RESUMEN
An infectious disease of colon, recurrent Clostridium difficile infection (RCDI) is hitherto considered insurmountable leading to significant morbidity and mortality. Gut dysbiosis, generally resulting from frequent use of antibiotics is considered to be responsible for the etiopathogenesis of rCDI. Ironically, the conventional treatment strategies for the disease also include the use of anti-infective drugs such as metronidazole, vancomycin and fidaxomycin. As a result of the efforts to overcome the limitations of these treatment options to control recurrence of disease, Fecal Microbiota Transplant (FMT) has emerged as an effective and safe alternative. It is pertinent to add here that FMT is defined as the process of engraftment of fecal suspension from the healthy person into the gastrointestinal tract of the diseased individual aiming at the restoration of gut microbiota. FMT has proved to be quite successful in the treatment of recurrent and resistant Clostridium difficile infections (RCDI). In last three decades a lot of information has been generated on the use of FMT for RCDI. A number of clinical trials have been reported with generally very high success rates. However, very small number of patents could be found in the area indicating that there still exists lacuna in the knowledge about FMT with respect to its preparation, regulation, mode of delivery and safety. The current review attempts to dive deeper to discuss the patents available in the area while supporting the information contained therein with the non-patent literature.
RESUMEN
The objective of the present study was to compare the efficacy and safety of low-dose unfractionated heparin (UFH) and a low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) as prophylaxis against venous thromboembolism in critically ill surgical patients undergoing major surgery. This was a randomized prospective study in which critically ill patients scheduled to undergo major elective surgery were allocated to receive subcutaneously either LMWH once daily and a placebo injection containing sterile 0.9% normal saline or 5000 IU UFH twice daily subcutaneously. Each patient was evaluated postoperatively clinically and confirmed by Doppler study for development of deep vein thrombosis (DVT). One hundred and fifty-six patients completed the protocol. There was similar efficacy of UFH as compared with LMWH in the prophylaxis of DVT. There was also no statistically significant difference in the incidence of major complications in the heparin group as compared with the LMWH group. However, minor hemorrhagic complications such as wound hematoma and surgical site bleeding were significantly more in the heparin group as compared with the LMWH group. Both UFH 5000 units subcutaneously twice daily and LMWH 40 mg once daily provide highly effective and well tolerated prophylaxis for critically ill surgical patients. Considering the advantage of once-daily dosing, a wider adoption of prophylaxis with LMWH may be justified on the basis of patient acceptability and saving of nursing time.