5 research outputs found

    The role of maternal echocardiography and uterine artery Doppler at 11-14 weeks in the prediction of pre-eclampsia in nulliparous women

    Get PDF
    Background: Pre-eclampsia (PE) complicates 2% of pregnancies and may have serious effects on mother and child, which makes it an important threat to public health in both developed and developing countries. Once high-risk women are identified, they can be targeted for more intense prenatal surveillance and preventative measures. Predicting PE in the first trimester requires the use of maternal echocardiography and the uterine artery pulsatility index (UAPI). Objective of the study was to see whether maternal echocardiography and uterine artery Doppler at 11-14 weeks can predict subsequent development of PE in nulliparous women.Methods: This prospective observational cohort study was carried out in outdoor patients of obstetrics and gynecology of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University (BSMMU), with collaboration with department of cardiology, National Institute of Nuclear Medicine and Allied Sciences (NINMAS), BSMMU, Dhaka, during 01 December 2013 to July 2015. A total of 135 healthy nulliparous women at 11-14 weeks of gestation were included in this study. Data was processed and analyzed by statistical package for the social sciences (SPSS) version 24.0.Results: Among 135 patients, two (1.5%) patients developed preeclampsia during 1st follow-up (20-28 weeks) and four (2.9%) patients developed preeclampsia during (29-36 weeks). Mean total peripheral resistance was found to be 1332.0±75.2 dynes/sec/cm5 in preeclampsia and 1157.0±139.2 dynes/sec/cm5 in non preeclamptic pregnancy. The difference between two groups was statistically significant. MAP and total peripheral resistance were statistically significant (p<0.05) between two groups.Conclusions: In first trimester of pregnancy UAPI is the best predictor for detection of PE

    Antenatal dexamethasone for early preterm birth in low-resource countries

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: The safety and efficacy of antenatal glucocorticoids in women in low-resource countries who are at risk for preterm birth are uncertain. METHODS: We conducted a multicountry, randomized trial involving pregnant women between 26 weeks 0 days and 33 weeks 6 days of gestation who were at risk for preterm birth. The participants were assigned to intramuscular dexamethasone or identical placebo. The primary outcomes were neonatal death alone, stillbirth or neonatal death, and possible maternal bacterial infection; neonatal death alone and stillbirth or neonatal death were evaluated with superiority analyses, and possible maternal bacterial infection was evaluated with a noninferiority analysis with the use of a prespecified margin of 1.25 on the relative scale. RESULTS: A total of 2852 women (and their 3070 fetuses) from 29 secondary- and tertiary-level hospitals across Bangladesh, India, Kenya, Nigeria, and Pakistan underwent randomization. The trial was stopped for benefit at the second interim analysis. Neonatal death occurred in 278 of 1417 infants (19.6%) in the dexamethasone group and in 331 of 1406 infants (23.5%) in the placebo group (relative risk, 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72 to 0.97; P=0.03). Stillbirth or neonatal death occurred in 393 of 1532 fetuses and infants (25.7%) and in 444 of 1519 fetuses and infants (29.2%), respectively (relative risk, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.78 to 0.99; P=0.04); the incidence of possible maternal bacterial infection was 4.8% and 6.3%, respectively (relative risk, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.56 to 1.03). There was no significant between-group difference in the incidence of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Among women in low-resource countries who were at risk for early preterm birth, the use of dexamethasone resulted in significantly lower risks of neonatal death alone and stillbirth or neonatal death than the use of placebo, without an increase in the incidence of possible maternal bacterial infection.Fil: Oladapo, Olufemi T.. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; ArgentinaFil: Vogel, Joshua P.. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; ArgentinaFil: Piaggio, Gilda. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; ArgentinaFil: Nguyen, My-Huong. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; ArgentinaFil: Althabe, Fernando. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública; ArgentinaFil: Metin Gülmezoglu, A.. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; ArgentinaFil: Bahl, Rajiv. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; ArgentinaFil: Rao, Suman P.N.. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; ArgentinaFil: de Costa, Ayesha. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; ArgentinaFil: Gupta, Shuchita. Organizacion Mundial de la Salud; ArgentinaFil: Shahidullah, Mohammod. No especifíca;Fil: Chowdhury, Saleha B.. No especifíca;Fil: Ara, Gulshan. No especifíca;Fil: Akter, Shaheen. No especifíca;Fil: Akhter, Nasreen. No especifíca;Fil: Dey, Probhat R.. No especifíca;Fil: Abdus Sabur, M.. No especifíca;Fil: Azad, Mohammad T.. No especifíca;Fil: Choudhury, Shahana F.. No especifíca;Fil: Matin, M.A.. No especifíca;Fil: Goudar, Shivaprasad S.. No especifíca;Fil: Dhaded, Sangappa M.. No especifíca;Fil: Metgud, Mrityunjay C.. No especifíca;Fil: Pujar, Yeshita V.. No especifíca;Fil: Somannavar, Manjunath S.. No especifíca;Fil: Vernekar, Sunil S.. No especifíca;Fil: Herekar, Veena R.. No especifíca;Fil: Bidri, Shailaja R.. No especifíca;Fil: Mathapati, Sangamesh S.. No especifíca;Fil: Patil, Preeti G.. No especifíca;Fil: Patil, Mallanagouda M.. No especifíca;Fil: Gudadinni, Muttappa R.. No especifíca;Fil: Bijapure, Hidaytullah R.. No especifíca;Fil: Mallapur, Ashalata A.. No especifíca;Fil: Katageri, Geetanjali M.. No especifíca;Fil: Chikkamath, Sumangala B.. No especifíca;Fil: Yelamali, Bhuvaneshwari C.. No especifíca;Fil: Pol, Ramesh R.. No especifíca;Fil: Misra, Sujata S.. No especifíca;Fil: Das, Leena. No especifíca

    Genotoxic and epigenetic mechanisms in arsenic carcinogenicity

    No full text
    Arsenic is a human carcinogen with weak mutagenic properties that induces tumors through mechanisms not yet completely understood. People worldwide are exposed to arsenic-contaminated drinking water, and epidemiological studies showed a high percentage of lung, bladder, liver, and kidney cancer in these populations. Several mechanisms by which arsenical compounds induce tumorigenesis were proposed including genotoxic damage and chromosomal abnormalities. Over the past decade, a growing body of evidence indicated that epigenetic modifications have a role in arsenic-inducing adverse effects on human health. The main epigenetic mechanisms are DNA methylation in gene promoter regions that regulate gene expression, histone tail modifications that regulate the accessibility of transcriptional machinery to genes, and microRNA activity (noncoding RNA able to modulate mRNA translation). The "double capacity" of arsenic to induce mutations and epimutations could be the main cause of arsenic-induced carcinogenesis. The aim of this review is to better clarify the mechanisms of the initiation and/or the promotion of arsenic-induced carcinogenesis in order to understand the best way to perform an early diagnosis and a prompt prevention that is the key point for protecting arsenic-exposed population. Studies on arsenic-exposed population should be designed in order to examine more comprehensively the presence and consequences of these genetic/epigenetic alterations. © 2014 Springer-Verlag

    Global burden of 288 causes of death and life expectancy decomposition in 204 countries and territories and 811 subnational locations, 1990–2021: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021

    No full text
    BackgroundRegular, detailed reporting on population health by underlying cause of death is fundamental for public health decision making. Cause-specific estimates of mortality and the subsequent effects on life expectancy worldwide are valuable metrics to gauge progress in reducing mortality rates. These estimates are particularly important following large-scale mortality spikes, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. When systematically analysed, mortality rates and life expectancy allow comparisons of the consequences of causes of death globally and over time, providing a nuanced understanding of the effect of these causes on global populations.MethodsThe Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2021 cause-of-death analysis estimated mortality and years of life lost (YLLs) from 288 causes of death by age-sex-location-year in 204 countries and territories and 811 subnational locations for each year from 1990 until 2021. The analysis used 56 604 data sources, including data from vital registration and verbal autopsy as well as surveys, censuses, surveillance systems, and cancer registries, among others. As with previous GBD rounds, cause-specific death rates for most causes were estimated using the Cause of Death Ensemble model—a modelling tool developed for GBD to assess the out-of-sample predictive validity of different statistical models and covariate permutations and combine those results to produce cause-specific mortality estimates—with alternative strategies adapted to model causes with insufficient data, substantial changes in reporting over the study period, or unusual epidemiology. YLLs were computed as the product of the number of deaths for each cause-age-sex-location-year and the standard life expectancy at each age. As part of the modelling process, uncertainty intervals (UIs) were generated using the 2·5th and 97·5th percentiles from a 1000-draw distribution for each metric. We decomposed life expectancy by cause of death, location, and year to show cause-specific effects on life expectancy from 1990 to 2021. We also used the coefficient of variation and the fraction of population affected by 90% of deaths to highlight concentrations of mortality. Findings are reported in counts and age-standardised rates. Methodological improvements for cause-of-death estimates in GBD 2021 include the expansion of under-5-years age group to include four new age groups, enhanced methods to account for stochastic variation of sparse data, and the inclusion of COVID-19 and other pandemic-related mortality—which includes excess mortality associated with the pandemic, excluding COVID-19, lower respiratory infections, measles, malaria, and pertussis. For this analysis, 199 new country-years of vital registration cause-of-death data, 5 country-years of surveillance data, 21 country-years of verbal autopsy data, and 94 country-years of other data types were added to those used in previous GBD rounds.FindingsThe leading causes of age-standardised deaths globally were the same in 2019 as they were in 1990; in descending order, these were, ischaemic heart disease, stroke, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and lower respiratory infections. In 2021, however, COVID-19 replaced stroke as the second-leading age-standardised cause of death, with 94·0 deaths (95% UI 89·2–100·0) per 100 000 population. The COVID-19 pandemic shifted the rankings of the leading five causes, lowering stroke to the third-leading and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease to the fourth-leading position. In 2021, the highest age-standardised death rates from COVID-19 occurred in sub-Saharan Africa (271·0 deaths [250·1–290·7] per 100 000 population) and Latin America and the Caribbean (195·4 deaths [182·1–211·4] per 100 000 population). The lowest age-standardised death rates from COVID-19 were in the high-income super-region (48·1 deaths [47·4–48·8] per 100 000 population) and southeast Asia, east Asia, and Oceania (23·2 deaths [16·3–37·2] per 100 000 population). Globally, life expectancy steadily improved between 1990 and 2019 for 18 of the 22 investigated causes. Decomposition of global and regional life expectancy showed the positive effect that reductions in deaths from enteric infections, lower respiratory infections, stroke, and neonatal deaths, among others have contributed to improved survival over the study period. However, a net reduction of 1·6 years occurred in global life expectancy between 2019 and 2021, primarily due to increased death rates from COVID-19 and other pandemic-related mortality. Life expectancy was highly variable between super-regions over the study period, with southeast Asia, east Asia, and Oceania gaining 8·3 years (6·7–9·9) overall, while having the smallest reduction in life expectancy due to COVID-19 (0·4 years). The largest reduction in life expectancy due to COVID-19 occurred in Latin America and the Caribbean (3·6 years). Additionally, 53 of the 288 causes of death were highly concentrated in locations with less than 50% of the global population as of 2021, and these causes of death became progressively more concentrated since 1990, when only 44 causes showed this pattern. The concentration phenomenon is discussed heuristically with respect to enteric and lower respiratory infections, malaria, HIV/AIDS, neonatal disorders, tuberculosis, and measles.InterpretationLong-standing gains in life expectancy and reductions in many of the leading causes of death have been disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic, the adverse effects of which were spread unevenly among populations. Despite the pandemic, there has been continued progress in combatting several notable causes of death, leading to improved global life expectancy over the study period. Each of the seven GBD super-regions showed an overall improvement from 1990 and 2021, obscuring the negative effect in the years of the pandemic. Additionally, our findings regarding regional variation in causes of death driving increases in life expectancy hold clear policy utility. Analyses of shifting mortality trends reveal that several causes, once widespread globally, are now increasingly concentrated geographically. These changes in mortality concentration, alongside further investigation of changing risks, interventions, and relevant policy, present an important opportunity to deepen our understanding of mortality-reduction strategies. Examining patterns in mortality concentration might reveal areas where successful public health interventions have been implemented. Translating these successes to locations where certain causes of death remain entrenched can inform policies that work to improve life expectancy for people everywhere
    corecore