Randomized controlled trial comparing highly purified (HP-hCG) and recombinant hCG (r-hCG) for triggering ovulation in ART.

BACKGROUND: A randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing highly purified human Choriogonadotrophin (HP-hCG) and recombinant hCG (r-hCG) both administered subcutaneously for triggering ovulation in controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) for Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART). METHODS: Multi-centre (n = 4), prospective, controlled, randomized, non-inferiority, parallel group, investigator blind design, including 147 patients. The trial was registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov, using the identifier: NCT00335569. The primary endpoint is the number of oocytes retrieved, while the secondary endpoints include embryo implantation, pregnancy and delivery rates as well as safety parameters. RESULTS: The number of retrieved oocytes was not inferior when HP-hCG was used as compared to r-hCG: the mean number was 13.3 (6.8) in HP-hCG and 12.5 (5.8) in the r-hCG group (p = 0.49) with a 95% CI (-1.34, 2.77). Regarding the secondary outcomes, there were also no differences in fertilization rate at 57.3% (467/815) vs. 61.3% (482/787) (p = 0.11), the number of embryos available for transfer and cryopreservation (2PN stage) and implantation, pregnancy and delivery rates. Furthermore, there were no differences in the number and type of adverse events reported. HP-hCG was therefore not inferior to r-hCG. CONCLUSIONS: HP-hCG and r-hCG are equally efficient and safe for triggering ovulation in ART and, both being administered subcutaneously, equally practical and well tolerated by patients.

Anal mucosectomy for haemorrhoids: should we start to speak Chinese?

AIM: Circular stapled mucosectomy is the standard therapy for the treatment of symptomatic third-degree haemorrhoids and mucosal prolapse. Recently, new staplers made in China have entered the market offering an alternative to the PPH stapling devices. The aim of this prospective randomized study was to compare the safety and efficacy of these new devices. METHODS: Fifty patients with symptomatic third-degree haemorrhoids were randomized to mucosectomy either by using stapler A (CPH32; Frankenman International Ltd, Hong Kong, China; n = 25) or stapler B (PPH03; Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Spreitenbach, Switzerland; n = 25). All procedures were performed by two experienced surgeons. After the stapler was fired by one surgeon, the other surgeon, who was blinded for stapler type, evaluated the stapler line. Postoperative outcome including pain, complications and patient satisfaction were analysed. RESULTS: Demographic and clinical features were no different between the groups. There was no significant difference regarding venous bleeding (P = 0.55), but arterial bleeding was significantly more frequent when stapler B was used (P < 0.001). This led to significantly more suture ligations (P = 0.002). However, no differences regarding operation time (P = 0.99), weight of the resected mucosa (P = 0.81) and height of the stapler line (anterior, P = 0.18; posterior, P = 0.65) were detected. Postoperative pain scores (visual analogue scale) and patient satisfaction were no different either (P = 0.91 and P = 0.78, respectively). No recurrence or incontinence occurred during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: CPH32 required significantly fewer sutures for bleeding control along the stapler line after circular mucosectomy. However, operation time, rate of postoperative complications and patient satisfaction were similar in both groups.

State-of-the-art treatment of hypertension: established and new drugs.

The treatment of essential hypertension is based essentially on the prescription of four major classes of antihypertensive drugs, i.e. blockers of the renin-angiotensin system, calcium channel blockers, diuretics and beta-blockers. In recent years, very few new drug therapies of hypertension have become available. Therefore, it is crucial for physicians to optimize their antihypertensive therapies with the drugs available on the market. In each of the classes of antihypertensive drugs, questions have recently been raised: are angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors superior to angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB)? Is it possible to reduce the incidence of peripheral oedema with calcium antagonists? Is hydrochlorothiazide really the good diuretic to use in combination therapies? The purpose of this review is to discuss these various questions in the light of the most recent clinical studies and meta-analyses. These latter suggest that ACE inhibitors and ARB are equivalent except for a better tolerability profile of ARB. Third generation calcium channel blockers enable to reduce the incidence of peripheral oedema and chlorthalidone is certainly more effective than hydrochlorothiazide in preventing cardiovascular events in hypertension. At last, studies suggest that drug adherence and long-term persistence under therapy is one of the major issues in the actual management of essential hypertension.