Influence of gestational age at initiation of antihypertensive therapy: secondary analysis of CHIPS trial data (control of hypertension in pregnancy study)

For hypertensive women in CHIPS (Control of Hypertension in Pregnancy Study), we assessed whether the maternal benefits of tight control could be achieved, while minimizing any potentially negative effect on fetal growth, by delaying initiation of antihypertensive therapy until later in pregnancy. For the 981 women with nonsevere, chronic or gestational hypertension randomized to less-tight (target diastolic blood pressure, 100 mm Hg), or tight (target, 85 mm Hg) control, we used mixed-effects logistic regression to examine whether the effect of less-tight (versus tight) control on major outcomes was dependent on gestational age at randomization, adjusting for baseline factors as in the primary analysis and including an interaction term between gestational age at randomization and treatment allocation. Gestational age was considered categorically (quartiles) and continuously (linear or quadratic form), and the optimal functional form selected to provide the best fit to the data based on the Akaike information criterion. Randomization before (but not after) 24 weeks to less-tight (versus tight) control was associated with fewer babies with birth weight 48 hours (Pinteraction=0.354). For the mother, less-tight (versus tight) control was associated with more severe hypertension at all gestational ages but particularly so before 28 weeks (Pinteraction=0.076). In women with nonsevere, chronic, or gestational hypertension, there seems to be no gestational age at which less-tight (versus tight) control is the preferred management strategy to optimize maternal or perinatal outcomes

Laboratorio de Ciencias Vivas con técnologías de código abierto

En este documento se presenta el Laboratorio de Ciencias Vivas con Técnologías de Código Abierto, creado en el marco del “Proyecto Piloto "Laboratorio de Ciencias Vivas con tecnologías `Házlo tú mismo mismo´, `Házlo con Otros´ y `Trae tu propio dispositivo`dispositivo`[ apoyado por Fondo Sectorial "Inclusión Digital Educación con Nuevos Horizontes CFE ANII (FSED_ 2 2018 1 150716 ) y desarrollado por un grupo de investigación interdisciplinario e interinstitucional integrado por Virginia E. Pellegrino1, Sandra Alonso1, Carolina Pereira1, Pablo M. Sedraschi2, Marcos I. Gimenez2, Fernando N. Acosta2, Marcos Umpiérrez2, Daniel A. Argente2, Jose Gomez-Marquez3, Anne Young3, Nikolas Albarran3, Javier Calvelo4, Martin Figares4, Maria I. Rehermann de Sagastizabal4 and Milka D. Radmilovich5 y María E. Castelló4 El Laboratorio Virtual de Ciencias Vivas consta de dos Laboratorios, uno de Fisiología y otro de Biología Celular. En el Laboratorio Virtual de Fisiología, los usuarios podrán hacer experimentos virtuales de registro de potenciales de acción en el sistema nervioso periférico de un invertebrado. Se puede visualizar registros en condiciones basales (sin estimulación) o en respuesta a distintos tipos estímulos (mecánico por una varilla o por aire a presión). En este caso se puede variar la intensidad del estímulo. De acuerdo a lo seleccionado, se pueden adquirir virtualmente registros que luego pueden ser visualizados y analizados. Por ejemplo, seleccionar una ventana teporal y contabilizar el número de potenciales estableciendo una ventana de amplitud de la señal. En el Laboratorio de Biología Celular, los usuarios podrán experimentar la Reacción de Hill. • Los laboratorios Virtuales Fisiología y Biología Celular son espacios en los que se puede aprender y experimentar sin peligro de daño personal, contaminación o pérdida de las muestras o rotura de equipos. Pueden ser descargados en sistema Ubuntu o Windows y los datos generados durante la experimentación pueden ser almacenados en las computadoras de los usuarios para posterior análisis.Agencia Nacional de Investigación e Innovació

The Magpie Trial: A randomised trial comparing magnesium sulphate with placebo for pre-eclampsia. Outcome for women at 2 years

Objective: The aim of this study was to assess long-term effects for women following the use of magnesium sulphate for pre-eclampsia. Design: Assessment at 2-3 years after delivery for women recruited to the Magpie Trial (recruitment in 1998-2001, ISRCTN 86938761), which compared magnesium sulphate with placebo for pre-eclampsia. Setting: Follow up after discharge from hospital at 125 centres in 19 countries across five continents. Population: A total of 7927 women were randomised at the follow-up centres. Of these women, 2544 were not included for logistic reasons and 601 excluded (109 at a centre where <20% of women were contacted, 466 discharged without a surviving child and 26 opted out). Therefore, 4782 women were selected for follow-up, of whom 3375 (71%) were traced. Methods: Questionnaire assessment was administered largely by post or in a dedicated clinic. Interview assessment of selected women was performed. Main outcome measures: Death or serious morbidity potentially related to pre-eclampsia at follow up, other morbidity and use of health service resources. Results: Median time from delivery to follow up was 26 months (interquartile range 19-36). Fifty-eight of 1650 (3.5%) women allocated magnesium sulphate died or had serious morbidity potentially related to pre-eclampsia compared with 72 of 1725 (4.2%) women allocated placebo (relative risk 0.84, 95% CI 0.60-1.18). Conclusions: The reduction in the risk of eclampsia following prophylaxis with magnesium sulphate was not associated with an excess of death or disability for the women after 2 years. © RCOG 2006 BJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology.Articl

Apixaban versus Enoxaparin for Thromboprophylaxis in Medically Ill Patients

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of prolonging prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in medically ill patients beyond hospital discharge remain uncertain. We hypothesized that extended prophylaxis with apixaban would be safe and more effective than short-term prophylaxis with enoxaparin. METHODS: In this double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned acutely ill patients who had congestive heart failure or respiratory failure or other medical disorders and at least one additional risk factor for venous thromboembolism and who were hospitalized with an expected stay of at least 3 days to receive apixaban, administered orally at a dose of 2.5 mg twice daily for 30 days, or enoxaparin, administered subcutaneously at a dose of 40 mg once daily for 6 to 14 days. The primary efficacy outcome was the 30-day composite of death related to venous thromboembolism, pulmonary embolism, symptomatic deep-vein thrombosis, or asymptomatic proximal-leg deep-vein thrombosis, as detected with the use of systematic bilateral compression ultrasonography on day 30. The primary safety outcome was bleeding. All efficacy and safety outcomes were independently adjudicated. RESULTS: A total of 6528 subjects underwent randomization, 4495 of whom could be evaluated for the primary efficacy outcome--2211 in the apixaban group and 2284 in the enoxaparin group. Among the patients who could be evaluated, 2.71% in the apixaban group (60 patients) and 3.06% in the enoxaparin group (70 patients) met the criteria for the primary efficacy outcome (relative risk with apixaban, 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.62 to 1.23; P=0.44). By day 30, major bleeding had occurred in 0.47% of the patients in the apixaban group (15 of 3184 patients) and in 0.19% of the patients in the enoxaparin group (6 of 3217 patients) (relative risk, 2.58; 95% CI, 1.02 to 7.24; P=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: In medically ill patients, an extended course of thromboprophylaxis with apixaban was not superior to a shorter course with enoxaparin. Apixaban was associated with significantly more major bleeding events than was enoxaparin. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00457002.)

A randomized trial of planned cesarean or vaginal delivery for twin pregnancy

Background: Twin birth is associated with a higher risk of adverse perinatal outcomes than singleton birth. It is unclear whether planned cesarean section results in a lower risk of adverse outcomes than planned vaginal delivery in twin pregnancy.\ud \ud Methods: We randomly assigned women between 32 weeks 0 days and 38 weeks 6 days of gestation with twin pregnancy and with the first twin in the cephalic presentation to planned cesarean section or planned vaginal delivery with cesarean only if indicated. Elective delivery was planned between 37 weeks 5 days and 38 weeks 6 days of gestation. The primary outcome was a composite of fetal or neonatal death or serious neonatal morbidity, with the fetus or infant as the unit of analysis for the statistical comparison.\ud \ud Results: A total of 1398 women (2795 fetuses) were randomly assigned to planned cesarean delivery and 1406 women (2812 fetuses) to planned vaginal delivery. The rate of cesarean delivery was 90.7% in the planned-cesarean-delivery group and 43.8% in the planned-vaginal-delivery group. Women in the planned-cesarean-delivery group delivered earlier than did those in the planned-vaginal-delivery group (mean number of days from randomization to delivery, 12.4 vs. 13.3; P = 0.04). There was no significant difference in the composite primary outcome between the planned-cesarean-delivery group and the planned-vaginal-delivery group (2.2% and 1.9%, respectively; odds ratio with planned cesarean delivery, 1.16; 95% confidence interval, 0.77 to 1.74; P = 0.49).\ud \ud Conclusion: In twin pregnancy between 32 weeks 0 days and 38 weeks 6 days of gestation, with the first twin in the cephalic presentation, planned cesarean delivery did not significantly decrease or increase the risk of fetal or neonatal death or serious neonatal morbidity, as compared with planned vaginal delivery