Early, but not late therapy with a vasopressin V1a-antagonist ameliorates the development of renal damage after 5/6 nephrectomy.

INTRODUCTION: Vasopressin, mainly through the V1a-receptor, is thought to be a major player in the maintenance of hyperfiltration. Its inhibition could therefore lead to a decrease in progression of chronic renal failure. To this end, the effect of the vasopressin V1a-receptor-selective antagonist, YM218, was studied on proteinuria and focal glomerulosclerosis in early and late intervention after 5/6 nephrectomy in rats, and compared with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACE-I). MATERIALS AND METHODS: After 5/6 nephrectomy, early intervention was performed between week 2 and 10 thereafter with the V1a-receptor-selective antagonist (VRA, 10 mg/kg/day, n=10), enalapril (ACE-I, 10 mg/kg/day, n=9), or vehicle (n=8). Late intervention was performed in another group between week 6 and 12 with VRA (10 mg/kg/day, n=7), lisinopril (ACE-I, 5 mg/kg/day, n=7), or vehicle (n=7). RESULTS: In early intervention, proteinuria and focal glomerulosclerosis were significantly decreased by VRA compared to vehicle (44+7% and 59+8% respectively). ACE-I significantly decreased proteinuria (67+7%) and a trend towards a decrease in focal glomerulosclerosis was observed (30+18%). In late intervention, VRA did not decrease proteinuria and focal glomerulosclerosis compared to vehicle (21+20% and 0%, respectively), ACE-I significantly lowered proteinuria (92+2%) and a focal glomerulosclerosis (69+1%) lowering trend was observed. CONCLUSION: These results indicate that VRA may protect against early progression of renal injury after 5/6 nephrectomy, whereas its effectiveness seems limited in established renal damage.     

Mechanismen der arteriellen Restenose und Therapieansätze zur Prävention

Both vascular surgery and endovascular interventions traumatise the arterial wall, especially the endothelium. The vessel responds with neointimal hyperplasia and/or constrictive remodelling, and this is still the limiting factor in curative interventions. Stent placement prevents constrictive remodelling but is the main trigger for in-stent restenosis. Hyperproliferation of neointimal tissue is the main response to arterial thrombosis, local inflammation or medio-intimal injury such as occurs, for example, after balloon dilatation in the region of arterial anastomoses or of a thrombectomy (Fogarty-manoeuvre). At present, research on prevention of restenosis is focused on inhibiting neointimal hyperproliferation by using drug-eluting stents, and especially sirolimus- or paclitaxel-eluting stents. In addition, further experimental research work is in progress, with the aim of esablishing new treatment regimens and solving the problem of neointimal formation, thrombosis and constrictive remodelling. These include both local and systemic pharmacological therapy, brachy- and laser therapy, and many genetic treatment options, some of which are currently the subjects of experimental studies and early-stage clinical trials. Gene therapy seems like a promising way of preventing restenosis, but has not yet been tested in clinical trials. In the near future, selective, simultaneous, and perhaps even polyphasic regulation for gene silencing of two or more genes involved in the development of restenosis could improve the long-term patency rate.     

法规:举证倒置——一笔算不清的"糊涂账"

早在《最高人民法院关于民事诉讼证据的若干规定》出台时,司法界的人士认为,由于患方对医疗专业技术知识知之甚少,而且病案和其他相关材料大部分均掌握在医院手里,患方在举证过程中处于劣势,难以保护自己的权益。而且医院与患者之间显然地存在着财力、物力和精力的差距。有些权益受侵害的患者及家属,因为无法花费过多的时间与精力用于收集证据、上诉等活动,所以不愿与医院打官司,而宁愿私下草草地协商解决问题,以至放弃了自己应有的权利。医疗侵权行为诉讼中举证责任倒置的原则,正是针对以上情况而确立的,它调整了以往诉讼程序中的不平等因素,更大限度地保护患者的权益不受侵害,维护了民法的平等原则。几年前,被誉为明显带着人文关怀规定的“举证倒置”的出台,让人们看到了一种希望:随着条文的细化和可操作性的增强,法律全面介入社会生活也有了更大的空间;如今,就此初衷对照检验“举证倒置”的实践效果:患者是不再发怵打官司了,但随之产生的其他问题却是剪不断,理还乱。     

Mycophenolate Mofetil Use Is Associated with Decreased Risk of Late Acute Rejection in Adult Liver Transplant Recipients

Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) used in a triple-drug regimen has been shown to decrease acute rejection rates, compared to a double-drug regimen. The impact of MMF on late acute rejection (LAR) episodes has not been well described. To investigate the risk of LAR (rejection > or = 6 months post-transplantation) data from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) were used. We studied adult primary liver transplant recipients transplanted between June 1, 1995, and April 30, 2004, with hepatitis C virus (HCV) (n = 3356), hepatitis B virus (HBV) (n = 550) or a nonviral (n = 5740) primary cause of liver disease who were recorded as receiving continuous 3-(MMF + Tacro + steroids) versus 2-drug (Tacro + steroids) therapy for at least 6 months immediately post transplantation. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed significantly lower LAR rates 4 years post-transplant in 3- versus 2-drug HCV, HBV and nonviral disease patients. Multivariate regression confirmed 3- versus 2-drug therapy to be associated with a decreased risk of LAR. Late graft survival was significantly lower at 4 years post-transplant for patients with LAR 6-12 months post-transplantation versus patients with early rejection (78.0% vs. 87.0%, p < 0.001) and no rejection (88.1%, p < 0.001). Three-drug versus 2-drug therapy for a minimum of 6 months may offer a better treatment strategy to avoid the consequences and expense of LAR episodes.