Dor neuropática: aspectos neuroquímicos

JUSTIFICATIVA E OBJETIVOS: A dor neuropática é causada por lesão ou inflamação do sistema nervoso. É síndrome complexa, com mecanismos biológicos pouco esclarecidos, envolvendo teorias inflamatórias e imunes. O objetivo desta revisão foi descrever os principais fatores biológicos relacionados com a dor neuropática, associando de forma lógica as hipóteses sugeridas pela literatura. CONTEÚDO: Foram descritos os principais neuromediadores, canais iônicos e células, incluindo as do sistema imune envolvidos na excitabilidade neuronal, assim como enfatizada possível seqüência de ativação ou interação desses agentes na alteração neuroplástica decorrente da agressão ao nervo. CONCLUSÕES: Do estudo, foi possível concluir que os avanços no conhecimento da fisiopatologia da dor neuropática podem determinar novos alvos para abordagem farmacológica dessa síndrome

Hepatitis C in Hemodialysis Units: diagnosis and therapeutic approach

Abstract According to data from the last census of the Brazilian Society of Nephrology (SBN), the prevalence of hepatitis C virus (HCV) in Brazilian hemodialysis units (HU) is 3.3%, about three times higher than what is reported for the Brazilian general population. Often, professionals working in HU are faced with clinical situations that require rapid HCV diagnosis in order to avoid horizontal transmission within the units. On the other hand, thanks to the development of new antiviral drugs, the cure of patients with HCV, both in the general population and in patients with chronic kidney disease and the disease eradication, appear to be very feasible objectives to be achieved in the near future . In this scenario, SBN and the Brazilian Society of Hepatology present in this review article a proposal to approach HCV within HUs

BMC Nephrology

p. 1-10Background: Despite the evidence that phosphate binder (PB) is associated with improved outcomes many hemodialysis patients do not adhere to prescribed PB regimen. Therefore, barriers to PB adherence should be identified and eliminated. The purpose of this study was to evaluate PB adherence among hemodialysis patients and to explore potentially modifiable factors associated with low PB adherence. Methods: A cross-sectional study (502 patients) was performed in four dialysis units in Salvador, Brazil, using data from the second phase of the Prospective Study of the Prognosis of Chronic Hemodialysis Patients (PROHEMO). Patients were categorized as adherent or non-adherent to PB based on their responses to a semi-structured questionnaire. Results: Non-adherence to PB was observed for 65.7% of the patients. After adjustments for numerous covariates, cerebrovascular disease (odds ratio (OR), 3.30; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.03-10.61), higher PTH (OR per each 300 pg/mL, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.01-1.28), lack of comprehension of the appropriate time to use PB (OR, 7.09; 95% CI, 2.10-23.95) and stopping PB use after feeling better (OR, 4.54; 95% CI, 1.45-14.25) or feeling worse (OR, 11.04; 95% CI, 1.79- 68.03) were significantly associated with PB non-adherence. By contrast, the adjusted odds of PB non-adherence were lower for patients with more years on dialysis (OR by each 2 years, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.80-0.95), with serum phosphorus above 5.5 mg/dL (OR, 0.53; 95% CI 0.34-0.82), who referred that were encouraged by the dialysis staff to be independent (OR, 0.52; 95% CI 0.30-0.90), and reported that the nephrologist explained how PB should be used (OR, 0.20; 95% CI 0.05-0.73). Conclusion: The results of the present study are encouraging by showing evidence that improvement in the care provided by the dialysis staff and the attending nephrologist may play an important role in reducing the high prevalence of non-adherence to PB in maintenance hemodialysis patients. A new questionnaire is presented and may help to evaluate systematically the patients regarding PB adherence in hemodialysis setting