Comparison of pro-atrial natriuretic peptide and atrial remodeling in marathon versus non-marathon runners

Long-term endurance sports are associated with atrial remodeling and an increased risk for atrial fibrillation (AF) and atrial flutter. Pro-atrial natriuretic peptide (pro-ANP) is a marker of atrial wall tension and elevated in patients with AF. The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that atrial remodeling would be perpetuated by repetitive episodes of atrial stretching during strenuous competitions, reflected by elevated levels of pro-ANP. A cross-sectional study was performed on nonelite runners scheduled to participate in the 2010 Grand Prix of Bern, a 10-mile race. Four hundred ninety-two marathon and nonmarathon runners applied for participation, 70 were randomly selected, and 56 entered the final analysis. Subjects were stratified according to former marathon participations: a control group (nonmarathon runners, n = 22), group 1 (1 to 4 marathons, n = 16), and group 2 (≥5 marathons, n = 18). Results were adjusted for age, training years, and average weekly endurance training hours. The mean age was 42 ± 7 years. Compared to the control group, marathon runners in groups 1 and 2 had larger left atria (25 ± 6 vs 30 ± 6 vs 34 ± 7 ml/m(2), p = 0.002) and larger right atria (27 ± 7 vs 31 ± 8 vs 35 ± 5 ml/m(2), p = 0.024). Pro-ANP levels at baseline were higher in marathon runners (1.04 ± 0.38 vs 1.42 ± 0.74 vs 1.67 ± 0.69 nmol/L, p = 0.006). Pro-ANP increased significantly in all groups after the race. In multiple linear regression analysis, marathon participation was an independent predictor of left atrial (β = 0.427, p <0.001) and right atrial (β = 0.395, p = 0.006) remodeling. In conclusion, marathon running was associated with progressive left and right atrial remodeling, possibly induced by repetitive episodes of atrial stretching. The altered left and right atrial substrate may facilitate atrial arrhythmias.

A 13-year analysis from Switzerland of non-fatal sledging (sledding or tobogganing) injuries

INTRODUCTION: Winter sports have evolved from an upper class activity to a mass industry. Especially sledging regained popularity at the start of this century, with more and more winter sports resorts offering sledge runs. This study investigated the rates of sledging injuries over the last 13 years and analysed injury patterns specific for certain age groups, enabling us to make suggestions for preventive measures. METHODS: We present a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. From 1996/1997 to 2008/2009, all patients involved in sledging injuries were recorded upon admission to a Level III trauma centre. Injuries were classified into body regions according to the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS). The Injury Severity Score (ISS) was calculated. Patients were stratified into 7 age groups. Associations between age and injured body region were tested using the chi-squared test. The slope of the linear regression with 95% confidence intervals was calculated for the proportion of patients with different injured body regions and winter season. RESULTS: 4956 winter sports patients were recorded. 263 patients (5%) sustained sledging injuries. Sledging injury patients had a median age of 22 years (interquartile range [IQR] 14-38 years) and a median ISS of 4 (IQR 1-4). 136 (51.7%) were male. Injuries (AIS≥2) were most frequent to the lower extremities (n=91, 51.7% of all AIS≥2 injuries), followed by the upper extremities (n=48, 27.3%), the head (n=17, 9.7%), the spine (n=7, 4.0%). AIS≥2 injuries to different body regions varied from season to season, with no significant trends (p>0.19). However, the number of patients admitted with AIS≥2 injuries increased significantly over the seasons analysed (p=0.031), as did the number of patients with any kind of sledging injury (p=0.004). Mild head injuries were most frequent in the youngest age group (1-10 years old). Injuries to the lower extremities were more often seen in the age groups from 21 to 60 years (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Mild head trauma was mainly found in very young sledgers, and injuries to the lower extremities were more frequent in adults. In accordance with the current literature, we suggest that sledging should be performed in designated, obstacle-free areas that are specially prepared, and that children should always be supervised by adults. The effect of routine use of helmets and other protective devices needs further evaluation, but it seems evident that these should be obligatory on official runs.

Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews in leading orthodontic journals: a quality paradigm?

The aims of this study were to assess and compare the methodological quality of Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews (SRs) published in leading orthodontic journals and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) using AMSTAR and to compare the prevalence of meta-analysis in both review types. A literature search was undertaken to identify SRs that consisted of hand-searching five major orthodontic journals [American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Angle Orthodontist, European Journal of Orthodontics, Journal of Orthodontics and Orthodontics and Craniofacial Research (February 2002 to July 2011)] and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from January 2000 to July 2011. Methodological quality of the included reviews was gauged using the AMSTAR tool involving 11 key methodological criteria with a score of 0 or 1 given for each criterion. A cumulative grade was given for the paper overall (0-11); an overall score of 4 or less represented poor methodological quality, 5-8 was considered fair and 9 or greater was deemed to be good. In total, 109 SRs were identified in the five major journals and on the CDSR. Of these, 26 (23.9%) were in the CDSR. The mean overall AMSTAR score was 6.2 with 21.1% of reviews satisfying 9 or more of the 11 criteria; a similar prevalence of poor reviews (22%) was also noted. Multiple linear regression indicated that reviews published in the CDSR (P < 0.01); and involving meta-analysis (β = 0.50, 95% confidence interval 0.72, 2.07, P < 0.001) showed greater concordance with AMSTAR.