Long-Term Treatment of Eosinophilic Esophagitis With Budesonide Oral Suspension

1. Download : Download high-res image (612KB)
2. Download : Download full-size image

     

Standard-Volume Plasma Exchange Improves Outcomes in Patients With Acute Liver Failure: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BackgroundHigh volume plasma-exchange (HVPE) improves survival in patients with acute liver failure (ALF), but apprehension regarding volume overload and worsening of cerebral edema remain.MethodsIn an open-label randomized controlled trial, 40 consecutive patients of ALF were randomized 1:1 to either standard medical treatment (SMT) or SMT with standard-volume plasma-exchange (SVPE). SVPE was performed using centrifugal apheresis [target volume of 1.5 to 2.0 plasma volumes per session] until desired response was achieved. Cerebral edema was assessed by brain imaging. Results were analyzed in an intention-to-treat analysis. Primary outcome was 21-day transplant-free survival. The levels of cytokines, damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs) and endotoxins were analyzed at baseline and day 5.ResultsALF patients [aged 31.5 ± 12.2 years, 60% male, 78% viral, 83% hyperacute, 70% with SIRS were included. At day 5, SVPE [mean sessions 2.15 ± 1.42, median plasma volume replaced 5.049 L] compared to SMT alone, resulted in higher lactate clearance (p = .02), amelioration of SIRS (84% vs. 26%; P = .02), reduction in ammonia levels [(221.5 ± 96.9) vs.(439 ± 385.6) μg/dl, P = .02) and SOFA scores [9.9(±3.3) vs. 14.6(±4.8); P = .001]. There were no treatment related deaths. SVPE was associated with a higher 21-day transplant free-survival [75% vs. 45%; P = .04, HR 0.30, 95%CI 0.01-0.88]. A significant decrease in levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines and an increase in anti-inflammatory cytokines along with a decrease in endotoxin and DAMPs was seen with SVPE.ConclusionIn ALF patients with cerebral edema, SVPE is safe and effective and improves survival possibly by a reduction in cytokine storm and ammonia. ClinicalTrial.gov (identifier: NCT02718079)     

5-Year Outcomes After TAVR With Balloon-Expandable Versus Self-Expanding Valves: Results From the CHOICE Randomized Clinical Trial

ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical and echocardiographic outcome data of the CHOICE (Randomized Comparison of Transcatheter Heart Valves in High Risk Patients with Severe Aortic Stenosis: Medtronic CoreValve Versus Edwards SAPIEN XT) trial at 5 years.BackgroundThe CHOICE trial was designed to compare device performance of a balloon-expandable (BE) transcatheter heart valve (THV) versus a self-expanding (SE) THV.MethodsThe CHOICE trial is an investigator-initiated trial that randomized 241 high-risk patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis and an anatomy suitable for treatment with both BE and SE THVs to transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement with either device. The primary endpoint was device success. Patients were followed up to 5 years, with assessment of clinical outcomes, and echocardiographic evaluation of valve function and THV durability.ResultsAfter 5 years, there were no statistically significant differences between BE and SE valves in the cumulative incidence of death from any cause (53.4% vs. 47.6%; p = 0.38), death from cardiovascular causes (31.6% vs. 21.5%; p = 0.12), all strokes (17.5% vs. 16.5%; p = 0.73), and repeat hospitalization for heart failure (28.9% vs. 22.5%; p = 0.75). SE patients had larger prosthetic valve area (1.6 ± 0.5 cm² vs. 1.9 ± 0.5 cm²; p = 0.02) with a lower mean transprosthetic gradient (12.2 ± 8.7 mm Hg vs. 6.9 ± 2.7 mm Hg; p = 0.001) at 5 years. No differences were observed in the rates of paravalvular regurgitation. Clinical valve thrombosis occurred in 7 BE patients (7.3%) and 1 SE patient (0.8%; p = 0.06), and moderate or severe structural valve deterioration in 6 BE patients (6.6%) and no SE patient (0%; p = 0.018). The rate of bioprosthetic valve failure was low and not significantly different between both groups (4.1% vs. 3.4%; p = 0.63).ConclusionsFive-year follow-up of patients in the CHOICE trial revealed clinical outcomes after transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement with early-generation BE and SE valves that were not statistically significantly different, with limited statistical power. Forward flow hemodynamics were significantly better with the SE valve. Moderate or severe structural valve deterioration was uncommon but occurred more frequently with the BE valve. (A Comparison of Transcatheter Heart Valves in High Risk Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis: The CHOICE Trial [CHOICE]; NCT01645202)