Prevalência e fatores associados aos sintomas urinários na doença de Parkinson

The authors present a cross-sectional study involving 61 patients with idiopathic Parkinson's disease (PD) who were consecutively examined and compared to a control group with 74 subjects. Only patients who fulfilled the standard diagnostic criteria for PD and whose brain magnetic resonance imaging was normal were included. The objective of the study was to evaluate the prevalence of inferior urinary tract symptoms in PD and to study the possible association between clinical factors to urinary dysfunction. ln the patient group, 39.3% presented urinary symptoms when compared to 10.8% in the control group. All symptomatic patients presented irritative symptoms. The most common irritative symptom PD was nocturia, followed by frequency and urinary incontinence. Around 25% of the patients presented functional obstructive symptoms determined by the disease. The most frequent obstructive symptom was incomplete emptying of the bladder. Only the age of the patients and control group were correlated with urinary dysfunction.Trata-se de estudo clínico transversal, envolvendo 61 pacientes com doença de Parkinson idiopática (DP) examinados consecutivamente e comparados a 74 indivíduos do grupo controle. Foram incluídos apenas pacientes com DP que preencheram os critérios de diagnóstico estabelecidos. A ressonância magnética do encéfalo e a ultra-sonografia da próstata foram utilizadas como critérios de exclusão. O objetivo do estudo foi avaliar a prevalência de sintomas do trato urinário inferior na DP e verificar associações entre sexo, idade e fatores clínicos às disfunções urinárias. Sintomatologia urinária foi encontrada em 39,3% dos parkinsonianos e 10,8% do grupo controle. Todos os pacientes sintomáticos apresentavam sintomas irritativos e 25% destes tinham sintomas obstrutivos. A sintomatologia urinária não estava associada ao sexo, duração e gravidade da doença, hipotensão postural e sintomas ortostáticos, assim como com os sinais cardeais e tratamento com a levodopa.35936

Health-status outcomes with invasive or conservative care in coronary disease

BACKGROUND In the ISCHEMIA trial, an invasive strategy with angiographic assessment and revascularization did not reduce clinical events among patients with stable ischemic heart disease and moderate or severe ischemia. A secondary objective of the trial was to assess angina-related health status among these patients. METHODS We assessed angina-related symptoms, function, and quality of life with the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) at randomization, at months 1.5, 3, and 6, and every 6 months thereafter in participants who had been randomly assigned to an invasive treatment strategy (2295 participants) or a conservative strategy (2322). Mixed-effects cumulative probability models within a Bayesian framework were used to estimate differences between the treatment groups. The primary outcome of this health-status analysis was the SAQ summary score (scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health status). All analyses were performed in the overall population and according to baseline angina frequency. RESULTS At baseline, 35% of patients reported having no angina in the previous month. SAQ summary scores increased in both treatment groups, with increases at 3, 12, and 36 months that were 4.1 points (95% credible interval, 3.2 to 5.0), 4.2 points (95% credible interval, 3.3 to 5.1), and 2.9 points (95% credible interval, 2.2 to 3.7) higher with the invasive strategy than with the conservative strategy. Differences were larger among participants who had more frequent angina at baseline (8.5 vs. 0.1 points at 3 months and 5.3 vs. 1.2 points at 36 months among participants with daily or weekly angina as compared with no angina). CONCLUSIONS In the overall trial population with moderate or severe ischemia, which included 35% of participants without angina at baseline, patients randomly assigned to the invasive strategy had greater improvement in angina-related health status than those assigned to the conservative strategy. The modest mean differences favoring the invasive strategy in the overall group reflected minimal differences among asymptomatic patients and larger differences among patients who had had angina at baseline

Initial invasive or conservative strategy for stable coronary disease

BACKGROUND Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, whether clinical outcomes are better in those who receive an invasive intervention plus medical therapy than in those who receive medical therapy alone is uncertain. METHODS We randomly assigned 5179 patients with moderate or severe ischemia to an initial invasive strategy (angiography and revascularization when feasible) and medical therapy or to an initial conservative strategy of medical therapy alone and angiography if medical therapy failed. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest. A key secondary outcome was death from cardiovascular causes or myocardial infarction. RESULTS Over a median of 3.2 years, 318 primary outcome events occurred in the invasive-strategy group and 352 occurred in the conservative-strategy group. At 6 months, the cumulative event rate was 5.3% in the invasive-strategy group and 3.4% in the conservative-strategy group (difference, 1.9 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8 to 3.0); at 5 years, the cumulative event rate was 16.4% and 18.2%, respectively (difference, 121.8 percentage points; 95% CI, 124.7 to 1.0). Results were similar with respect to the key secondary outcome. The incidence of the primary outcome was sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction; a secondary analysis yielded more procedural myocardial infarctions of uncertain clinical importance. There were 145 deaths in the invasive-strategy group and 144 deaths in the conservative-strategy group (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.32). CONCLUSIONS Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, we did not find evidence that an initial invasive strategy, as compared with an initial conservative strategy, reduced the risk of ischemic cardiovascular events or death from any cause over a median of 3.2 years. The trial findings were sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction that was used