Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Gynecological Devices

Background: Performing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) on women with gynecological devices is a completely accepted practice. The goal of our review is to assess how safe it is to perform MRI on women using contraceptive implants or devices. Study Design: Literature review, searching in PubMed-Medline/Ovid for the following keywords: magnetic resonance imaging, intrauterine devices, Implanon® and Essure®. Results: Though plastic devices do not represent a contraindication to the use of the technique, those including metallic components have been submitted to several tests, after which they were classified as MR Conditional (devices presenting no risks in MR-specific environments) by the Food and Drug Administration. Thus, the use of MRI can be safely advised to women with this type of device as long as the magnetic resonance equipment is ≤3.0 T. Conclusions: Presently, there is no scientific evidence that contraindicates performing MRI on women with any kind of gynecological device. Therefore, this procedure is safe as long as it is performed under previously tested conditions.

Atorvastatin versus Bezafibrate in Mixed Hyperlipidaemia : Randomised Clinical Trial of Efficacy and Safety (the ATOMIX Study)

OBJECTIVE: Combined hyperlipidaemia is a common and highly atherogenic lipid phenotype with multiple lipoprotein abnormalities that are difficult to normalise with single-drug therapy. The ATOMIX multicentre, controlled clinical trial compared the efficacy and safety of atorvastatin and bezafibrate in patients with diet-resistant combined hyperlipidaemia. PATIENTS AND STUDY DESIGN: Following a 6-week placebo run-in period, 138 patients received atorvastatin 10mg or bezafibrate 400mg once daily in a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. To meet predefined low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) target levels, atorvastatin dosages were increased to 20mg or 40mg once daily after 8 and 16 weeks, respectively. RESULTS: After 52 weeks, atorvastatin achieved greater reductions in LDL-C than bezafibrate (percentage decrease 35 vs 5; p < 0.0001), while bezafibrate achieved greater reductions in triglyceride than atorvastatin (percentage decrease 33 vs 21; p < 0.05) and greater increases in high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C) [percentage increase 28 vs 17; p < 0.01 ]. Target LDL-C levels (according to global risk) were attained in 62% of atorvastatin recipients and 6% of bezafibrate recipients, and triglyceride levels <200 mg/dL were achieved in 52% and 60% of patients, respectively. In patients with normal baseline HDL-C, bezafibrate was superior to atorvastatin for raising HDL-C, while in those with baseline HDL-C <35 mg/dL, the two drugs raised HDL-C to a similar extent after adjustment for baseline values. Both drugs were well tolerated. CONCLUSION: The results show that atorvastatin has an overall better efficacy than bezafibrate in concomitantly reaching LDL-C and triglyceride target levels in combined hyperlipidaemia, thus supporting its use as monotherapy in patients with this lipid phenotype.

Sirolimus-Induced Drug Fever in a Renal Transplant Patient: a Case Report

Herein we have described the case of a male renal transplant recipient who developed drug fever apparently related to sirolimus. He had been stable under an immunosuppressive regimen of tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil, but developed acute cellular rejection at 5 years after transplantation due to noncompliance. Renal biopsy showed marked interstitial fibrosis, and immunosuppression was switched from mycophenolate to sirolimus, maintaining low tacrolimus levels. One month later he was admitted to our hospital for investigation of intermittently high fever, fatigue, myalgias, and diarrhea. Physical examination was unremarkable and drug levels were not increased. Lactic dehydrogenase and C-reactive protein were increased. The blood cell count and chest radiographic findings were normal. After extensive cultures, he was started on broad-spectrum antibiotics. Inflammatory markers and fever worsened, but diarrhea resolved. All serologic and imaging tests excluded infection, immune-mediated diseases, and malignancy. After 12 days antibiotics were stopped as no clinical improvement was achieved. Drug fever was suspected; sirolimus was replaced by mycophenolate mofetil. Fever and other symptoms disappeared after 24 hours; inflammatory markers normalized in a few days. After 1 month the patient was in good health with stable renal function. Although infrequent, the recognition of drug fever as a potential side effect of sirolimus may avoid unnecessary invasive diagnostic procedures. Nevertheless, exclusion of other common causes of fever is essential.

Sepsis Mortality Prediction Based on Predisposition, Infection and Response

OBJECTIVE: To empirically test, based on a large multicenter, multinational database, whether a modified PIRO (predisposition, insult, response, and organ dysfunction) concept could be applied to predict mortality in patients with infection and sepsis. DESIGN: Substudy of a multicenter multinational cohort study (SAPS 3). PATIENTS: A total of 2,628 patients with signs of infection or sepsis who stayed in the ICU for >48 h. Three boxes of variables were defined, according to the PIRO concept. Box 1 (Predisposition) contained information about the patient's condition before ICU admission. Box 2 (Injury) contained information about the infection at ICU admission. Box 3 (Response) was defined as the response to the infection, expressed as a Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score after 48 h. INTERVENTIONS: None. MAIN MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Most of the infections were community acquired (59.6%); 32.5% were hospital acquired. The median age of the patients was 65 (50-75) years, and 41.1% were female. About 22% (n=576) of the patients presented with infection only, 36.3% (n=953) with signs of sepsis, 23.6% (n=619) with severe sepsis, and 18.3% (n=480) with septic shock. Hospital mortality was 40.6% overall, greater in those with septic shock (52.5%) than in those with infection (34.7%). Several factors related to predisposition, infection and response were associated with hospital mortality. CONCLUSION: The proposed three-level system, by using objectively defined criteria for risk of mortality in sepsis, could be used by physicians to stratify patients at ICU admission or shortly thereafter, contributing to a better selection of management according to the risk of death.

Management of Childhood Urticaria: Current Knowledge and Practical Recommendations

Urticaria, defined by the presence of wheals and/or angioedema,is a common condition in children, prompting parents to consult physicians. For its successful management, paediatric-specific features must be taken into account, regarding the identification of eliciting triggers and pharmacological therapy. This review systematically discusses the current best-available evidence on spontaneous acute and chronic urticaria as well as physical and other urticaria types in children. Potential underlying causes, namely infections, food and drug hypersensitivity, autoreactivity and autoimmune or other conditions, and eliciting stimuli are considered, with practical recommendations for specific diagnostic approaches. Second-generation antihistamines are the mainstay of pharmacological treatment aimed at relief of symptoms, which require dose adjustment for paediatric use. Other therapeutic interventions are also discussed. In addition, unmet needs are highlighted, aiming to promote research into the paediatric population, ultimately aiming at the effective management of childhood urticaria.

The Use of Statins in People at Risk of Developing Diabetes Mellitus: Evidence and Guidance for Clinical Practice

Reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels using statins is associated with significant reductions in cardiovascular (CV) events in a wide range of patient populations. Although statins are generally considered to be safe, recent studies suggest they are associated with an increased risk of developing Type 2 diabetes (T2D). This led the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to change their labelling requirements for statins to include a warning about the possibility of increased blood sugar and HbA1c levels and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) to issue guidance on a small increased risk of T2D with the statin class. This review examines the evidence leading to these claims and provides practical guidance for primary care physicians on the use of statins in people with or at risk of developing T2D. Overall, evidence suggests that the benefits of statins for the reduction of CV risk far outweigh the risk of developing T2D, especially in individuals with higher CV risk. To reduce the risk of developing T2D, physicians should assess all patients for T2D risk prior to starting statin therapy, educate patients about their risks, and encourage risk-reduction through lifestyle changes. Whether some statins are more diabetogenic than others requires further study. Statin-treated patients at high risk of developing T2D should regularly be monitored for changes in blood glucose or HbA1c levels, and the risk of conversion from pre-diabetes to T2D should be reduced by intensifying lifestyle changes. Should a patient develop T2D during statin treatment, physicians should continue with statin therapy and manage T2D in accordance with relevant national guidelines.