Herbal supplements are common complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) approaches with an ever-increasing use trend in the last two decades among the US population. Self-medication with herbal supplements which are promoted for general well-being, weight loss, immunity, and memory boost, and mental and physical health claims are very prevalent. There is a misperception that herbal supplements are harmless as they are prepared from natural sources. Unlike conventional drugs, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not regulate herbal supplements for premarketing purity and potency. Hence, there is a growing concern for health risks due to misbranded toxic ingredients, contaminants, adulterants, and herb-drug interactions (HDI) with co-administered drugs. The spectrum of pharmacological and toxicological effects of herbal supplements includes deranged lab results, allergic reactions, genotoxicity, carcinogenicity, teratogenicity, organ damage, and even fatality contributing to sizable emergency visits and hospitalizations in the US. The use of herbal supplements should be carefully monitored in high-risk groups such as pediatric and geriatric populations, pregnant women, breastfeeding mothers, immunocompromised patients, and surgical candidates. The deleterious health effects of herbal supplements are loosely addressed in conventional medical practice in part due to the limited knowledge of practitioners. This comprehensive narrative review aims to explore the clinical implications of herbal supplements in order to fill the knowledge gaps by summarizing scientific publications. It also highlights the pivotal roles physicians can play in minimizing the health risks of herbal supplements by encouraging patients to disclose usage through a non-judgmental approach, employing HDI screening tools, and reporting adverse reactions to FDA. Formal training of physicians, a standardized pharmacovigilance system, stricter regulation of the herbal industry, and more scientific studies are keys to establishing herbal safety and efficacy in clinical practice.

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), also named metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD), is a progressive disease spectrum encompassing simple steatosis, nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), fibrosis, and cirrhosis. It is a clinically silent disease leading to multiple extra-hepatic complications/comorbidities. It is an independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD), increasing susceptibility to hypertension, atherosclerosis, arrhythmia, myocardial dysfunction, cardiac valve deformation, and venous thrombosis through putative mechanisms including systemic inflammation, endothelial dysfunction, oxidative stress, insulin resistance, and altered lipid metabolism. Eventually, it increases the CVD prevalence, incident, and fatality, contributing to a huge health care burden. In fact, CVD is becoming the leading cause of mortality among patients with NAFLD. Other cardiometabolic risk factors coexisting with NAFLD may also accelerate the synergistic development of CVD, which warrants assessment targeting hypertension, diabetes mellitus (DM), obesity, and dyslipidemia to be an integral part of NAFLD care. Monitoring metabolic biomarkers (glucose, glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA1c], insulin, lipids, and lipoproteins), cardiovascular (CV) risk scores (American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association [ACC/AHA] or Framingham), and subclinical atherosclerosis (coronary artery calcification [CAC], carotid intima-media thickness [CIMT], and carotid plaque) are recommended for risk prediction and reduction. There is no universally accepted treatment for NAFLD, and lifestyle changes with weight loss of at least 10% are the mainstay of management. Combination therapy of ezetimibe and statins have a cardioprotective effect and help reduce liver fat. Despite being an emerging risk factor for CVD and its rapidly increasing pattern affecting a quarter of the global population, NAFLD remains overlooked and undetected, unlike the other traditional risk factors. Hence, we conducted a comprehensive narrative review to shed more light on the importance of screening CVD in NAFLD patients. PubMed indexed relevant articles published from 2002 to 2022 (20 years) were searched in April 2022 using medical subject headings (MeSH) as "nonalcoholic fatty liver disease" [Mesh] AND "cardiovascular diseases" [Mesh]. Evidence from 40 observational studies, three clinical trials, one case series, 45 narrative reviews, four systematic reviews and meta-analyses, three systematic reviews, and one meta-analysis were summarized on the epidemiologic data, pathophysiologic mechanisms, clinical features, diagnostic modalities, overlapping management, perceived challenges and health literacy regarding the CVD risk attributed to NAFLD.

An effective healthcare system should embrace practices that enhance overall quality and productivity. Training primary care physicians in Point-of-Care Ultrasound (POCUS) has become part of the processes that improve the quality of patient care and serve to guide the diagnostic impression quickly and effectively. With the purpose of highlighting the applications and challenges of POCUS use in US primary health care, we conducted a narrative review based on PubMed-indexed and Cochrane Library English text publications searched in May-July 2022 using a combination of key terms including point of care ultrasound, primary care, and US healthcare. Many studies have shown that POCUS has a positive impact on fostering medical attention and reducing morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs. Besides assisting in procedures, POCUS has a head-to-toe application in evaluating inflammatory and infectious conditions, acute abdomen, cardiopulmonary function, musculoskeletal and vascular pathologies. However, its uniform implementation is limited across the US healthcare system due to multitudes of barriers such as lack of training, resource scarcity, and low reimbursement. Training primary care physicians in general and emergency care providers, in particular, is key to scaleup POCUS use. Large size studies are paramount to further explore the effectiveness of POCUS and identify key challenges to its implementation.

The prevalence of intravenous drug use has increased in the past decade and it represents an important risk factor for deep vein thrombosis. Intravenous drug use is a global problem, with the main culprit being heroin. Peer pressure and poverty in high-risk groups such as sex workers, females, and young adults raise the risk of intravenous drug use, which expresses itself in the form of venous thromboembolism eventually. Deep vein thrombosis typically manifests itself eight years after the initial intravenous drug administration, rendering it a silent killer. Aiming to review and summarize existing articles in this context, we performed an exhaustive literature search online on PubMed and Google Scholar indexes using the keywords “Deep Venous Thrombosis (DVT)” and “Intravenous Drug Users (IVDU).” English articles that addressed epidemiology, pathogenesis, clinical manifestations, diagnosis, differential diagnosis, management, and outcomes of DVT, including those in IVDU, were selected and analyzed. The pathogenesis of DVT development in IVDU is mainly attributed to the interplay of trauma to the vessel by repeated injection and the injected drug itself. The right-sided femoral vein is the most common vein affected. Prevalent clinical presentations include local pain, swelling, and redness with typical systemic symptoms including fever, cough, dyspnea, and chest pain on top of addiction features. There appeared to be a delay in reporting symptoms, which was most likely due to the social stigma attached to IVDU. There are over 50 conditions that present with swollen and painful limbs comparable to DVT in IVDU, making precise diagnosis critical for timely treatment. Venous ultrasound is the method of choice for diagnosing DVT. Extended anticoagulant therapy with low-molecular-weight heparin combined with warfarin is the recommended treatment. Intravenous drug abusers having DVT are affected by multiple complications and poorer outcomes such as slower recovery, recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE), and a longer hospital stay, which put them at higher risk of morbidity, mortality, reduced productivity, and economic burden.

Erdheim Chester disease (ECD) is a type of histiocytosis characterized by a variable clinical presentation. The treatment of ECD is complex and mainly unknown. We aim to conduct a literature review of the treatment of ECD and consolidate the knowledge about the most recent and updated treatment for ECD. To conduct the systematic review, we used the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) protocol. To analyze the bias, we used the Cochrane collaboration risk-of-bias tool to assess the bias. We included observational studies and clinical trials on humans, which were written in English. Papers not fulfilling the objective of our study were excluded. Overall, the drug showed efficacy in the clinical trials, showing prolonged improvement and high rates of response rate. Overall, the drug was not well tolerated, and patients had a long list of side effects. Nevertheless, the drug seems to be a good option for second-line treatment for patients with ECD and BRAFV600 mutation.

Gastric cancer (GC) is one of the most common malignancies throughout the world with late diagnosis and poor prognosis. The expression of programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) in GC is attributed to immune evasion and tumor progression. PD-L1 positivity has both predictive and prognostic biomarker potential. Aiming to summarize a large amount of research and to provide a definitive conclusion to the conflicting results on the prognostic significance of PD-L1 expression in GC, we performed an umbrella review based on existing meta-analyses which were published recently (2016-2021) and indexed in the PubMed database. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline was used in August 2021 to screen articles, and data extraction with quality assessment was performed on the selected meta-analyses. Review Manager (RevMan) 5.3 software was used to analyze the HR and OR with a 95% confidence interval (CI) among PD-L1 positive GC patients. We also assessed the between-study heterogeneity (I²). Forest and Funnel plots were obtained, and a P-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. A total of 567 articles were screened, and we selected three meta-analyses with a total of 40 studies conducted over a period of 14 years. In our umbrella review, a total of 8,419 GC patients with an average PD-L1 positivity of 39% were analyzed. We found that PD-L1 positivity in GC patients is associated with poor prognosis (pooled HR =1.44, 95% CI: 1.24-1.68, P<0.00001) having higher mortality reducing the chances of overall survival (OS). However, there are no significant differences in PD-L1 expression among different lymph node (LN) metastases (OR=1.31, 95% CI: 0.98-1.74, P=0.07) and tumor, node, and metastasis (TNM) stages (OR=1.13, 95% CI: 0.80-1.58, P=0.50). Early identification of PD-L1 expression may help tailor cost-effective and targeted immunotherapy among GC patients. More research is needed to further understand how PD-L1 affects LN metastasis and tumor invasion.