The Beta Agonist Lung Injury Trial Prevention:A Randomized Controlled Trial

Rationale: Experimental studies suggest that pretreatment with b-agonists might prevent acute lung injury (ALI).

Objectives: To determine if in adult patients undergoing elective esophagectomy, perioperative treatment with inhaled b-agonists effects the development of early ALI.

Methods:We conducted a randomized placebo-controlled trial in 12 UK centers (2008-2011). Adult patients undergoing elective esophagectomy were allocated to prerandomized, sequentially numbered treatment packs containing inhaled salmeterol (100 mg twice daily) or a matching placebo. Patients, clinicians, and researchers were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was development of ALI within 72 hours of surgery. Secondary outcomes were ALI within 28 days, organ failure, adverse events, survival, and health-related quality of life. An exploratory substudy measured biomarkers of alveolar-capillary inflammation and injury.

Measurements and Main Results: A total of 179 patients were randomized to salmeterol and 183 to placebo. Baseline characteristics were similar. Treatment with salmeterol did not prevent early lung injury (32 [19.2%] of 168 vs. 27 [16.0%] of 170; odds ratio [OR], 1.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-2.22). There was no difference in organ failure, survival, or health-related quality of life.Adverse events were less frequent in the salmeterol group (55 vs. 70; OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.39-0.99), predominantly because of a lower number of pneumonia (7 vs. 17; OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.16-0.96). Salmeterol reduced some biomarkers of alveolar inflammation and epithelial injury.

Conclusion: Perioperative treatment with inhaled salmeterol was well tolerated but did not prevent ALI.

Clinical trial registered with International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Register (ISRCTN47481946) and European Union database of randomized Controlled Trials (EudraCT 2007-004096-19).Copyright © 2014 by the American Thoracic Society.

Beyond HIV microbicides: multipurpose prevention technology (MPT) products

Multi-purpose prevention technologies (MPTs) that aim to simultaneously prevent unintended pregnancy, human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are among the most innovative and complex products currently in development within women’s sexual and reproductive healthcare. In this review article, MPTs are placed within the wider context of combination products, combination drug products and multi-indication products. The current MPT product landscape is mapped and assessed with reference to existing products for the corresponding single indications, before identifying the gaps in the current MPT product pipeline and highlighting priority products and challenges moving forward.

Anastrozole for prevention of breast cancer in high-risk postmenopausal women (IBIS-II): an international, double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial

Aromatase inhibitors effectively prevent breast cancer recurrence and development of new contralateral tumours in postmenopausal women. We assessed the efficacy and safety of the aromatase inhibitor anastrozole for prevention of breast cancer in postmenopausal women who are at high risk of the disease.

Pre-intravitrael injection preparation: endophthalmitis prevention and the importance of povidone-iodine

Despite adherence to strict standards of care in preparation for intravitreal injections, endophthalmitis can still occur. This article focuses on endophthalmitis and the importance of povidone-iodine in pre-procedure antisepsis. An overview of endophthalmitis and an examination of the benefits of povidone-iodine in ocular aseptic technique for the prevention of post-procedure endophthalmitis are provided. The misconceptions that patients and health practitioners may have in relation to povidone-iodine hypersensitivity are also explored.

An efficacy and mechanism evaluation study of Levosimendan for the Prevention of Acute oRgan Dysfunction in Sepsis (LeoPARDS): Protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Organ dysfunction consequent to infection (‘severe sepsis’) is the leading cause of admission to an intensive care unit (ICU). In both animal models and early clinical studies the calcium channel sensitizer levosimendan has been demonstrated to have potentially beneficial effects on organ function. The aims of the Levosimendan for the Prevention of Acute oRgan Dysfunction in Sepsis (LeoPARDS) trial are to identify whether a 24-hour infusion of levosimendan will improve organ dysfunction in adults who have septic shock and to establish the safety profile of levosimendan in this group of patients.

This is a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel group, placebo-controlled trial. Adults fulfilling the criteria for systemic inflammatory response syndrome due to infection, and requiring vasopressor therapy, will be eligible for inclusion in the trial. Within 24 hours of meeting these inclusion criteria, patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio stratified by the ICU to receive either levosimendan (0.05 to 0.2 μg.kg^-1.min^-1 or placebo for 24 hours in addition to standard care. The primary outcome measure is the mean Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score while in the ICU. Secondary outcomes include: central venous oxygen saturations and cardiac output; incidence and severity of renal failure using the Acute Kidney Injury Network criteria; duration of renal replacement therapy; serum bilirubin; time to liberation from mechanical ventilation; 28-day, hospital, 3 and 6 month survival; ICU and hospital length-of-stay; and days free from catecholamine therapy. Blood and urine samples will be collected on the day of inclusion, at 24 hours, and on days 4 and 6 post-inclusion for investigation of the mechanisms by which levosimendan might improve organ function. Eighty patients will have additional blood samples taken to measure levels of levosimendan and its active metabolites OR-1896 and OR-1855. A total of 516 patients will be recruited from approximately 25 ICUs in the United Kingdom.

This trial will test the efficacy of levosimendan to reduce acute organ dysfunction in adult patients who have septic shock and evaluate its biological mechanisms of action.

Falls prevention and support:: translating research, integrating services and promoting the contribution of service users for quality and innovative programmes of care

Falls are a significant threat to the safety, health and independence of older citizens. Despite the substantial evidence that is available around effective falls prevention programmes and interventions, their translation into falls reduction programmes and policies has yet to be fully realised. While hip fracture rates are decreasing, the number and incidence of fall-related hospital admissions among older people continue to rise. Given the demographic trends that highlight increasing numbers of older people in the UK, which is broadly reflected internationally, there is a financial and social imperative to minimise the rate of falls and associated injuries. Falling is closely aligned to growing older (Slips, Trips and Falls Update: From Acute and Community Hospitals and Mental Health Units in England and Wales, Department of Health, HMSO, London, 2010). According to the World Health Organization, around 30% of older people aged over 65 and 50% of those over 80 will fall each year (Falls Fact Sheet Number 344, WHO, Geneva, 2010). Falls happen as a result of many reasons and can have harmful consequences, including loss of mobility and independence, confidence and in many cases even death (Cochrane Database Syst Rev 15, 2009, 146; Slips, Trips and Falls Update: From Acute and Community Hospitals and Mental Health Units in England and Wales, Department of Health, HMSO, London, 2010; Falling Standards, Broken Promises: Report of the National
Audit of Falls and Bone Health in Older People 2010, Health Care Quality
Improvement Partnership, London, 2011). What is neither fair nor correct is the
common belief by old and young alike that falls are just another inconvenience to put up with. The available evidence justifiably supports the view that well-organised services, based upon national standards and expert guidance, can prevent future falls among older people and reduce death and disability from fractures. This paper will draw from the UK, as an exemplar for policy and practice, to discuss the strategic direction of falls prevention programmes for older people and the partnerships that need to exist between researchers, service providers and users of services to translate evidence to the clinical setting. Second, it will propose some mechanisms for disseminating evidence to healthcare professionals and other stakeholders, to improve the quality and capacity of the clinical workforce.