Définition et prise en charge de l'échec d'une première injection de toxine botulique Botox(®) 200 U pour hyperactivité détrusorienne neurogène : résultats de l'enquête DETOX [Definition of botulinum toxin failure in neurogenic detrusor overactivity: Preliminary results of the DETOX survey].

OBJECTIVE: There is currently no guideline regarding the management of neurogenic detrusor overactivity (NDO) refractory to intra-detrusor botulinum toxin injections. The primary objective of the present study was to find a consensus definition of failure of botulinum toxin intra-detrusor injections for NDO. The secondary objective was to report current trends in the managment of NDO refractory to botulinum toxin. METHODS: A survey was created, based on data drawn from current literature, and sent via e-mail to all the experts form the Group for research in neurourology in french language (GENULF) and from the comittee of neurourology of the French urological association (AFU). The experts who did not answer to the first e-mail were contacted again twice. Main results from the survey are presented and expressed as numbers and proportions. RESULTS: Out of the 42 experts contacted, 21 responded to the survey. Nineteen participants considered that the definition of failure should be a combination of clinical and urodynamics criteria. Among the urodynamics criteria, the persistence of a maximum detrusor pressure>40cm H2O was the most supported by the experts (18/21, 85%). According to the vast majority of participants (19/21, 90.5%), the impact of injections on urinary incontinence should be included in the definition of failure. Regarding the management, most experts considered that the first line treatment in case of failure of a first intra-detrusor injection of Botox(®) 200 U should be a repeat injection of Botox(®) at a higher dosage (300 U) (15/20, 75%), regardless of the presence or not of urodynamics risk factors of upper tract damage (16/20, 80%). CONCLUSION: This work has provided a first overview of the definition of failure of intra-detrusor injections of botulinum toxin in the management of NDO. For 90.5% of the experts involved, the definition of failure should be clinical and urodynamic and most participants (75%) considered that, in case of failure of a first injection of Botox(®) 200 U, repeat injection of Botox(®) 300 U should be the first line treatment. Level of proof 4.

Presence of Leishmania RNA Virus 1 in Leishmania guyanensis Increases the Risk of First-Line Treatment Failure and Symptomatic Relapse.

Treatment failure and symptomatic relapse are major concerns in American tegumentary leishmaniasis (TL). Such complications are seen frequently in Leishmania guyanensis infections, in which patients respond variously to first-line antileishmanials and are more prone to develop chronic cutaneous leishmaniasis. The factors underlying this pathology, however, are unknown. Recently, we reported that a double-stranded RNA virus, Leishmania RNA virus 1 (LRV1), nested within L. guyanensis parasites is able to exacerbate experimental murine leishmaniasis by inducing a hyperinflammatory response. This report investigates the prevalence of LRV1 in human L. guyanensis infection and its effect on treatment efficacy, as well as its correlation to symptomatic relapses after the completion of first-line treatment. In our cohort of 75 patients with a diagnosis of primary localized American TL, the prevalence of LRV1-positive L. guyanensis infection was elevated to 58%. All patients infected with LRV1-negative L. guyanensis were cured after 1 dose (22 of 31 [71%]) or 2 doses (31 of 31 [100%]) of pentamidine. In contrast, 12 of 44 LRV1-positive patients (27%) presented with persistent infection and symptomatic relapse that required extended therapy and the use of second-line drugs. Finally, LRV1 presence was associated with a significant increase in levels of intra-lesional inflammatory markers. In conclusion, LRV1 status in L. guyanensis infection is significantly predictive (P = .0009) of first-line treatment failure and symptomatic relapse and has the potential to guide therapeutic choices in American TL.

Impact of Aldosterone Antagonists on Sudden Cardiac Death Prevention in Heart Failure and Post-Myocardial Infarction Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Sudden cardiac death (SCD) is a severe burden of modern medicine. Aldosterone antagonist is publicized as effective in reducing mortality in patients with heart failure (HF) or post myocardial infarction (MI). Our study aimed to assess the efficacy of AAs on mortality including SCD, hospitalization admission and several common adverse effects. METHODS: We searched Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane library and clinicaltrial.gov for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assigning AAs in patients with HF or post MI through May 2015. The comparator included standard medication or placebo, or both. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Event rates were compared using a random effects model. Prospective RCTs of AAs with durations of at least 8 weeks were selected if they included at least one of the following outcomes: SCD, all-cause/cardiovascular mortality, all-cause/cardiovascular hospitalization and common side effects (hyperkalemia, renal function degradation and gynecomastia). RESULTS: Data from 19,333 patients enrolled in 25 trials were included. In patients with HF, this treatment significantly reduced the risk of SCD by 19% (RR 0.81; 95% CI, 0.67-0.98; p = 0.03); all-cause mortality by 19% (RR 0.81; 95% CI, 0.74-0.88, p<0.00001) and cardiovascular death by 21% (RR 0.79; 95% CI, 0.70-0.89, p<0.00001). In patients with post-MI, the matching reduced risks were 20% (RR 0.80; 95% CI, 0.66-0.98; p = 0.03), 15% (RR 0.85; 95% CI, 0.76-0.95, p = 0.003) and 17% (RR 0.83; 95% CI, 0.74-0.94, p = 0.003), respectively. Concerning both subgroups, the relative risks respectively decreased by 19% (RR 0.81; 95% CI, 0.71-0.92; p = 0.002) for SCD, 18% (RR 0.82; 95% CI, 0.77-0.88, p < 0.0001) for all-cause mortality and 20% (RR 0.80; 95% CI, 0.74-0.87, p < 0.0001) for cardiovascular mortality in patients treated with AAs. As well, hospitalizations were significantly reduced, while common adverse effects were significantly increased. CONCLUSION: Aldosterone antagonists appear to be effective in reducing SCD and other mortality events, compared with placebo or standard medication in patients with HF and/or after a MI.