Treatment of hyperfunctioning thyroid nodules by percutaneous ethanol injection

BACKGROUND: Autonomous thyroid nodules can be treated by a variety of methods. We assessed the efficacy of percutaneous ethanol injection in treating autonomous thyroid nodules. METHODS: 35 patients diagnosed by technetium-99 scanning with hyperfunctioning nodules and suppressed sensitive TSH (sTSH) were given sterile ethanol injections under ultrasound guidance. 29 patients had clinical and biochemical hyperthyroidism. The other 6 had sub-clinical hyperthyroidism with suppressed sTSH levels (<0.24 μIU/ml) and normal thyroid hormone levels. Ethanol injections were performed once every 1–4 weeks. Ethanol injections were stopped when serum T(3), T(4 )and sTSH levels had returned to normal, or else injections could no longer be performed because significant side effects. Patients were followed up at 3, 6 and, in 15 patients, 24 months after the last injection. RESULTS: Average pre-treatment nodule volume [18.2 ± 12.7 ml] decreased to 5.7 ± 4.6 ml at 6 months follow-up [P < 0.001]. All patients had normal thyroid hormone levels at 3 and 6 months follow-up [P < 0.001 relative to baseline]. sTSH levels increased from 0.09 ± 0.02 μIU/ml to 0.65 ± 0.8 μIU/ml at the end of therapy [P < 0.05]. Only 3 patients had persistent sTSH suppression at 6 months post-therapy. T(4 )and sTSH did not change significantly between 6 months and 2 years [P > 0.05]. Ethanol injections were well tolerated by the patients, with only 2 cases of transient dysphonia. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that ethanol injection is an alternative to surgery or radioactive iodine in the treatment of autonomous thyroid nodules

Effect of sitagliptin on cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND: Data are lacking on the long-term effect on cardiovascular events of adding sitagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor, to usual care in patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind study, we assigned 14,671 patients to add either sitagliptin or placebo to their existing therapy. Open-label use of antihyperglycemic therapy was encouraged as required, aimed at reaching individually appropriate glycemic targets in all patients. To determine whether sitagliptin was noninferior to placebo, we used a relative risk of 1.3 as the marginal upper boundary. The primary cardiovascular outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for unstable angina. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 3.0 years, there was a small difference in glycated hemoglobin levels (least-squares mean difference for sitagliptin vs. placebo, -0.29 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.32 to -0.27). Overall, the primary outcome occurred in 839 patients in the sitagliptin group (11.4%; 4.06 per 100 person-years) and 851 patients in the placebo group (11.6%; 4.17 per 100 person-years). Sitagliptin was noninferior to placebo for the primary composite cardiovascular outcome (hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.09; P<0.001). Rates of hospitalization for heart failure did not differ between the two groups (hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.20; P = 0.98). There were no significant between-group differences in rates of acute pancreatitis (P = 0.07) or pancreatic cancer (P = 0.32). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with type 2 diabetes and established cardiovascular disease, adding sitagliptin to usual care did not appear to increase the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events, hospitalization for heart failure, or other adverse events

Effects of Once-Weekly Exenatide on Cardiovascular Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes.

Abstract BACKGROUND: The cardiovascular effects of adding once-weekly treatment with exenatide to usual care in patients with type 2 diabetes are unknown. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with type 2 diabetes, with or without previous cardiovascular disease, to receive subcutaneous injections of extended-release exenatide at a dose of 2 mg or matching placebo once weekly. The primary composite outcome was the first occurrence of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. The coprimary hypotheses were that exenatide, administered once weekly, would be noninferior to placebo with respect to safety and superior to placebo with respect to efficacy. RESULTS: In all, 14,752 patients (of whom 10,782 [73.1%] had previous cardiovascular disease) were followed for a median of 3.2 years (interquartile range, 2.2 to 4.4). A primary composite outcome event occurred in 839 of 7356 patients (11.4%; 3.7 events per 100 person-years) in the exenatide group and in 905 of 7396 patients (12.2%; 4.0 events per 100 person-years) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83 to 1.00), with the intention-to-treat analysis indicating that exenatide, administered once weekly, was noninferior to placebo with respect to safety (P<0.001 for noninferiority) but was not superior to placebo with respect to efficacy (P=0.06 for superiority). The rates of death from cardiovascular causes, fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction, fatal or nonfatal stroke, hospitalization for heart failure, and hospitalization for acute coronary syndrome, and the incidence of acute pancreatitis, pancreatic cancer, medullary thyroid carcinoma, and serious adverse events did not differ significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with type 2 diabetes with or without previous cardiovascular disease, the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events did not differ significantly between patients who received exenatide and those who received placebo. (Funded by Amylin Pharmaceuticals; EXSCEL ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01144338 .)

Political issues in internal medicine in Europe. A position paper.

What will be the future of internal medicine in Europe? Because of rapidly growing concerns regarding the position of internal medicine in many European countries, the European Federation of Internal Medicine (EFIM) has established a working group to analyze the situation. Being well aware of the variation in working practices in the different countries, the members of the group used an “all-European” approach to answer the following questions: • Are there problems for internal medicine? If so, what are these problems and why? • Why do the health care systems in the European countries need internal medicine? • Why do patients need internal medicine? • What needs to be done? Internal medicine is the modern, clinical, and scientific medical discipline that is responsible for the care of adult patients with one or more complex, acute, or chronic illnesses. Internal medicine is the cornerstone of an integrated health care delivery service that is needed today. Decision-makers in politics and hospitals, insurers, journalists, and the general public need a better understanding of what internal medicine can offer to the health care system and to the individual patient