Background: Patients with autoimmune diseases experience a higher burden of metabolic syndrome (MetS) and cardiovascular disease (CVD). There is a paucity of data regarding MetS in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and its impact on CVD. In this retrospective study, we aimed to evaluate the prevalence of MetS components in IBD patients, as well as their association with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), heart failure and arrhythmias. Methods: After pooling 5 years of data from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) Database (2016–2020), we compared traditional cardiovascular risk factors between IBD and non-IBD patients. We then investigated the association between MetS (represented by a calculated metabolic score (CMS) ranging from 0 to 4, based on the presence or absence of hypertension, obesity, dyslipidemia and type II diabetes) and CVD, separately for Crohn’s disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC) patients. Results: The prevalence of the different MetS components was found to be lower in IBD patients compared to non-IBD patients. Comparing CD (n = 806,875) and UC (n = 575,925) identified a higher prevalence of MetS components in UC. Higher CMS was positively associated with ACS and arrhythmias in both CD and UC. This association was evident in heart failure, with the odds ratio increasing from 2.601 for CMS = 1 to 6.290 for CMS = 4 in UC patients and from 2.622 to 5.709 in CD patients. Conclusions: Our study highlights the positive association between traditional components of MetS and CVD in IBD patients. Our findings suggest that chronic inflammation explains only partially the CVD burden in hospitalized IBD patients.

Background/Objectives: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients face elevated gastrointestinal (GI) infection risks due to immune dysregulation and gut dysbiosis. While steroids and immunosuppressants are known to increase infection risk, data on biologics and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) remain limited, particularly for non-Clostridioides difficile (C.diff) infections. Methods: This retrospective cohort study analyzed 9849 hospitalized IBD patients (2013–2023) from the Northwell Inpatient Database. Patients were categorized into four groups: biologics-only, PPIs-only, both, or neither. GI infections were identified via C.diff PCR, GI PCR, and chart review. Multivariate logistic regression adjusted for demographics, BMI, and IBD type. Results: GI infections occurred in 1.75% of patients, with significantly higher odds in those on biologics alone (OR 21.5, 95% CI 11.7–39.4) or with PPIs (OR 16.6, 95% CI 10.2–26.8) versus untreated patients. Non-C.diff infections were strongly associated with biologics (OR 20.7, 95% CI 10.2–41.9). PPIs alone increased slightly the risk of GI infections (OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1–2.4). Vedolizumab and adalimumab had the highest infection risks among biologics (26.8% and 22.7%, respectively). Bacterial pathogens, such as E. coli and Salmonella, predominated, with no significant difference in causative agents across treatment groups. Conclusions: Biologic therapy greatly increases GI infection risk in IBD patients independent of PPI use. Clinicians should weigh infection risks when prescribing biologics, particularly in high-risk populations. Further studies are needed to assess risks by biologic subtype and the interplay with PPIs.

Background/Objectives: The “weekend effect,” characterized by increased mortality and complication rates for weekend hospital admissions, is well documented in myocardial infarction and stroke but has been less thoroughly investigated in acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF). This study evaluates the weekend effect in ADHF using a national cohort. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the 2016–2020 Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS). Adult ADHF admissions were identified by ICD-10 codes and classified as weekend or weekday admissions. Over 30 variables, including age, sex, and comorbidities, were analyzed. Propensity score matching (1:1) yielded 489,204 patients per group. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to assess outcomes, adjusting for key covariates. Results: Of 2,131,915 ADHF hospitalizations, 501,076 (23.5%) occurred on weekends. The cohort was 48% female, with a mean age of 72 years (SD ± 12.3). After 1:1 matching, weekend admissions had higher odds of cardiac arrest (aOR: 1.10; 95% CI: 1.06–1.13, p < 0.001), inpatient mortality (aOR: 1.07; 95% CI: 1.05–1.09, p < 0.001), acute kidney injury (AKI; aOR: 1.07; 95% CI: 1.06–1.08, p < 0.001), and acute respiratory failure (ARF; aOR: 1.28; 95% CI: 1.27–1.30, p < 0.001). No significant differences were observed in mechanical circulatory support (MCS) use or length of stay. Conclusions: Weekend ADHF admissions were associated with a higher risk of mortality and complications, which may be attributable to reduced specialist availability or delayed diagnostics. These findings underscore the need for standardized ADHF protocols to ensure equitable care throughout the week.

The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has explicitly discouraged the use of ivermectin for the treatment of cancer outside of clinical trials. Nevertheless, patient self-administration persists, frequently influenced by information encountered online. Cases of ivermectin neurotoxicity in the oncology setting remain underreported despite growing off-label use driven by online misinformation. We present a case of severe neurotoxicity following unintentional high-dose self-administration of ivermectin as an off-label attempt to treat breast cancer. A 73-year-old female with metastatic breast cancer self-administered high doses of ivermectin based on information obtained online. She subsequently developed acute altered mental status, generalized seizures, and respiratory failure. Her clinical course was consistent with severe ivermectin-induced neurotoxicity, necessitating supportive management including intubation, mechanical ventilation, intravenous fluids, and anticonvulsant therapy. The patient demonstrated full neurological recovery to baseline within 48 hours. This case highlights the potential for life-threatening neurotoxicity associated with high-dose ivermectin use. Increasing online health misinformation has led to the self-administration of unproven therapies; therefore, clinicians should counsel patients on the risks of non-evidence-based treatments. A thorough exposure history is essential to identify uncommon causes and maintain vigilance for severe adverse reactions.