Sodium bicarbonate versus isotonic saline solution to prevent contrast-induced nephropathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction: Contrast-induced nephropathy is one of the main causes of acute kidney injury and increased hospital-acquired morbidity and mortality. The use of sodium bicarbonate for nephroprotection has emerged as a preventative strategy; however, its efficacy is controversial compared to other strategies, such as hydration using 0.9% saline solution. Objective: To compare the effectiveness of sodium bicarbonate vs. hydration using 0.9% saline solution to prevent contrast-induced acute kidney injury. Methods: A systematic review of studies registered in the COCHRANE, PUBMED, MEDLINE, LILACS, SCIELO and EMBASE databases was conducted. Randomized controlled studies that evaluated the use of 0.9% saline solution vs. sodium bicarbonate to prevent contrast-induced nephropathy were included. Results: A total of 22 studies (5,686 patients) were included. Sodium bicarbonate did not decrease the risk of contrast-induced nephropathy (RD= 0.00; 95% CI= -0.02 to 0.03; p= 0.83; I2= 0%). No significant differences were found in the demand for renal replacement therapy (RD= 0.00; 95% CI= -0.01 to 0-01; I2= 0%; p= 0.99) or in mortality (RD= -0.00; 95% CI= -0.001 to 0.001; I2= 0%; p= 0.51). Conclusions: Sodium bicarbonate administration is not superior to the use of 0.9% saline solution for preventing contrast-induced nephropathy in patients with risk factors, nor is it better at reducing mortality or the need for renal replacement therapy.

Self-reported vaccination in the elderly : SABE Bogotá study, Colombia

Objectives: To determine the frequency of vaccination in older adults within the city of Bogotá and to estimate the association with sociodemographic and health factors. Methods: This is a secondary data analysis from the SABE-Bogotá Study, a cross-sectional population-based study that included a total of 2,000 persons aged 60 years. Weighted percentages for self-reported vaccination [influenza, pneumococcal, tetanus] were determined. The association between vaccination and covariates was evaluate by logistic regression models. Results: A total of 73.0% of respondents received influenza, 57.8% pneumococcal and 47.6% tetanus vaccine. Factors independently associated with vaccination included: 1- age (65-74 years had higher odds of receiving vaccinations, compared to 60-64 years; 2- socioeconomic status (SES) (higher SES had lower odds of having influenza and pneumococcal vaccines, compared to those with lower SES); 3- health insurance (those with contributive or subsidized health insurance had higher odds (between 3 and 5 times higher) of having vaccinations, compared to those with no insurance); 4- older adults with better functional status (greater Lawton scores) had increased odds for all vaccinations; 5- older adults with higher comorbidity had increased odds for influenza and pneumococcal vaccinations. Conclusion: Vaccination campaigns should be strengthened to increase vaccination coverage, especially in the group more reticent to vaccination or vulnerable to reach it such as the disable elder.