Sahar M El-Haggar,1 Sahar K Hegazy,1 Sherief M Abd-Elsalam,2 Eslam B Elkaeed,3 Ahmed A Al-Karmalawy,4 Mostafa M Bahaa5 1Clinical Pharmacy Department, Faculty of Pharmacy, Tanta University, El-Gharbia Government, Tanta, 31527, Egypt; 2Tropical Medicine and Infectious Diseases Department, Faculty of Medicine, Tanta University, Tanta, 315274, Egypt; 3Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Pharmacy, AlMaarefa University, Riyadh, 13713, Saudi Arabia; 4Department of Pharmaceutical Medicinal Chemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy, Horus University-Egypt, New Damietta, 34518, Egypt; 5Pharmacy Practice Department, Faculty of Pharmacy, Horus University, New Damietta, EgyptCorrespondence: Mostafa M Bahaa, Pharmacy Practice Department, Faculty of Pharmacy, Horus University, New Damietta, Egypt, Tel +201025538337, Email mostafabahaamnf@gmail.com; mbahaa@horus.edu.egBackground and Purpose: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is defined as an association of chronic abdominal pain with bowel habit abnormalities, without clear organic dysfunction. T-type calcium channels and low-grade mucosal inflammation are linked to abdominal pain; however, medical treatments for IBS abdominal pain are largely ineffective. In this study, we investigated if pentoxifylline (PTX) and ethosuximide could potentially alleviate abdominal pain in patients with IBS treated with mebeverine.Methods: We recruited 150 patients from Tanta University Hospital to this randomized, prospective, and double blinded study. Patients were randomly allocated to three groups (n = 50). Group 1 (mebeverine) received 135 mg mebeverine three times/day (t.i.d). Group 2 (ethosuximide group) received 135 mg mebeverine t.i.d plus 250 mg ethosuximide twice daily (b.i.d) and group 3 (PTX group) received 135 mg mebeverine t.i.d plus 400 mg PTX b.i.d. Patients were assessed by a gastroenterologist at baseline and 6 months after therapy. Serum interleukin-8 (IL-8), IL-6, tumor necrosis-α (TNF-α), fecal myeloperoxidase, and fecal neutrophil gelatinase associated lipocalin (NGAL) levels were measured before and after therapy. The numeric pain rating scale (NRS) was also assessed before and after therapy.Primary Outcomes: Reduced NRS scores and abdominal pain relief.Secondary Outcomes: Decreased inflammatory biomarkers.Results: After 6 months, groups 2 and 3 showed a significantly greater reduction in serum IL-8, IL-6, TNF-α, fecal myeloperoxidase, and fecal NGAL levels when compared to group 1 after therapy. Both groups 2 and 3 showed significant reductions in NRS scores when compared to the group 1.Conclusion: Ethosuximide and PTX may be promising, novel adjunct drugs to antispasmodics for relieving abdominal pain in patients with IBS.Trial Registration: Identifier: NCT04217733.Graphical Abstract: Keywords: IBS, inflammation, pentoxifylline, Ca++ channels, ethosuximide
Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11 827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long-term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services. Funding National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit, Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, Medtronic, Sarcoma UK, The Urology Foundation, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research.
Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long- term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services. Funding National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit, Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, Medtronic, Sarcoma UK, The Urology Foundation, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research.