Telmisartan and cardioprotection

Cardiovascular risk reduction has been the target of several large clinical trials in the last decade. As the activation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) plays a central role in the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease, RAAS blockade has been suggested to be among the most efficient cardioprotective interventions, as revealed with the angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors trials. The angiotensin receptor blockers’ (ARBs) efficacy in lowering blood pressure has been very well established. Telmisartan is however the first ARB to show a promising role in reducing cardiovascular risk in high-risk patients. This article will highlight the role of telmisartan in cardioprotection, underlying specifically the results of two major randomized controlled trials: ONTARGET (ONgoing Telmisartan Alone and in combination with Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial) and TRANSCEND (Telmisartan Randomized AssessmeNt Study in aCE-iNtolerant subjects with cardiovascular Disease)

Antiepileptic drugs and bone metabolism

Anti-epileptic medications encompass a wide range of drugs including anticonvulsants, benzodiazepines, enzyme inducers or inhibitors, with a variety effects, including induction of cytochrome P450 and other enzyme, which may lead to catabolism of vitamin D and hypocalcemia and other effects that may significantly effect the risk for low bone mass and fractures. With the current estimates of 50 million people worldwide with epilepsy together with the rapid increase in utilization of these medications for other indications, bone disease associated with the use of anti-epileptic medications is emerging as a serious health threat for millions of people. Nevertheless, it usually goes unrecognized and untreated. In this review we discuss the pathophysiologic mechanisms of bone disease associated with anti-epileptic use, including effect of anti-epileptic agents on bone turnover and fracture risk, highlighting various strategies for prevention of bone loss and associated fractures a rapidly increasing vulnerable population

Diabetes and Coronary Artery Disease – Pathophysiologic Insights and Therapeutic Implications

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality among people with diabetes worldwide, accounting for 60% of all deaths in diabetics. Despite advances in our pathophysiologic understanding of diabetic co-morbidities and measures to help counter these, diabetics still remain at increased risk for cardiovascular disease complicating our overall approach to management. Diabetics, in particularly type 2, are often fraught with additional risk factors contributing to their overall propensity for developing cardiovascular disease. These include, but are not limited to, obesity, dyslipidemia, poor glycemic control, lack of physical activity, and hypertension. In response to this, research driven guidelines focusing on primary prevention have continued to arise with new clinical targets and goals substantially changing our approach with the diabetic population. It is important to note early on, type 1 diabetics carry a higher risk of cardiovascular disease for which the pathophysiology is only recently being elucidated. The underlying relationship between cardiovascular events and risk factors is, however, not well understood. For this reason, management approaches to risk reduction have been extrapolated from experience in type 2 diabetes mellitus. The purpose of this chapter is to present the conclusions of current literature pertaining to blood pressure and blood glucose control, cholesterol management, aspirin therapy, and lifestyle modification. We present a synthesis of the new guidelines, and clinical targets, including preventative measures for subclinical cardiovascular disease for the contemporary management of patients with diabetes mellitus

Hypertension Management in the High Cardiovascular Risk Population

The incidence of hypertension is increasing every year. Blood pressure (BP) control is an important therapeutic goal for the slowing of progression as well as for the prevention of Cardiovascular disease. The management of hypertension in the high cardiovascular risk population remains a real challenge as the population continues to age, the incidence of diabetes increases, and more and more people survive acute myocardial infarction. We will review hypertension management in the high cardiovascular risk population: patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) and heart failure (HF) as well as in diabetic patients

Differential effect of obesity on bone mineral density in White, Hispanic and African American women: a cross sectional study

Osteoporosis is a major public health problem with low bone mass affecting nearly half the women aged 50 years or older. Evidence from various studies has shown that higher body mass index (BMI) is a protective factor for bone mineral density (BMD). Most of the evidence, however, is from studies with Caucasian women and it is unclear to what extent ethnicity plays a role in modifying the effect of BMI on BMD. A cross sectional study was performed in which records of postmenopausal women who presented for screening for osteoporosis at 2 urban medical centres were reviewed. Using logistic regression, we examined the interaction of race and BMI after adjusting for age, family history of osteoporosis, maternal fracture, smoking, and sedentary lifestyle on BMD. Low BMD was defined as T-score at the lumbar spine < -1. Among 3,206 patients identified, the mean age of the study population was 58.3 ± 0.24 (Years ± SEM) and the BMI was 30.6 kg/m(2). 2,417 (75.4%) were African Americans (AA), 441(13.6%) were Whites and 348 (10.9%) were Hispanics. The AA women had lower odds of having low BMD compared to Whites [Odds ratio (OR) = 0.079 (0.03–0.24) (95% CI), p < 0.01]. The odds ratio of low BMD was not statistically significant between White and Hispanic women. We examined the interaction between race and BMD. For White women; as the BMI increases by unity, the odds of low BMD decreases [OR = 0.9 (0.87–0.94), p < 0.01; for every unit increase in BMI]. AA women had slightly but significantly higher odds of low BMD compared to Whites [OR 1.015 (1.007–1.14), p <0.01 for every unit increase in BMI]. This effect was not observed when Hispanic women were compared to Whites. There is thus a race-dependent effect of BMI on BMD. With each unit increase in BMI, BMD increases for White women, while a slight but significant decrease in BMD occurs in African American women

Dietary carbohydrate restriction as the first approach in diabetes management:Critical review and evidence base

AbstractThe inability of current recommendations to control the epidemic of diabetes, the specific failure of the prevailing low-fat diets to improve obesity, cardiovascular risk, or general health and the persistent reports of some serious side effects of commonly prescribed diabetic medications, in combination with the continued success of low-carbohydrate diets in the treatment of diabetes and metabolic syndrome without significant side effects, point to the need for a reappraisal of dietary guidelines. The benefits of carbohydrate restriction in diabetes are immediate and well documented. Concerns about the efficacy and safety are long term and conjectural rather than data driven. Dietary carbohydrate restriction reliably reduces high blood glucose, does not require weight loss (although is still best for weight loss), and leads to the reduction or elimination of medication. It has never shown side effects comparable with those seen in many drugs. Here we present 12 points of evidence supporting the use of low-carbohydrate diets as the first approach to treating type 2 diabetes and as the most effective adjunct to pharmacology in type 1. They represent the best-documented, least controversial results. The insistence on long-term randomized controlled trials as the only kind of data that will be accepted is without precedent in science. The seriousness of diabetes requires that we evaluate all of the evidence that is available. The 12 points are sufficiently compelling that we feel that the burden of proof rests with those who are opposed