNA Covid-19 vaccines in reducing the risk of hospitalization among adults 65 years of age or older?

My patient with renal insufficiency developed hyponatremia after an IV contrast study.  Is there a connection between hyponatremia and iodinated contrast media?

There are several reports in the literature of hyponatremia (sometimes severe) developing in patients undergoing coronary angiography or routine IV contrast CT studies. 1-3 Although generally asymptomatic, severe hyponatremia with symptoms may also occur, particularly in those at risk of hyponatremia due to other factors.  

In a case series of 5 patients with advanced renal disease who underwent cardiac catheterization and developed post-procedure hyponatremia, the mean plasma sodium concentration decreased from 138.6 mEq/L to 122.6 mEq/L within 2-22 hours post-procedure; no patient had any neurological symptoms associated with hyponatremia. There was a strong correlation between dose of contrast administered and change in sodium level. 2

Severe symptomatic hyponatremia (confusion, stupor) was also reported in an elderly woman with blood creatinine of 0.9 mg/dL following coronary angiography (baseline plasma sodium 142 mmo/L vs. 115 mmol/L >16 hours post-procedure).  The authors suggested that a diagnosis of hyponatremia be considered in any patient who develops behavioral or neurologic manifestations after coronary angiography.3

Aside from coronary angiography, a prospective study among 103 adults (mean serum creatinine 0.79 mg/dl) undergoing contrast-enhanced CT found a drop in serum sodium from a mean concentration of 136 mmol/L to 132 mmol/L 24 hours after the procedure without any associated symptoms.1

Potential mechanisms for the development of hyponatremia after IV contrast studies include hemodilution due to translocation of fluid from intracellular space caused by high osmolality of the contrast media.1  

Bonus Pearl

Did you know that even the newer “low osmolar contrast” agents are more than 3 times the osmolality of blood?4

Liked this post? Download the app on your smart phone and sign up below to catch future pearls right into your inbox, all for free!

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

References

  1. Sankaran S, Saharia GK, Naik S, et al. Effect of iodinated contrast media on serum electrolyte concentrations in patients undergoing routine contrast computed tomography scan procedure. Int J Appl Basic Med Res 2019;9:217-220. https://www.ijabmr.org/article.asp?issn=2229-516X;year=2019;volume=9;issue=4;spage=217;epage=220;aulast=Sankaran
  2. Sirken G, Raja R, Garces J, et al. Contrast-induced translocational hyponatremia and hyperkalemia in advanced kidney disease. Am J Kidney Dis 2004;43:e9.1-e9.5. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0272638603013854?via%3Dihub
  3. Jung ES, Kang WC, Jang YR, et al. Acute severe symptomatic hyponatremia following coronary angiography. Korean Circ J 2011;41:552-554. https://europepmc.org/article/pmc/pmc3193049
  4. Bucher AM, De Cecco CN, Schoefpf UJ, et al. Is contrast medium osmolality a causal factor for contrast-induced nephropathy? BioMed Res International 2014; Volume 2014, article ID 931413. https://www.hindawi.com/journals/bmri/2014/931413/

Disclosures: The listed questions and answers are solely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Catalyst, Harvard University, its affiliate academic healthcare centers, or its contributors. Although every effort has been made to provide accurate information, the author is far from being perfect. The reader is urged to verify the content of the material with other sources as deemed appropriate and exercise clinical judgment in the interpretation and application of the information provided herein. No responsibility for an adverse outcome or guarantees for a favorable clinical result is assumed by the author. Thank you!

My patient with renal insufficiency developed hyponatremia after an IV contrast study.  Is there a connection between hyponatremia and iodinated contrast media?

Are women at higher risk of Covid-19 vaccine-related adverse events?

Data to date shows a preponderance of Covid-19 vaccine-related adverse events (AEs) among women compared to men. This finding may be due to the generally more robust immunological response to infections and vaccines among women, increased reporting of AEs by women, genetic factors, microbiome differences as well as other factors.1-3

A CDC study involving mRNA vaccines (Pfizer and Moderna) during the 1st month of vaccination roll out in the US, found that nearly 80% of adverse events were reported by women.  The great majority (>90%) of these AEs were not serious and included symptoms such as headache, dizziness and fatigue.1

A JAMA study involving individuals receiving one of the mRNA vaccines found that 94% (Pfizer) and 100% (Moderna) of anaphylaxis events occurred among women. Of note, the median age was ~40 years  with the majority of anaphylaxis events were reported after the first dose. 2

Higher incidence of AEs following Covid-19 vaccination is not surprising and may be explained biologically. Women typically have a more robust immune response to infections and vaccination, both at the level of innate and adaptive immunity with higher antibody responses.  

These findings may be in part due to hormones such as estrogen which is known to enhance differentiation of dendritic cells and proinflammatory cytokine production. Other proposed mechanisms include differences in microbiome between sexes and sex-based genetic influences on humoral immune profile with the X chromosome expressing 10 times more genes than the Y chromosome, including genes that influence immunity.3

Bonus Pearl: Did you know that anaphylactic reaction to the mRNA Covid-19 vaccines is extremely rare, occurring in only 2-5 cases/ million!2

Liked this post? Download the app on your smart phone and sign up below to catch future pearls right into your inbox, all for free!

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

References

  1. Gee J, Marquez P, Su J, et al. First month of Covid-19 vaccine safety monitoring—United States, December 14, 2020—January 13, 2021. MMWR 2021;70:283-88. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7008e3.htm
  2. Shimabukuro TT, Cole M, Su JR. Reports of anaphylaxis after receipt of mRNA Covid-19 vaccines in the US—December 14, 2020-January 18, 2021. JAMA 20201;325:1101-1102. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2776557
  3. Fischinger S, Boudreau CM, Butler AL, et al. Sex differences in vaccine-induced humoral immunity. Semin Immunopath 2019;41:239-49. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30547182/

Disclosures: The listed questions and answers are solely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of Mercy Hospital-St. Louis or its affiliate healthcare centers, Mass General Hospital, Harvard Medical School or its affiliated institutions. Although every effort has been made to provide accurate information, the author is far from being perfect. The reader is urged to verify the content of the material with other sources as deemed appropriate and exercise clinical judgment in the interpretation and application of the information provided herein. No responsibility for an adverse outcome or guarantees for a favorable clinical result is assumed by the author. Thank you!

Are women at higher risk of Covid-19 vaccine-related adverse events?

How effective are the current Covid-19 vaccines in reducing the risk of asymptomatic infection?

Limited data suggest that not only are the mRNA Covid-19 vaccines effective in reducing the risk of symptomatic disease  by greater than 90% but also reducing the risk of asymptomatic infections by 80-90% after the second dose and by 62-80% after the 1st dose. 1-3

A CDC study of health care personnel, first responders, and other essential and frontline workers who received one of the 2 currently available mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2-Pfizer or mRNA-1273-Moderna) and underwent weekly testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection irrespective of symptoms found 90% efficacy in preventing infection among fully immunized (≥14 days after 2nd dose) and 80% efficacy in preventing infection among the partially immunized (≥14 days after 1st dose).  The majority of SARS-CoV-2 infections were identified by weekly specimens, with 11% remaining without symptoms.1

In a retrospective study of over 39,000 asymptomatic adult patients undergoing pre-procedural SARS-CoV-2 molecular screening tests, an 80% reduction in the risk of a positive test  was observed in those who had received 2 doses of an mRNA vaccine (majority Pfizer) and 72% reduction in those following a single dose of vaccine >10 days prior to their pre-procedure test.2  In the original Moderna trial , a 62% reduction in the risk of asymptomatic infection was seen among participants just before the second dose (ie, partially immunized).3 

Collectively, these reports support the high efficacy of mRNA vaccines in reducing the risk of SARS-CoV-2 in asymptomatic infection.  Whether these findings can be reproduced with other vaccine preparations is not known at this time!

Bonus Pearl: Did you know that according to 1 study, asymptomatic patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection may be more likely to be women, younger and have shorter duration of viral shedding? 4

Liked this post? Download the app on your smart phone and sign up below to catch future pearls right into your inbox, all for free!

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

References

  1. Thompson MG, Burgess JL, Naleway AL, et al. Interim estimates of vaccine effectiveness of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 Covid-19 vaccines in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection among health care personnel, first responders, and other essential and frontline workers—Eight U.S. locations, December 2020-March 2021. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7013e3.htm
  2. Tande AJ, Pollock BD, Shah ND, et al. Impact of the Covid-19 vaccine on asymptomatic infection among patients undergoing pre-procedural Covid-19 molecular screening. Clin Infect Dis 2021. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33704435/
  3. Baden LR, El Sahly HM, Essink B, et al. Efficacy and safety of the mRNA-1273 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. N Engl J Med 2021;384:403-16. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2035389
  4. Yang R, Gui X, Xiong Y. Comparison of clinical characteristics of patients with asymptomatic vs symptomatic coronavirus disease 2019 in Wuhan, China. JAMA Network Open 2020; May 27. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2766237

Disclosures: The listed questions and answers are solely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of Mercy Hospital-St. Louis or its affiliate healthcare centers, Mass General Hospital, Harvard Medical School or its affiliated institutions. Although every effort has been made to provide accurate information, the author is far from being perfect. The reader is urged to verify the content of the material with other sources as deemed appropriate and exercise clinical judgment in the interpretation and application of the information provided herein. No responsibility for an adverse outcome or guarantees for a favorable clinical result is assumed by the author. Thank you!

How effective are the current Covid-19 vaccines in reducing the risk of asymptomatic infection?

How long should my patient recovering from Covid-19 remain on isolation precautions?

For the great majority of patients with Covid-19, the risk of shedding viable SARS-CoV2 diminishes considerably as the time from onset of symptoms nears 10 days or more, with the risk higher among those who have severe (eg, sp02 <94%)  or critical disease (eg, in need of ICU care) or who are immunocompromised. 1-4  

For patients with mild-moderate illness who are not immunocompromised, the CDC recommends isolation for “at least 10 days” from onset of symptoms as long as at least 24 hours have passed since last fever without the use of fever-reducing medications and symptoms  (eg, cough, shortness of breath) have improved.  For patients with severe to critical illness or who are severely immunocompromised, “at least 10 days” and up to 20 days since onset of symptoms—with qualifications as above— is recommended. 1

A 2021 meta-analysis found that although SARS-CoV-2 RNA shedding in respiratory and stool samples may be prolonged, duration of viable virus was relatively short with no study detecting live virus beyond day 9 of illness.2

In contrast, another study involving patients with severe or critical illness (23% immunocompromised, 2/3 on mechanical ventilation) found  that the median time of infectious virus shedding was 8 days (range 0-20) and concluded that detection of infectious virus was common after 8 days or more since onset of symptoms; the probability of isolating infectious SARS-CoV-2 was  ≤5% when the duration of symptoms was 15.2 days (95% CI 13.4-17.2). In the same study, a single patient had infectious particles for up to 20 days following onset of symptoms. 3

The take home point is that although 10 days of isolation since onset of symptoms should be sufficient for mild to moderate Covid-19, for those with severe or critical disease or immunocompromised state, a longer duration up to 20 days may be needed.  The setting and status of the potential contacts (eg, an immunocompromised person in household setting) should also be considered in our decision making. 4

Bonus Pearl: Did you know that infectious particles are unlikely to be isolated from respiratory tract samples once patients develop a serum neutralizing antibody titer of at least 1:80, potentially useful information in deciding when a patient may come off isolation? 3

Liked this post? Download the app on your smart phone and sign up below to catch future pearls right into your inbox, all for free!

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

 

References

  1. Discontinuation of transmission-based precautions and disposition of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection in healthcare settings. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/disposition-hospitalized-patients.html#definitions. Accessed March 24, 2021
  2. Cevik M, Tate M, Lloyd O, et al. Sars-Cov-2, SARS-CoV, and MERS-CoV viral load dynamics, duration of viral shedding, and infectiousness: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Microbe 2021;2:e13-22. https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lanmic/PIIS2666-5247(20)30172-5.pdf
  3. Van Kampen JJA, van de Vijver DAMC, Fraaij PLA, et al. Duration and key determinants of infectious virus shedding in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). Nature Communications 2021;12:267. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-20568-4
  4. Kadire SR, Fabre V, Wenzel RP. Doctor, how long should I isolate? NEJM, March 2021 https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMclde2100910?articleTools=true

 

Disclosures: The listed questions and answers are solely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of Mercy Hospital-St. Louis or its affiliate healthcare centers. Although every effort has been made to provide accurate information, the author is far from being perfect. The reader is urged to verify the content of the material with other sources as deemed appropriate and exercise clinical judgment in the interpretation and application of the information provided herein. No responsibility for an adverse outcome or guarantees for a favorable clinical result is assumed by the author. Thank you!

How long should my patient recovering from Covid-19 remain on isolation precautions?

My elderly patient has a WBC count of 60,000 without obvious hematologic malignancy.  How likely is it that his leukocytosis is related to an infection?

Although extremely high WBC count in the absence of myeloproliferative disease may be associated with solid tumors and other causes, infections are often the most common cause of leukemoid reaction (LR), including tuberculosis, Clostridiodes difficile colitis, shigellosis, salmonellosis, pneumonia, abscesses, as well as  parasitic infections (eg, malaria), fungal infections (mucormycosis), and viral diseases (eg, HIV, EBV, Chickungunya fever).1-4   

In a study of 173 hospitalized patients (mean age 69 y) with leukemoid reaction (defined in this study as WBC ≥30,000/µl), infection was the most common cause of LR (48%), followed by tissue ischemia/stress (28%), inflammation (eg, pancreatitis, diverticulitis without perforation) and obstetric diagnoses (7% each) and malignant tumor (5%).1 

In the same study, the most common infections were “sepsis”, pneumonia and urinary tract infections.  Bacteremia was documented in 13%, while Clostridiodes difficile toxin assay was positive in 7% of patients.  The highest WBC counts were observed in patients with either a positive blood culture or positive C. difficile toxin.  In-hospital mortality rate was very high at 62%.

Similarly, in a study involving 105 hospitalized patients, the most common cause was infection, followed by malignancy and other causes. 2 In a smaller study of 25 patients with “extreme” leukocytosis (defined as WBC ≥50,000/µl) infection was considered the cause in 52% and malignancy in 44% of patients; about one-third were bacteremic (eg, Pseudomonas sp, Streptococcus pneumoniae, E. coli).3

Bonus Pearl: Did you know that besides infections and malignancy, drugs (eg, corticosteroids, epinephrine) and ingestion of ethylene glycol have also been associated with LR? 1,3,4

Liked this post? Download the app on your smart phone and sign up below to catch future pearls right into your inbox, all for free!

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

References

  1. Potasman I, Grupper M. Leukemoid reaction:Spectrum and prognosis of 173 adult patients. Clin Infect Dis 2013;57:e177-81. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23994818/
  2. Portich JP, Faulhaber GAM. Leudemoid reaction: A 21st-century study. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31765058/
  3. Halkes CJM, Dijstelbloem HM, Eelman Rooda SJ, et al. Extreme leucocytosis: not always leukaemia. The Netherlands J Med 2007;65:248-51. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17656811/
  4. Kumar P, Charaniya R, Sahoo R, et al. Leukemoid reaction in Chickungunya fever. J Clin Diagn Res 2016;10:OD05-OD06. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4948452/

 

Disclosures: The listed questions and answers are solely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of Mercy Hospital-St. Louis or its affiliate healthcare centers. Although every effort has been made to provide accurate information, the author is far from being perfect. The reader is urged to verify the content of the material with other sources as deemed appropriate and exercise clinical judgment in the interpretation and application of the information provided herein. No responsibility for an adverse outcome or guarantees for a favorable clinical result is assumed by the author. Thank you!

My elderly patient has a WBC count of 60,000 without obvious hematologic malignancy.  How likely is it that his leukocytosis is related to an infection?

My elderly patient developed a flare-up of her gout few days after receiving Covid-19 vaccine. Is there a connection between immunization and gout flare?

Although the connection between Covid-19 vaccination and gout flare has yet to be established, higher rates of gout/gout flare following the administration of several other vaccines (eg, influenza, tetatnus, recombinant zoster) have been reported.1  Thus, it is conceivable that Covid-19 vaccine may also be associated with gout flare as more and more people are immunized.  

A 2019 prospective study of over 500 patients with gout found that vaccination was associated with 2-fold higher odds of gout flare (aO.R. 1.99; 95% ci 1.01-3.89) during the 2 day period following immunization; no information on the type of vaccines administered was provided, however.1  Similarly,  higher risk of gout (3.6-fold) has been reported in recipients of recombinant zoster vaccine following immunization.1

An intriguing mechanism explaining the association of vaccination and gout flare is the activation of the Nlrp3 inflammasome, a multiprotein complex produced in response to diverse stimuli such as uric acid crystals and ATP released from tissue injury/necrotic cells.2 Of interest, ~25% of patients with asymptomatic hyperuricemia have been found to have evidence of monosodium urate crystals in and around their joints by advanced imaging, such that vaccination may potentially bring out more inflammatory response and gout flare.

Although aluminum adjuvants intended to increase the immunogenicity of one-half of all routine adult vaccines (eg, tetanus, diphteria, pertussis) have been shown to activate the Nlrp3 inflammasome in vitro, neither currently available mRNA vaccines (Pfizer, Moderna) nor the Johnson&Johnson vaccine contains aluminum as an adjuvant. 4  

Despite the potential for gout flare following adult vaccination, it should be emphasized that the absolute risk is still low and pales compared to the overwhelming benefits of vaccination in general.1

Bonus Pearl: Did you know that, in addition to the usual uric acid lowering drugs, losartan, fenofibrate and some non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, such as indomethacin, also lower serum uric acid levels? 5,6

Liked this post? Download the app on your smart phone and sign up below to catch future pearls right into your inbox, all for free!

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

References

  1. Yokose C, McCormick N, Chen C, et al. Risk of gout flares after vaccination: a prospective case-crossoverstudy. Ann Rheum Dis 2019;78:1601-1604. https://ard.bmj.com/content/early/2019/07/31/annrheumdis-2019-215724.info?versioned=true
  2. Lyer SS, Pulskens WP, Sadler JJ, et al. Necrotic cells trigger a sterile inflammatory response throught the Nlrp3 inflammasome. PNAS 2009;106:20388-20393. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19918053/
  3. Yokose C, Choi H. Response to “Clarification regarding the statement of the association between the recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) and gout flares’ by Didierlaurent etal. Ann Rheum Dis Month, December 2019. https://ard.bmj.com/content/annrheumdis/early/2019/12/18/annrheumdis-2019-216670.full.pdf
  4. Covid-19 vaccine information. https://covidvaccine.mo.gov/ Accessed March 16, 2021.
  5. Daskalopoulou SS, Tzovaras V, Mikhailidis DP, et al. Effect on serum uric acid levels of drugs prescribed for indications other than treating hyperuricaemia. Current Pharmaceutical Design 2005;11:4161-75. https://www.eurekaselect.com/60510/article
  6. Tiitinen S, Nissila M, Ruutsalo HM, et al. Effect of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs on the renal excretion of uric acid. Clin Rheumatol 1983;2:233-6. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6678696/#:~:text=The%20effect%20of%209%20nonsteroidal,studied%20had%20no%20significant%20influence.

Disclosures: The listed questions and answers are solely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of Mercy Hospital-St. Louis or its affiliate healthcare centers. Although every effort has been made to provide accurate information, the author is far from being perfect. The reader is urged to verify the content of the material with other sources as deemed appropriate and exercise clinical judgment in the interpretation and application of the information provided herein. No responsibility for an adverse outcome or guarantees for a favorable clinical result is assumed by the author. Thank you!

My elderly patient developed a flare-up of her gout few days after receiving Covid-19 vaccine. Is there a connection between immunization and gout flare?

Why might Lactated Ringer’s (LR) solution be preferred over normal saline (NS) for fluid resuscitation in acute pancreatitis?

Although the data is limited, fluid resuscitation with lactated Ringer’s (LR) solution in acute pancreatitis has been associated with lower risk of persistent systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) compared to normal saline (NS),  with an additional trend toward lower mortality.1-3

A 2018 meta-analysis of 3 randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) and 2 retrospective studies involving 428 patients found a significantly lower odds of developing SIRS at 24 hours (OR 0.38, CI 0.15-0.98).   Mortality was also lower in the LR group (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.28-1.29), though it did not reach statistical significance. 1

A small 2011 RCT was the first to suggest the “protective” effect of LR in acute pancreatitis, reporting significant reduction in the prevalence of SIRS after 24 hours when compared to NS (84% vs 0%);  patients on LR also had a significantly lower C-reactive protein (CRP) (104 mg/L vs 51.4 mg/L) at 24 hours. 2   Significantly lower CRP levels were also reported at 48 and 72 hours when LR was compared to NS in another RCT in acute pancreatitis.3

As for potential mechanisms for the observed beneficial effects of LR on the pancreatic tissue in acute pancreatitis, hyperchloremic metabolic acidosis (with its attendant low extracellular pH) often seen in large volume NS resuscitation was initially thought to contribute to pancreatic injury.2  A more plausible explanation, however, may relate to the direct anti-inflammatory effect of lactate itself.  Of interest, lactate has been shown to inhibit macrophage induction invitro 4  and suppress innate immunity in experimental models of pancreatitis. 3 Who would have guessed!

Bonus Pearl: Did you know that Ringer’s solution gets its name from Sydney Ringer, a 19th century physician who demonstrated the importance of salts of sodium, potassium, calcium and chloride in precise proportions for cellular function?  LR solution was actually concocted in the 1930s by a St. Louis pediatrician, Alexis Hartmann, and was also known as the “Hartmann’s solution”. 4

Liked this post? Download the app on your smart phone and sign up below to catch future pearls right into your inbox, all for free!

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

References

  1. Iqbal U, Anwar H, Scribani M. Ringer’s lactate versus normal saline in acute pancreatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Dig Dis 208;19:335-341. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1751-2980.12606
  2. Wu BU, Hwang JQ, Gardner TH, et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2011;9:710-17. https://www.cghjournal.org/article/S1542-3565(11)00454-X/abstract
  3. de-Madaria E, Herrera-Marante I, Gonzalez-Camacho V, et al. Fluid resuscitation with lactated Ringer’s solution vs normal saline in acute pancreatitis: A triple-blind, randomized, controlled trial. UEG J 2017;6:63-72. file:///C:/Users/manifa/OneDrive%20-%20Mercy%20Online/pancreatitis%20LR2spain.pdf
  4. Lee JA. Sydney Ringer (1834-1910) and Alexis Hartmann (1898-1964). Anaesthesia 1981;36:1115-21. https://associationofanaesthetists-publications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1365-2044.1981.tb08698.x

Disclosures: The listed questions and answers are solely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of Mercy Hospital-St. Louis or its affiliate healthcare centers. Although every effort has been made to provide accurate information, the author is far from being perfect. The reader is urged to verify the content of the material with other sources as deemed appropriate and exercise clinical judgment in the interpretation and application of the information provided herein. No responsibility for an adverse outcome or guarantees for a favorable clinical result is assumed by the author. Thank you!

 

Why might Lactated Ringer’s (LR) solution be preferred over normal saline (NS) for fluid resuscitation in acute pancreatitis?