Effects of Renal Denervation on Insulin Sensitivity and Inflammatory Markers in Nondiabetic Patients with Treatment-Resistant Hypertension

Increased sympathetic activity is important in the pathogenesis of hypertension and insulin resistance. Afferent signaling from the kidneys elevates the central sympathetic drive. We investigated the effect of catheter-based renal sympathetic denervation (RDN) on glucose metabolism, inflammatory markers, and blood pressure in nondiabetic patients with treatment-resistant hypertension. Eight subjects were included in an open-labelled study. Each patient was studied before and 6 months after RDN. Endogenous glucose production was assessed by a 3-3H glucose tracer, insulin sensitivity was examined by hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp, hormones and inflammatory markers were analyzed, and blood pressure was measured by office blood pressure readings and 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Insulin sensitivity (M-value) increased nonsignificantly from 2.68 ± 0.28 to 3.07 ± 0.41 (p=0.12). A significant inverse correlation between the increase in M-value and BMI 6 months after RDN (p=0.03) was found, suggesting beneficial effects on leaner subjects. Blood pressure decreased significantly, but there were no changes in hormones, inflammatory markers, or endogenous glucose production. Our results indicate that RDN may improve insulin sensitivity in some patients with treatment-resistant hypertension, albeit confirmation of these indications of beneficial effects on leaner subjects awaits the outcome of larger randomized controlled studies

The impact of liraglutide on diabetes-related foot ulceration and associated complications in patients with type 2 diabetes at high risk for cardiovascular events: Results from the LEADER trial

OBJECTIVE: Diabetes-related foot ulcers (DFUs) and their sequelae result in large patient and societal burdens. Long-term data determining the efficacy of individual glucose-lowering agents on DFUs are lacking. Using existing data from the Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes: Evaluation of Cardiovascular Outcome Results (LEADER) trial, we conducted post hoc analyses assessing the impact of liraglutide versus placebo in people with type 2 diabetes and at high risk of cardiovascular (CV) events on the incidence of DFUs and their sequelae. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The LEADER trial (NCT01179048) was a randomized, double-blind, multicenter, CV outcomes trial assessing liraglutide (1.8 mg/day) versus placebo, in addition to standard of care, for up to 5 years. Information on DFUs was collected systematically during the trial, and DFU complications were assessed post hoc through reviewing case narratives. RESULTS: During a median of 3.8 years' follow-up, similar proportions of patients reported at least one episode of DFU in the liraglutide and placebo groups (3.8% [176/4,668] versus 4.1% [191/4,672], respectively; hazard ratio [HR] 0.92 [95% CI 0.75, 1.13; P = 0.41]). Analysis of DFU-related complications demonstrated a significant reduction in amputations with liraglutide versus placebo (HR 0.65 [95% CI 0.45, 0.95; P = 0.03]). However, no differences were found for foot infections, involvement of underlying structures, or peripheral revascularization in the main analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with liraglutide in patients with type 2 diabetes and at high risk of CV events in the LEADER trial did not increase the risk of DFU events and was associated with a significantly lower risk of DFU-related amputations compared with placebo. This association, possibly due to chance, needs further investigation

Clinical outcomes after treatment of multiple lesions with zotarolimus-eluting versus sirolimus-eluting coronary stents (a SORT OUT III substudy)

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Data on clinical outcomes among patients treated with the zotarolimus-eluting Endeavor™ stent versus the sirolimus-eluting Cypher™ stent favor the sirolimus-eluting stent. However, a separate comparison of clinical outcome among patients treated for multiple lesions with these stents is lacking. We performed this comparison within the SORT OUT III trial data set.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Among 2332 patients randomized in SORT OUT III, 695 were treated for multiple lesions with zotarolimus-eluting (n = 350) or sirolimus-eluting (n = 345) stents and followed for 18 months. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE); composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization (TVR); was the primary endpoint.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Zotarolimus-eluting compared to sirolimus-eluting stent treatment was associated with increased MACE rate (13.2% vs. 2.6%; hazard ratio 5.29 with 95% confidence interval: 2.59-10.8). All secondary endpoints; all cause death, cardiac death, myocardial infarction, TVR, target lesion revascularization, in-stent restenosis, and definite stent thrombosis; were observed more frequently among zotarolimus-eluting stent treated patients. For all endpoints, hazard ratios were 1.6 to 4.6 times higher than in the overall results of the SORT OUT III trial.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>We observed better clinical outcomes among patients treated for multiple lesions with the sirolimus-eluting stent compared to those treated with the zotarolimus-eluting stent.</p

The Freedoms and Capabilities of Farm Animals: How Can Organic Husbandry Fulfill Them?

Organic farming promotes animal husbandry practices that consider the welfare of the animals on the farm. The concept of animal welfare and the standards that should encompass this concept have in many cases been largely generalised in practice, which leaves relevant aspects of animal freedom or capabilities insufficiently addressed. This chapter puts forth the prospect that the capabilities approach offers an appropriate practical platform by which to improve welfare in farm animals by meeting a wider range of their natural needs and abilities. The capabilities approach coupled with effective health planning could foster organic husbandry towards a more acceptable production system for farmers and consumers alike

Colonic epithelial ion transport is not affected in patients with diverticulosis

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Colonic diverticular disease is a bothersome condition with an unresolved pathogenesis. It is unknown whether a neuroepithelial dysfunction is present. The aim of the study was two-fold; (1) to investigate colonic epithelial ion transport in patients with diverticulosis and (2) to adapt a miniaturized Modified Ussing Air-Suction (MUAS) chamber for colonic endoscopic biopsies.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Biopsies were obtained from the sigmoid part of the colon. 86 patients were included. All patients were referred for colonoscopy on suspicion of neoplasia and they were without pathological findings at colonoscopy (controls) except for diverticulosis in 22 (D-patients). Biopsies were mounted in MUAS chambers with an exposed area of 5 mm². Electrical responses to various stimulators and inhibitors of ion transport were investigated together with histological examination. The MUAS chamber was easy to use and reproducible data were obtained.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Median basal short circuit current (SCC) was 43.8 μA·cm^-2(0.8 – 199) for controls and 59.3 μA·cm^-2(3.0 – 177.2) for D-patients. Slope conductance was 77.0 mS·cm^-2(18.6 – 204.0) equal to 13 Ω·cm²for controls and 96.6 mS·cm^-2(8.4 – 191.4) equal to 10.3 Ω·cm²for D-patients. Stimulation with serotonin, theophylline, forskolin and carbachol induced increases in SCC in a range of 4.9 – 18.6 μA·cm^-2, while inhibition with indomethacin, bumetanide, ouabain and amiloride decreased SCC in a range of 6.5 – 27.4 μA·cm^-2, and all with no significant differences between controls and D-patients. Histological examinations showed intact epithelium and lamina propria before and after mounting for both types of patients.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>We conclude that epithelial ion transport is not significantly altered in patients with diverticulosis and that the MUAS chamber can be adapted for studies of human colonic endoscopic biopsies.</p

Addressing preference heterogeneity in public health policy by combining Cluster Analysis and Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis: Proof of Method.

The use of subgroups based on biological-clinical and socio-demographic variables to deal with population heterogeneity is well-established in public policy. The use of subgroups based on preferences is rare, except when religion based, and controversial. If it were decided to treat subgroup preferences as valid determinants of public policy, a transparent analytical procedure is needed. In this proof of method study we show how public preferences could be incorporated into policy decisions in a way that respects both the multi-criterial nature of those decisions, and the heterogeneity of the population in relation to the importance assigned to relevant criteria. It involves combining Cluster Analysis (CA), to generate the subgroup sets of preferences, with Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA), to provide the policy framework into which the clustered preferences are entered. We employ three techniques of CA to demonstrate that not only do different techniques produce different clusters, but that choosing among techniques (as well as developing the MCDA structure) is an important task to be undertaken in implementing the approach outlined in any specific policy context. Data for the illustrative, not substantive, application are from a Randomized Controlled Trial of online decision aids for Australian men aged 40-69 years considering Prostate-specific Antigen testing for prostate cancer. We show that such analyses can provide policy-makers with insights into the criterion-specific needs of different subgroups. Implementing CA and MCDA in combination to assist in the development of policies on important health and community issues such as drug coverage, reimbursement, and screening programs, poses major challenges -conceptual, methodological, ethical-political, and practical - but most are exposed by the techniques, not created by them

Pneumococcal Serotypes and Mortality following Invasive Pneumococcal Disease: A Population-Based Cohort Study

Analyzing population-based data collected over 30 years in more than 18,000 patients with invasive pneumococcal infection, Zitta Harboe and colleagues find specific pneumococcal serotypes to be associated with increased mortality

Relative survival and excess mortality following primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction

Background: High survival rates are commonly reported following primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction, with most contemporary studies reporting overall survival. Aims: The aim of this study was to describe survival following primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction corrected for non-cardiovascular deaths by reporting relative survival and investigate clinically significant factors associated with poor long-term outcomes. Methods and Results: Using the prospective UK Percutaneous Coronary Intervention registry, primary percutaneous coronary intervention cases (n=88,188; 2005–2013) were matched to mortality data for the UK populace. Crude five-year relative survival was 87.1% for the patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention and 94.7% for patients 75 years: 4.69, 4.27–5.16). After four years, there was no excess mortality for ages 56–65 years (excess mortality rate ratio 1.27, 0.95–1.70), but persisting excess mortality for older groups (66–75 years: excess mortality rate ratio 1.72, 1.30–2.27; >75 years: 1.66, 1.15–2.41). Excess mortality was associated with cardiogenic shock (excess mortality rate ratio 6.10, 5.72–6.50), renal failure (2.52, 2.27–2.81), left main stem stenosis (1.67, 1.54–1.81), diabetes (1.58, 1.47–1.69), previous myocardial infarction (1.52, 1.40–1.65) and female sex (1.33, 1.26–1.41); whereas stent deployment (0.46, 0.42–0.50) especially drug eluting stents (0.27, 0.45–0.55), radial access (0.70, 0.63–0.71) and previous percutaneous coronary intervention (0.67, 0.60–0.75) were protective. Conclusions: Following primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction, long-term cardiovascular survival is excellent. Failure to account for non-cardiovascular death may result in an underestimation of the efficacy of primary percutaneous coronary intervention