{"title":"Utility of Aprepitant in the Management of Pediatric Patients with Cyclical Vomiting Syndrome.","authors":"Aravind Thavamani, Sindhoosha Malay, Jasmine Khatana, Sujithra Velayuthan, Senthilkumar Sankararaman","doi":"10.3390/medicines11080021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Introduction</b>: Cyclical vomiting syndrome (CVS) is a recurrent debilitating illness characterized by intense episodes of nausea and emesis with widely varied pharmacological management across the country. Aprepitant is now increasingly used in patients with CVS. The impact of aprepitant as an abortive therapy in the readmission of pediatric patients with CVS is currently unknown. <b>Methodology</b>: We analyzed all pediatric patients with a primary diagnosis of CVS using the ICD-10 code in the Pediatric Health Information System database of the Children's Hospital Association. We evaluated the demographic data, comorbid conditions, and management details during the inpatient stay. CVS patients who received aprepitant during their inpatient hospitalization were compared with patients without aprepitant use. Seven-day readmission rate for CVS was used as the outcome variable to assess the effectiveness of the aprepitant in aborting an episode. Propensity score matching was used to match the two cohorts. <b>Results</b>: We analyzed 1775 patients of which 96 received aprepitant during the inpatient hospitalization. The aprepitant group had a more severe hospitalization course as evidenced by an increased duration of hospital stay (5 vs. 3 days) and total hospitalization costs ($11,790 vs. $6380). There were no significant differences in the 7-day (17% vs. 16%, <i>p</i> = 0.91) readmission rate and results were not altered by propensity score matching. <b>Conclusions</b>: Aprepitant use as an abortive therapy did not affect the 7-day CVS-related readmission rate. Further prospective studies are needed to explore the role of aprepitant as an abortive agent in the management of CVS in the pediatric population.</p>","PeriodicalId":74162,"journal":{"name":"Medicines (Basel, Switzerland)","volume":"11 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11677684/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicines (Basel, Switzerland)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/medicines11080021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Cyclical vomiting syndrome (CVS) is a recurrent debilitating illness characterized by intense episodes of nausea and emesis with widely varied pharmacological management across the country. Aprepitant is now increasingly used in patients with CVS. The impact of aprepitant as an abortive therapy in the readmission of pediatric patients with CVS is currently unknown. Methodology: We analyzed all pediatric patients with a primary diagnosis of CVS using the ICD-10 code in the Pediatric Health Information System database of the Children's Hospital Association. We evaluated the demographic data, comorbid conditions, and management details during the inpatient stay. CVS patients who received aprepitant during their inpatient hospitalization were compared with patients without aprepitant use. Seven-day readmission rate for CVS was used as the outcome variable to assess the effectiveness of the aprepitant in aborting an episode. Propensity score matching was used to match the two cohorts. Results: We analyzed 1775 patients of which 96 received aprepitant during the inpatient hospitalization. The aprepitant group had a more severe hospitalization course as evidenced by an increased duration of hospital stay (5 vs. 3 days) and total hospitalization costs ($11,790 vs. $6380). There were no significant differences in the 7-day (17% vs. 16%, p = 0.91) readmission rate and results were not altered by propensity score matching. Conclusions: Aprepitant use as an abortive therapy did not affect the 7-day CVS-related readmission rate. Further prospective studies are needed to explore the role of aprepitant as an abortive agent in the management of CVS in the pediatric population.
简介:周期性呕吐综合征(CVS)是一种复发性衰弱性疾病,其特征是强烈的恶心和呕吐发作,在全国范围内具有广泛不同的药物管理。阿瑞吡坦现在越来越多地用于CVS患者。阿瑞吡坦作为一种流产治疗对小儿CVS患者再入院的影响目前尚不清楚。方法:我们使用儿童医院协会儿童健康信息系统数据库中的ICD-10代码分析所有初步诊断为CVS的儿科患者。我们评估了住院期间的人口统计数据、合并症和管理细节。在住院期间接受阿瑞吡坦治疗的CVS患者与未使用阿瑞吡坦的患者进行比较。CVS的7天再入院率被用作结果变量来评估阿瑞吡坦在流产发作中的有效性。倾向评分匹配用于匹配两个队列。结果:我们分析了1775例患者,其中96例在住院期间接受阿瑞吡坦治疗。阿瑞吡坦组有更严重的住院过程,住院时间增加(5天对3天)和总住院费用(11,790美元对6380美元)就是证据。7天再入院率无显著差异(17% vs. 16%, p = 0.91),倾向评分匹配没有改变结果。结论:阿瑞吡坦作为流产治疗不影响7天心血管相关再入院率。需要进一步的前瞻性研究来探讨阿瑞吡坦作为流产药物在小儿CVS治疗中的作用。