A randomized trial for the treatment of refractory status epilepticus

Refractory status epilepticus (RSE) has a mortality of 16-39%; coma induction is advocated for its management, but no comparative study has been performed. We aimed to assess the effectiveness (RSE control, adverse events) of the first course of propofol versus barbiturates in the treatment of RSE.

Comparison of the effects of bimatoprost and a fixed combination of latanoprost and timolol on circadian intraocular pressure

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of bimatoprost and the fixed combination of latanoprost and timolol (LTFC) on 24-hour mean intraocular pressure (IOP) after patients are switched from a nonfixed combination of latanoprost and timolol. DESIGN: Randomized, double-masked, multicenter clinical trial. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred patients with glaucoma or ocular hypertension. METHODS: Included were patients who were controlled (IOP < 21 mmHg) on the nonfixed combination of latanoprost and timolol for at least 3 months before the baseline visit or patients on monotherapy with either latanoprost or timolol who were eligible for dual therapy not being fully controlled on monotherapy. The latter group of patients underwent a 6-week wash-in phase with the nonfixed combination of latanoprost and timolol before baseline IOP determination and study inclusion. Supine and sitting position IOPs were recorded at 8 pm, midnight, 5 am, 8 am, noon, and 4 pm at baseline, week 6, and week 12 visits. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: An analysis of covariance model was used for a noninferiority test of the primary efficacy variable, with mean area under the 24-hour IOP curve after 12 weeks of treatment as response variable and treatment, center, and baseline IOP as factors. A secondary analysis was performed on the within-treatment change from baseline. RESULTS: Mean baseline IOPs were 16.3+/-3.3 mmHg and 15.5+/-2.9.mmHg in the bimatoprost and LTFC groups, respectively. At week 12, mean IOPs were 16.1+/-2.5 mmHg for the bimatoprost group and 16.3+/-3.7 mmHg for the LTFC group, and no significant difference between the 2 treatment groups could be found. As compared with baseline, mean IOP increased by 0.3+/-3.6 mmHg during the day and decreased by 0.8+/-3.8 mmHg during the night in the bimatoprost group, whereas there were increases of 1.43+/-2.6 mmHg and 0.14+/-3.2 mmHg in the LTFC group, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Bimatoprost is not inferior to the LTFC in maintaining IOP at a controlled level during a 24-hour period in patients switched from the nonfixed combination of latanoprost and timolol.

A Note on the Use of Sum in the Logic of Proofs

The Logic of Proofs~LP, introduced by Artemov, encodes the same reasoning as the modal logic~S4 using proofs explicitly present in the language. In particular, Artemov showed that three operations on proofs (application~$\cdot$, positive introspection~!, and sum~+) are sufficient to mimic provability concealed in S4~modality. While the first two operations go back to G{\"o}del, the exact role of~+ remained somewhat unclear. In particular, it was not known whether the other two operations are sufficient by themselves. We provide a positive answer to this question under a very weak restriction on the axiomatization of LP.

Combined aerobic/inspiratory muscle training vs. aerobic training in patients with chronic heart failure: The Vent-HeFT trial: a European prospective multicentre randomized trial

AIMS Vent-HeFT is a multicentre randomized trial designed to investigate the potential additive benefits of inspiratory muscle training (IMT) on aerobic training (AT) in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF). METHODS AND RESULTS Forty-three CHF patients with a mean age of 58 ± 12 years, peak oxygen consumption (peak VO2 ) 17.9 ± 5 mL/kg/min, and LVEF 29.5 ± 5% were randomized to an AT/IMT group (n = 21) or to an AT/SHAM group (n = 22) in a 12-week exercise programme. AT involved 45 min of ergometer training at 70-80% of maximum heart rate, three times a week for both groups. In the AT/IMT group, IMT was performed at 60% of sustained maximal inspiratory pressure (SPImax ) while in the AT/SHAM group it was performed at 10% of SPImax , using a computer biofeedback trainer for 30 min, three times a week. At baseline and at 3 months, patients were evaluated for exercise capacity, lung function, inspiratory muscle strength (PImax ) and work capacity (SPImax ), quality of life (QoL), LVEF and LV diameter, dyspnoea, C-reactive protein (CRP), and NT-proBNP. IMT resulted in a significantly higher benefit in SPImax (P = 0.02), QoL (P = 0.002), dyspnoea (P = 0.004), CRP (P = 0.03), and NT-proBNP (P = 0.004). In both AT/IMT and AT/SHAM groups PImax (P < 0.001, P = 0.02), peak VO2 (P = 0.008, P = 0.04), and LVEF (P = 0.005, P = 0.002) improved significantly; however, without an additional benefit for either of the groups. CONCLUSION This randomized multicentre study demonstrates that IMT combined with aerobic training provides additional benefits in functional and serum biomarkers in patients with moderate CHF. These findings advocate for application of IMT in cardiac rehabilitation programmes.