Renal disease

肾脏疾病
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    丙型肝炎病毒仍然是全世界发病率和死亡率的主要原因。在秘鲁,5年多前发布了两项管理这种感染的国家实践指南;然而,治疗方面的最新突破使得有必要更新这些指南。我们回顾了国际准则的最新建议,并将其与当前的秘鲁准则进行了比较。我们发现了很大的不同,例如使用Glecaprevir/Pibrentasvir作为一线治疗,这是在世界卫生组织指南中考虑的,并由美国和欧洲指南推荐,但秘鲁指南中没有考虑。另一个关键的区别在于慢性肾脏病患者的管理,他们现在用各种直接作用的抗病毒药物治疗,在第一世界国家没有限制使用基于Sofosbuvir的方案,秘鲁尚未采用的方法。我们认为,秘鲁准则建议的标准化势在必行,包括近年来出现的新的治疗策略。我们还建议在秘鲁背景下进行成本效益分析,以便实施新的抗病毒药物,并在该国更好地控制丙型肝炎。
    Hepatitis C virus still represents a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. In Peru, two national practice guidelines for the management of this infection were published more than 5 years ago; however, the latest breakthroughs in the treatment make it necessary to update these guidelines. We reviewed the most recent recommendations of the international guidelines and compared them with the current Peruvian guidelines. We found major differences, such as the use of Glecaprevir/Pibrentasvir as a first-line therapy, which is contemplated in the World Health Organization guideline, and recommended by American and European guidelines, but is not considered in the Peruvian guidelines. Another crucial difference lies in the management of patients with chronic kidney disease, who are treated nowadays with a variety of direct-acting antivirals, with no restrictions on the use of Sofosbuvir-based regimens in first-world countries, an approach that has not been adopted in Peru. We believe that standardization of the recommendations of the Peruvian guidelines is imperative, including the new therapeutic strategies that have emerged in recent years. We also suggest conducting a cost effectiveness analysis in the Peruvian context to allow for the implementation of new antivirals, and to achieve a better control of hepatitis C in the country.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    AL淀粉样变性是最常见的全身性淀粉样变性形式。然而,出现症状的非特异性性质要求需要加强临床怀疑,以在适当的临床环境中检测无法解释的表现.早期检测和治疗至关重要,因为心脏受累程度是AL淀粉样变性患者生存的主要预后预测指标。在用适当的组织活检诊断AL淀粉样变性后,用硼替佐米迅速治疗,在有或没有达雷妥单抗的情况下,应开始基于环磷酰胺和地塞米松的一线诱导.治疗的目标是实现可能的最佳血液学反应,理想情况下涉及游离轻链<20mg/L,因为它提供了器官功能改善的最佳机会。如果患者在2个治疗周期内没有达到部分反应,或者在4个周期或自体干细胞移植后没有达到非常好的部分反应,则应改变治疗方法。作为实现深刻和长期的克隆反应转化为更好的器官反应和长期结果。早期多学科专家如肾内科医师的参与,心脏病学家,神经学家,建议胃肠病学家对受累器官进行最佳维护和支持,以对AL淀粉样变性患者进行最佳管理。
    AL amyloidosis is the most common form of systemic amyloidosis. However, the non-specific nature of presenting symptoms requires the need for a heightened clinical suspicion to detect unexplained manifestations in the appropriate clinical setting. Early detection and treatment are crucial as the degree of cardiac involvement emerges as a primary prognostic predictor of survival in a patient with AL amyloidosis. Following the diagnosis of AL amyloidosis with appropriate tissue biopsies, prompt treatment with a bortezomib, cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone-based first-line induction with or without daratumumab should be initiated. The goal of treatment is to achieve the best haematologic response possible, ideally with involved free light chain <20 mg/L, as it offers the best chance of organ function improvement. Treatment should be changed if patients do not achieve a partial response within 2 cycles of treatment or very good partial response after 4 cycles or after autologous stem cell transplant, as achievement of profound and prolonged clonal responses translates to better organ response and long-term outcomes. Early involvement of multidisciplinary subspecialists such as renal physicians, cardiologists, neurologists, and gastroenterologists for optimal maintenance and support of involved organs is recommended for optimal management of patients with AL amyloidosis.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    Psoriasis is a chronic, inflammatory, multisystem disease that affects up to 3.2% of the US population. This guideline addresses important clinical questions that arise in psoriasis management and care, providing recommendations on the basis of available evidence.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    Although large randomized clinical trials have found that primary prevention use of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) improves survival in patients with cardiomyopathy and heart failure symptoms, patients who receive ICDs in practice are often older and have more comorbidities than patients who were enrolled in the clinical trials. In addition, there is a debate among clinicians on the usefulness of electrophysiological study for risk stratification of asymptomatic patients with Brugada syndrome.
    Our analysis has 2 objectives. First, to evaluate whether ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) induced with programmed electrostimulation in asymptomatic patients with Brugada syndrome identify a higher risk group that may require additional testing or therapies. Second, to evaluate whether implantation of an ICD is associated with a clinical benefit in older patients and patients with comorbidities who would otherwise benefit on the basis of left ventricular ejection fraction and heart failure symptoms.
    Traditional statistical approaches were used to address 1) whether programmed ventricular stimulation identifies a higher-risk group in asymptomatic patients with Brugada syndrome and 2) whether ICD implantation for primary prevention is associated with improved outcomes in older patients (>75 years of age) and patients with significant comorbidities who would otherwise meet criteria for ICD implantation on the basis of symptoms or left ventricular function.
    Evidence from 6 studies of 1138 asymptomatic patients were identified. Brugada syndrome with inducible VA on electrophysiological study was identified in 390 (34.3%) patients. To minimize patient overlap, the primary analysis used 5 of the 6 studies and found an odds ratio of 2.3 (95% CI: 0.63-8.66; p=0.2) for major arrhythmic events (sustained VAs, sudden cardiac death, or appropriate ICD therapy) in asymptomatic patients with Brugada syndrome and inducible VA on electrophysiological study versus those without inducible VA. Ten studies were reviewed that evaluated ICD use in older patients and 4 studies that evaluated unique patient populations were identified. In our analysis, ICD implantation was associated with improved survival (overall hazard ratio: 0.75; 95% confidence interval: 0.67-0.83; p<0.001). Ten studies were identified that evaluated ICD use in patients with various comorbidities including renal disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, atrial fibrillation, heart disease, and others. A random effects model demonstrated that ICD use was associated with reduced all-cause mortality (overall hazard ratio: 0.72; 95% confidence interval: 0.65-0.79; p<0.0001), and a second \"minimal overlap\" analysis also found that ICD use was associated with reduced all-cause mortality (overall hazard ratio: 0.71; 95% confidence interval: 0.61-0.82; p<0.0001). In 5 studies that included data on renal dysfunction, ICD implantation was associated with reduced all-cause mortality (overall hazard ratio: 0.71; 95% confidence interval: 0.60-0.85; p<0.001).
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    Although large randomized clinical trials have found that primary prevention use of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) improves survival in patients with cardiomyopathy and heart failure symptoms, patients who receive ICDs in practice are often older and have more comorbidities than patients who were enrolled in the clinical trials. In addition, there is a debate among clinicians on the usefulness of electrophysiological study for risk stratification of asymptomatic patients with Brugada syndrome.
    Our analysis has 2 objectives. First, to evaluate whether ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) induced with programmed electrostimulation in asymptomatic patients with Brugada syndrome identify a higher risk group that may require additional testing or therapies. Second, to evaluate whether implantation of an ICD is associated with a clinical benefit in older patients and patients with comorbidities who would otherwise benefit on the basis of left ventricular ejection fraction and heart failure symptoms.
    Traditional statistical approaches were used to address 1) whether programmed ventricular stimulation identifies a higher-risk group in asymptomatic patients with Brugada syndrome and 2) whether ICD implantation for primary prevention is associated with improved outcomes in older patients (>75 years of age) and patients with significant comorbidities who would otherwise meet criteria for ICD implantation on the basis of symptoms or left ventricular function.
    Evidence from 6 studies of 1138 asymptomatic patients were identified. Brugada syndrome with inducible VA on electrophysiological study was identified in 390 (34.3%) patients. To minimize patient overlap, the primary analysis used 5 of the 6 studies and found an odds ratio of 2.3 (95% CI: 0.63-8.66; p=0.2) for major arrhythmic events (sustained VAs, sudden cardiac death, or appropriate ICD therapy) in asymptomatic patients with Brugada syndrome and inducible VA on electrophysiological study versus those without inducible VA. Ten studies were reviewed that evaluated ICD use in older patients and 4 studies that evaluated unique patient populations were identified. In our analysis, ICD implantation was associated with improved survival (overall hazard ratio: 0.75; 95% confidence interval: 0.67-0.83; p<0.001). Ten studies were identified that evaluated ICD use in patients with various comorbidities including renal disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, atrial fibrillation, heart disease, and others. A random effects model demonstrated that ICD use was associated with reduced all-cause mortality (overall hazard ratio: 0.72; 95% confidence interval: 0.65-0.79; p<0.0001), and a second \"minimal overlap\" analysis also found that ICD use was associated with reduced all-cause mortality (overall hazard ratio: 0.71; 95% confidence interval: 0.61-0.82; p<0.0001). In 5 studies that included data on renal dysfunction, ICD implantation was associated with reduced all-cause mortality (overall hazard ratio: 0.71; 95% confidence interval: 0.60-0.85; p<0.001).
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    虽然大型随机临床试验发现,一级预防使用植入式心律转复除颤器(ICD)可改善心肌病和心力衰竭症状患者的生存率,与纳入临床试验的患者相比,在实践中接受ICD的患者通常年龄较大,并且有更多的合并症.此外,临床医师对电生理研究对无症状Brugada综合征患者的危险分层是否有用存在争议.
    我们的分析有两个目标。首先,评估程序电刺激在无症状的Brugada综合征患者中诱导的室性心律失常(VA)是否确定了可能需要额外检测或治疗的较高风险人群.第二,评估ICD的植入是否与老年患者和有合并症的患者的临床获益相关,否则这些患者会根据左心室射血分数和心力衰竭症状获益.
    传统的统计方法用于解决:1)程序心室刺激是否在无症状的Brugada综合征患者中识别出高风险人群;2)用于一级预防的ICD植入是否与老年患者(>75岁)和有明显合并症的患者的预后改善相关,否则根据症状或左心室功能符合ICD植入标准。
    确定了来自6项研究的1138名无症状患者的证据。在电生理研究中,在390名(34.3%)患者中发现了具有诱导型VA的Brugada综合征。为了尽量减少病人重叠,主要分析使用6项研究中的5项,发现主要心律失常事件的比值比为2.3(95%CI:0.63-8.66;P=0.2)(持续的VAs,心源性猝死,或适当的ICD治疗)在电生理研究中,无症状的Brugada综合征和诱导型VA患者与没有诱导型VA的患者相比。回顾了10项评估老年患者ICD使用的研究,并确定了4项评估独特患者群体的研究。在我们的分析中,ICD植入与生存改善相关(总风险比:0.75;95%置信区间:0.67-0.83;P<0.001)。确定了十项研究,评估了包括肾脏疾病在内的各种合并症患者的ICD使用情况。慢性阻塞性肺疾病,心房颤动,心脏病,和其他人。随机效应模型表明,使用ICD与降低全因死亡率相关(总体风险比:0.72;95%置信区间:0.65-0.79;P<0.0001),第二次"最小重叠"分析还发现使用ICD与降低全因死亡率相关(总体风险比:0.71;95%置信区间:0.61-0.82;P<0.0001).在包括肾功能不全数据的5项研究中,ICD植入与全因死亡率降低相关(总体风险比:0.71;95%置信区间:0.60-0.85;P<0.001)。
    Although large randomized clinical trials have found that primary prevention use of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) improves survival in patients with cardiomyopathy and heart failure symptoms, patients who receive ICDs in practice are often older and have more comorbidities than patients who were enrolled in the clinical trials. In addition, there is a debate among clinicians on the usefulness of electrophysiological study for risk stratification of asymptomatic patients with Brugada syndrome.
    Our analysis has 2 objectives. First, to evaluate whether ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) induced with programmed electrostimulation in asymptomatic patients with Brugada syndrome identify a higher risk group that may require additional testing or therapies. Second, to evaluate whether implantation of an ICD is associated with a clinical benefit in older patients and patients with comorbidities who would otherwise benefit on the basis of left ventricular ejection fraction and heart failure symptoms.
    Traditional statistical approaches were used to address 1) whether programmed ventricular stimulation identifies a higher-risk group in asymptomatic patients with Brugada syndrome and 2) whether ICD implantation for primary prevention is associated with improved outcomes in older patients (>75 years of age) and patients with significant comorbidities who would otherwise meet criteria for ICD implantation on the basis of symptoms or left ventricular function.
    Evidence from 6 studies of 1138 asymptomatic patients were identified. Brugada syndrome with inducible VA on electrophysiological study was identified in 390 (34.3%) patients. To minimize patient overlap, the primary analysis used 5 of the 6 studies and found an odds ratio of 2.3 (95% CI: 0.63-8.66; P=0.2) for major arrhythmic events (sustained VAs, sudden cardiac death, or appropriate ICD therapy) in asymptomatic patients with Brugada syndrome and inducible VA on electrophysiological study versus those without inducible VA. Ten studies were reviewed that evaluated ICD use in older patients and 4 studies that evaluated unique patient populations were identified. In our analysis, ICD implantation was associated with improved survival (overall hazard ratio: 0.75; 95% confidence interval: 0.67-0.83; P<0.001). Ten studies were identified that evaluated ICD use in patients with various comorbidities including renal disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, atrial fibrillation, heart disease, and others. A random effects model demonstrated that ICD use was associated with reduced all-cause mortality (overall hazard ratio: 0.72; 95% confidence interval: 0.65-0.79; P<0.0001), and a second \"minimal overlap\" analysis also found that ICD use was associated with reduced all-cause mortality (overall hazard ratio: 0.71; 95% confidence interval: 0.61-0.82; P<0.0001). In 5 studies that included data on renal dysfunction, ICD implantation was associated with reduced all-cause mortality (overall hazard ratio: 0.71; 95% confidence interval: 0.60-0.85; P<0.001).
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    暂无摘要。
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

公众号