Prediabetes: to treat or not to treat?

The incidence of diabetes is continuously increasing worldwide. Pre-diabetes (defined as impaired glucose tolerance, impaired fasting glucose or both) represents an intermediate state, which often progresses to overt diabetes within a few years. In addition, pre-diabetes may be associated with increased risk of microvascular and macrovascular complications. Thus, reverting a pre-diabetic state as well as preventing the development of diabetes represents enormous challenge for the clinician. Lifestyle modification in pre-diabetic individuals was found particularly effective in the prevention of diabetes. However, compliance to lifestyle modification measures can be a crucial problem in the everyday clinical practice, especially in developing countries. During the last decade many studies support the use of anti-diabetic treatment schemes in pre-diabetic subjects to be advantageous. The American Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) as well as other minor studies and meta-analyses has convincingly demonstrated the efficacy of metformin in this patient group. In addition, results of the 10 year DPP follow up have recently been published, demonstrating the long term safety and sustainability of metformin treatment benefits in this population. In contrast to metformin, the evidence from the use of other anti-diabetic agents (thiazolidinediones, a-glucosidase inhibitors, incretin mimetics) in pre-diabetic individuals is rather inadequate and prospective data is further needed. Furthermore, large scale studies with hard clinical endpoints are needed to delineate the effect of pre-diabetes treatment on macro- and microvascular complications. In conclusion, several strategies of patient management, mainly lifestyle modification and pharmacological interventions can prevent diabetes development in subjects diagnosed with pre-diabetes or even revert pre-diabetic state. However, whether this biochemical improvement can be translated into actual clinical benefit remains to be established.     

Dyslipidaemia in the elderly: to treat or not to treat?

Introduction: The elderly population (i.e. aged ≥ 65 years) is increasing worldwide. Ageing is associated with a higher incidence and prevalence of cardiovascular disease (CVD).

Areas covered: The prevalence of CVD risk factors including type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension and dyslipidaemia also increases with advancing age, contributing to the higher absolute CVD risk observed in the elderly. The present narrative review comments on the associations of dyslipidaemia with CVD as well as the effects of lifestyle measures and lipid-lowering drugs on lipids and CVD risk with a special focus on the elderly population. Individual treatment goals and therapeutic options according to current guidelines are also reviewed. Finally, we discuss special characteristics of the elderly that may influence the efficacy and safety of drug therapy and should be considered before selection of hypolipidaemic pharmacotherapy.

Expert commentary: There may be a greater CVD benefit in older patients following drug therapy compared with younger ones. Treatment goals and therapeutic options should be individualized according to current guidelines. Specific characteristics that may influence the efficacy and safety of drug therapy in the elderly should be considered in relation to dyslipidaemia treatment.     

Personal view: to treat or not to treat? Helicobacter pylori and gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease — an alternative hypothesis

Helicobacter pylori causes acute on chronic gastritis and is responsible for most peptic ulcers and gastric cancer. However, recent papers have suggested that it may protect against gastro-oesophageal reflux, Barrett's oesophagus and oesophageal cancer. Furthermore, the rapid increase in gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, Barrett's oesophagus and adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus in the developed world has been attributed by some to the falling prevalence of H. pylori. These considerations have led to the suggestion that H. pylori infection should not necessarily be treated, especially in patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Conversely, data from prospective randomized studies have shown that H. pylori eradication does not cause gastro-oesophageal reflux disease in patients with duodenal ulcer or in the normal population, nor does it worsen the outcome of pre-existing gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Therefore, although H. pylori is negatively associated with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, its eradication does not induce the disease. A hypothesis is presented suggesting that the increased prevalence of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease is a result of rising acid secretion in the general population, which, in turn, is a consequence of the increased linear height (a predictor of acid secretion). The greater acid secretion could also explain the decline in the prevalence of H. pylori and perhaps account for the inverse relationship between H. pylori and gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. These considerations are explored in discussing whether H. pylori infection should be treated in infected patients presenting with gastro-oesophageal reflux disease.     

Baby massage – what's not to like?

Procianoy RS, Mendes EW, Silverira RC. Massage therapy improves neurodevelopment outcome at two years corrected for very low birth weight infants. Early Hum Dev 2010; 86: 7–11.