Talk:Rhabdomyolysis/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

New reviews

doi:10.1177/0885066611402150 - JICM doi:10.1378/chest.12-2016 - Chest

Two reviews that might warrant inclusion. JFW | T@lk 20:58, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Toxnet

Seppi333 added a link to a Toxnet monograph about niacin. Currently, the article does not have individual references for each agent known to cause rhadbomyolysis, because the list of items would be extremely long and the methodology of each individual report is often extremely weak. The current solution (using only secondary sources, and try to include only those causes that are mentioned in multiple sources and are very well recognised) has worked well for a long time, and I am reluctant to deviate from it. I hope this makes sense. JFW | T@lk 22:56, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Jfdwolff I added a link to toxnet and quoted a monograph. I'm assuming you're unfamiliar with Toxnet given your reasoning - It's a tertiary source. The niacin page mentions rhabdo ~5 times, quoting secondary sources. I agree that listing everything would be excessive. The only reason I bothered including it is that it's also a major cholesterol treatment that also causes rhabdo, w/ interactions with statins (as stated on Toxnet). Seppi333 (talk) 23:22, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Just to clarify, are all the reports about niacin together with statins? JFW | T@lk 23:37, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

There's more saying with statins than just alone, but both cases are covered. You'll be able to see them by ctrl-f searching for "rhabdo" on that page.Seppi333 (talk) 23:54, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Adding it as a fourth ref does not make sense since we already have three good refs. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 19:04, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

This "Elevations in serum creatine kinase (CK, creatine phosphokinase, CPK), myalgia, myopathy, and rhabdomyolysis have been reported in patients receiving niacin alone or combined with other antilipemic agents" does not clearly state that rhabdo occurs with niacin alone. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 19:06, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

I'd understand if you said doesn't indicate enough evidence, but idk how I would state "receiving niacin alone or combined with other [agents]" more clearly to indicate that if asked to rewrite it. In any event, I don't really care about whether it's included or not - I just figured I'd add it for comprehensiveness. I replied to this thread just to explain my rationale - that's why I'm not making a big deal out of it. If someone doesn't want it added, that's sufficient for me to stop. Seppi333 (talk) 19:29, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Edit: In other words, unless you feel like further explaining your rationale, this thread is already resolved. Seppi333 (talk) 19:33, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Review

Critical Care has an updated review on rhabdomyolysis doi:10.1186/cc13897. I will need to see if it contains anything novel. JFW | T@lk 15:24, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Cochrane

I had missed this, but the Cochrane review from last year (doi:10.1002/14651858.CD008566.pub2) could not confirm a mortality benefit with CVVH due to low numbers in the studies. I wonder how we should discuss that in the article. JFW | T@lk 16:45, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Says "Although CRRT may provide some benefits for people with rhabdomyolysis, the poor methodological quality of the included studies and lack of data relating to clinically important outcomes limited our findings about the effectiveness of CRRT for people with rhabdomyolysis"

Basically it may help but has not been well studied and thus firm conclusions cannot be made. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:44, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Critical care

Review doi:10.1186/s13054-016-1314-5 JFW | T@lk 23:54, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

wtf

"If the swelling is very rapid, as may happen after someone is released from under a collapsed building"

This is the stupidest analogy I can imagine. Nice work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.164.99.158 (talk) 19:54, 16 April 2017 (UTC) Tell us how you really feel... 2600:1700:4CA1:3C80:ED78:EA7D:6EE1:95DA (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:05, 24 November 2018 (UTC)