Browsing by Author "Stamenkovic, Dusica (23037217500)"

At present, neither specific antiviral drugs, nor vaccine is recommended for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatment. In this review we discuss the drugs suggested as therapy for COVID-19 infection, with a focus on chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine. The list of drugs used for COVID-19 treatment includes a combination of lopinavir and ritonavir, remdesivir, favipiravir, alpha-interferon, ribavirin, atazanavir, umifenovir, and tocilizumab. As their efficacy and safety are under investigation, none of the regulatory agencies approved them for the treatment of COVID-19 infection. Although chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine possess antiviral and immunomodulatory effects, in practice benefit of their use for COVID-19 treatment is controversial. Several studies investigating hydroxychloroquine were stopped and the French national medicines regulator suspended its use in clinical trials because of safety concerns. The results from the double-blind, randomised clinical trials, including large number of participants, will add better insight into the role of these two drugs as already available and affordable, antimalarial therapy. The ethical issue on emergency use of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in the settings of COVID-19 should be carefully managed, with adherence to the “monitored emergency use of unregistered and experimental interventions” (MEURI) framework or be ethically approved as a trial, as stated by the WHO. Potential shortage of chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine on the market can be overbridged with regular prescriptions by medical doctors and national drug agency should ensure sufficient quantities of these drugs for standard indications. © 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd

Background/aims: Early assessment of disease severity and vigilant patient monitoring are key factors for adequate treatment of acute pancreatitis (AP). The aim of this study was to determine the correlation of procalcitonin (PCT) serum concentrations and intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) as prognostic markers in early stages of AP. Methods: This prospective observational study included 51 patients, of which 29 had severe AP (SAP). Patients were evaluated with the Acute Physiology And Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II) score, Creactive protein (CRP) and PCT serum concentrations and IAP at 24 h from admission. PCT was measured three times in the 1st week of disease and three times afterward, while IAP was measured daily. PCT and IAP values correlated with each other, and also compared with APACHE II score and CRP values. Results: PCT, IAP, CRP values and APACHE II score at 24 h after hospital admission were significantly elevated in patients with SAP. There was significant correlation between PCT and IAP values measured at 24 h of admission, and between maximal PCT and IAP values. Sensitivity/specificity for predicting AP severity at 24 h after admission was 89%/69% for APACHE II score, 75%/86% for CRP, 86%/63% for PCT and 75%/77% for IAP. Conclusions: Increased IAP was accompanied by increased PCT serum concentration in patients with AP. PCT and IAP can both be used as early markers of AP severity. Copyright © 2012, IAP and EPC.

Background/aims: Early assessment of disease severity and vigilant patient monitoring are key factors for adequate treatment of acute pancreatitis (AP). The aim of this study was to determine the correlation of procalcitonin (PCT) serum concentrations and intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) as prognostic markers in early stages of AP. Methods: This prospective observational study included 51 patients, of which 29 had severe AP (SAP). Patients were evaluated with the Acute Physiology And Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II) score, Creactive protein (CRP) and PCT serum concentrations and IAP at 24 h from admission. PCT was measured three times in the 1st week of disease and three times afterward, while IAP was measured daily. PCT and IAP values correlated with each other, and also compared with APACHE II score and CRP values. Results: PCT, IAP, CRP values and APACHE II score at 24 h after hospital admission were significantly elevated in patients with SAP. There was significant correlation between PCT and IAP values measured at 24 h of admission, and between maximal PCT and IAP values. Sensitivity/specificity for predicting AP severity at 24 h after admission was 89%/69% for APACHE II score, 75%/86% for CRP, 86%/63% for PCT and 75%/77% for IAP. Conclusions: Increased IAP was accompanied by increased PCT serum concentration in patients with AP. PCT and IAP can both be used as early markers of AP severity. Copyright © 2012, IAP and EPC.

Introduction: The Perioperative Pain Management Bundle was introduced in 10 Serbian PAIN OUT network hospitals to improve the quality of postoperative pain management. The Bundle consists of 4 elements: informing patients about postoperative pain treatment options; administering a full daily dose of 1–2 non-opioid analgesics; administering regional blocks and/or surgical wound infiltration; and assessing pain after surgery. In this study, we aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of the Bundle during the initial 24 h after surgery. Materials and methods: The assessment of cost-effectiveness was carried out by comparing patients before and after Bundle implementation and by comparing patients who received all Bundle elements to those with no Bundle element. Costs of postoperative pain management included costs of the analgesic medications, costs of labor for administering these medications, and related disposable materials. A multidimensional Pain Composite Score (PCS), the effectiveness measurement, was obtained by averaging variables from the International Pain Outcomes questionnaire evaluating pain intensity, interference of pain with activities and emotions, and side effects of analgesic medications. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated as the incremental change in costs divided by the incremental change in PCS and plotted on the cost-effectiveness plane along with the economic preference analysis. Results: The ICER value calculated when comparing patients before and after Bundle implementation was 181.89 RSD (1.55 EUR) with plotted ICERs located in the northeast and southeast quadrants of the cost-effectiveness plane. However, when comparing patients with no Bundle elements and those with all four Bundle elements, the calculated ICER was −800.63 RSD (−6.82 EUR) with plotted ICERs located in the southeast quadrant of the cost-effectiveness plane. ICER values differ across surgical disciplines. Conclusion: The proposed perioperative pain management Bundle is cost-effective. The cost-effectiveness varies depending on the number of implemented Bundle elements and fluctuates across surgical disciplines. Copyright © 2023 Bojic, Ladjevic, Palibrk, Soldatovic, Likic-Ladjevic, Meissner, Zaslansky, Stamer, Baumbach and Stamenkovic.

Background ‒ Generative artificial intelligence (AI) models offer potential assistance in pain research data acquisition, yet concerns persist regarding data accuracy and reliability. In a comparative study, we evaluated open generative AI models’ capacity to acquire data on acute pain in rock climbers comparable to field research. Methods ‒ Fifty-two rock climbers (33 m/19 f; age 29.0 [24.0–35.75] years) were asked to report pain location and intensity during a single climbing session. Five generative pretrained transformer models were tasked with responses to the same questions. Results ‒ Climbers identified the back of the forearm (19.2%) and toes (17.3%) as primary pain sites, with reported median pain intensity at 4 [3–5] and median maximum pain intensity at 7 [5–8]. Conversely, AI models yielded divergent findings, indicating fingers, hands, shoulders, legs, and feet as primary pain localizations with average and maximum pain intensity ranging from 3 to 4.4 and 5 to 10, respectively. Only two AI models provided references that were untraceable in PubMed and Google searches. Conclusion ‒ Our findings reveal that, currently, open generative AI models cannot match the quality of field-collected data on acute pain in rock climbers. Moreover, the models generated nonexistent references, raising concerns about their reliability. © 2024 the author(s), published by De Gruyter.

Background: Metamizole is a medication with analgesic, antipyretic, spasmolytic, and weak anti-inflammatory effects. The aim of our study was to evaluate a six-year trend in the utilization and expenditure of metamizole in comparison to other group of licensed non-opioid analgesics in Serbia and Croatia, in order to rationalize its use and prescribing in these countries. Methods: The data of metamizole vs. all other non-opioid analgesics utilization and expenditure in Serbia and Croatia was analyzed according to the WHO methodology and expressed as defined daily doses per 1,000 inhabitants per day (DDD/1,000 inhabitants/per day) and total costs, respectively, during the 6-year period from 2010 to 2015. Results: In the observed period, utilization of metamizole was 3.31 fold higher in Serbia than in Croatia (median in Serbia was 2.238 vs. 0.675 in Croatia DDD/1,000 inhabitants/per day/per year). Expenditure of metamizole in the same period was 5.29-fold higher in Serbia than in Croatia (median in Serbia was 1,738,192.51 €/per year vs. 328,355.03 €/per year in Croatia). Conclusion: Utilization and expenditure of non-opioid analgesics, including metamizole, in Serbia was significantly higher comparing with Croatia.Further research is needed to determine whether the current analgesic consumption in Serbia meets the needs of the patient. The benefits of metamizole should be weighed against the risk of metamizole-induced adverse effects. Until then, its prescribing should be based on indications and the appropriate duration of therapy. © Copyright © 2018 Miljkovic, Dragojevic-Simic, Rancic, Simic, Pekez-Pavlisko, Kovacevic and Stamenkovic.

Objectives: The quality of postoperative pain management is often poor. A "bundle," a small set of evidence-based interventions, is associated with improved outcomes in different settings. We assessed whether staff caring for surgical patients could implement a "Perioperative Pain Management Bundle" and whether this would be associated with improved multidimensional pain-related patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Methods: "PAIN OUT," a perioperative pain registry, offers tools for auditing pain-related PROs and obtaining information about perioperative pain management during the first 24 hours after surgery. Staff from 10 hospitals in Serbia used this methodology to collect data at baseline. They then implemented the "Perioperative Pain Management Bundle" into the clinical routine and collected another round of data. The bundle consists of 4 treatment elements: (1) a full daily dose of 1 to 2 nonopioid analgesics (eg, paracetamol and/or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs), (2) at least 1 type of local/regional anesthesia, (3) pain assessment by staff, and (4) offering patients information about pain management. The primary endpoint was a multidimensional pain composite score (PCS), evaluating pain intensity, interference, and side effects that was compared between patients who received the full bundle versus not. Results: Implementation of the complete bundle was associated with a significant reduction in the PCS (P < 0.001, small-medium effect size [ES]). When each treatment element was evaluated independently, nonopioid analgesics were associated with a higher PCS (ie, poorer outcome, and negligible ES), and the other elements were associated with a lower PCS (all negligible small ES). Individual PROs were consistently better in patients receiving the full bundle compared with 0 to 3 elements. The PCS was not associated with the surgical discipline. Discussion: We report findings from using a bundle approach for perioperative pain management in patients undergoing mixed surgical procedures. Future work will seek strategies to improve the effect. © 2023 Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. All rights reserved.

Background: Few studies analyzed the pattern of opioid analgesic utilization in hospital settings. The aim of this study was to determine the consumption pattern of parenteral morphine in patients hospitalized in the Serbian referral teaching hospital and to correlate it with utilization at the national and international level. Methods: In retrospective study, the required data were extracted from medical records of surgical patients who received parenteral morphine in the 5-year period, from 2011 to 2015. We used the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical Classification/Defined Daily Doses (DDD) international system for consumption evaluation. Results: While the number of performed surgical procedures in our hospital steadily increased from 2011 to 2015, the number of inpatient bed-days decreased from 2012. However, the consumption of parenteral morphine varied and was not more than 0.867 DDD/100 bed-days in the observed period. Conclusion: Based on the available data, parenteral morphine consumption in our hospital was lower compared with international data. The low level of morphine use in the hospital was in accordance with national data, and compared with other countries, morphine consumption applied for medical indications in Serbia was low. Adequate legal provision to ensure the availability of opioids, better education and training of medical personnel, as well as multidisciplinary approach should enable more rational and individual pain management in the future, not only within the hospitals. © Copyright © 2017 Dragojevic-Simic, Rancic, Stamenkovic and Simic.