Guidelines for specialized nutritional and metabolic support in the critically-ill patient. Update. Consensus SEMICYUC-SENPE: Septic patient

Nutritional metabolic management, together with other treatment and support measures used, is one of the mainstays of the treatment of septic patients. Nutritional support should be started early, after initial life support measures, to avoid the consequences of malnutrition, to provide adequate nutritional intake and to prevent the development of secondary complications such as superinfection or multiorgan failure. As in other critically-ill patients, when the enteral route cannot be used to ensure calorie-protein requirements, the association of parenteral nutrition has been shown to be safe in this subgroup of patients. Studies evaluating the effect of specific pharmaconutrients in septic patients are scarce and are insufficient to allow recommendations to be made. To date, enteral diets with a mixture of substrates with distinct pharmaconutrient properties do not seem to be superior to standard diets in altering the course of sepsis, although equally there is no evidence that these diets are harmful. There is insufficient evidence to recommend the use of glutamine in septic patients receiving parenteral nutrition. However, given the good results and absence of glutamine-related adverse effects in the various studies performed in the general population of critically-ill patients, these patients could benefit from the use of this substance. Routine use of omega-3 fatty acids cannot be recommended until further evidence has been gathered, although the use of lipid emulsions with a high omega-6 fatty acid content should be avoided. Septic patients should receive an adequate supply of essential trace elements and vitamins. Further studies are required before the use of high-dose selenium can be recommended.

Breast cancer prognostic classification in the molecular era: the role of histological grade.

Breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease with varied morphological appearances, molecular features, behavior, and response to therapy. Current routine clinical management of breast cancer relies on the availability of robust clinical and pathological prognostic and predictive factors to support clinical and patient decision making in which potentially suitable treatment options are increasingly available. One of the best-established prognostic factors in breast cancer is histological grade, which represents the morphological assessment of tumor biological characteristics and has been shown to be able to generate important information related to the clinical behavior of breast cancers. Genome-wide microarray-based expression profiling studies have unraveled several characteristics of breast cancer biology and have provided further evidence that the biological features captured by histological grade are important in determining tumor behavior. Also, expression profiling studies have generated clinically useful data that have significantly improved our understanding of the biology of breast cancer, and these studies are undergoing evaluation as improved prognostic and predictive tools in clinical practice. Clinical acceptance of these molecular assays will require them to be more than expensive surrogates of established traditional factors such as histological grade. It is essential that they provide additional prognostic or predictive information above and beyond that offered by current parameters. Here, we present an analysis of the validity of histological grade as a prognostic factor and a consensus view on the significance of histological grade and its role in breast cancer classification and staging systems in this era of emerging clinical use of molecular classifiers.

Effectiveness of two interventions based on improving patient-practitioner communication on diabetes self-management in patients with low educational level: study protocol of a clustered randomized trial in primary care.

BACKGROUND In the last decades the presence of social inequalities in diabetes care has been observed in multiple countries, including Spain. These inequalities have been at least partially attributed to differences in diabetes self-management behaviours. Communication problems during medical consultations occur more frequently to patients with a lower educational level. The purpose of this cluster randomized trial is to determine whether an intervention implemented in a General Surgery, based in improving patient-provider communication, results in a better diabetes self-management in patients with lower educational level. A secondary objective is to assess whether telephone reinforcement enhances the effect of such intervention. We report the design and implementation of this on-going study. METHODS/DESIGN The study is being conducted in a General Practice located in a deprived neighbourhood of Granada, Spain. Diabetic patients 18 years old or older with a low educational level and inadequate glycaemic control (HbA1c > 7%) were recruited. General Practitioners (GPs) were randomised to three groups: intervention A, intervention B and control group. GPs allocated to intervention groups A and B received training in communication skills and are providing graphic feedback about glycosylated haemoglobin levels. Patients whose GPs were allocated to group B are additionally receiving telephone reinforcement whereas patients from the control group are receiving usual care. The described interventions are being conducted during 7 consecutive medical visits which are scheduled every three months. The main outcome measure will be HbA1c; blood pressure, lipidemia, body mass index and waist circumference will be considered as secondary outcome measures. Statistical analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of the interventions will include multilevel regression analysis with three hierarchical levels: medical visit level, patient level and GP level. DISCUSSION The results of this study will provide new knowledge about possible strategies to promote a better diabetes self-management in a particularly vulnerable group. If effective, this low cost intervention will have the potential to be easily incorporated into routine clinical practice, contributing to decrease health inequalities in diabetic patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinical Trials U.S. National Institutes of Health, NCT01849731.