This review addresses the practical usage of intravenous etomidate as a medical therapy in Cushing's syndrome. We reviewed the relevant literature, using search terms 'etomidate', 'Cushing's syndrome', 'adrenocortical hyperfunction', 'drug therapy' and 'hypercortisolaemia' in a series of public databases. There is a paucity of large randomised controlled trials, and data on its use rely only on small series, case study reports and international consensus guideline recommendations. Based on these, etomidate is an effective parenteral medication for the management of endogenous hypercortisolaemia, particularly in cases with significant biochemical disturbance, sepsis and other serious complications such as severe psychosis, as well as in preoperative instability. We suggest treatment protocols for the safe and effective use of etomidate in Cushing's syndrome.

No abstract

No abstract

Previous studies have suggested benefits of applying fractal analysis to intervals between R waves in electrocardiography as an additional prognostic marker. The aim of this study was to investigate whether fractal analysis can provide an independent predictor of cardiac mortality or all-cause mortality. Prognostic cohort studies reporting fractal heart rate variability results from 24-h Holter monitor recordings were selected for comparison. Populations were subdivided into four groups-post-myocardial infarction, left ventricular dysfunction, other cardiac, and non-cardiac patients-and analysed using ANOVA, Forest plots (using pooled mean difference), and Funnel plots. The most significant mean differences were recorded in short-term fractal self-similarity (α) (-0.17, 95% CI [-0.21, -0.13], p < 0.00001) and the traditional measure called standard deviation of NN intervals (SDNN) (-13.31, 95% CI [-18.89, -7.73], p < 0.00001) between the deceased and survivor groups. Fractal measures of long-term fractal self-similarity (α), 1/f scaling (β), and traditional heart rate variability measures of high frequency to low frequency ratio show promise. This review indicated that fractal measure α and traditional measure SDNN could be potential predictors of mortality, but require further assessment to determine appropriate thresholds for clinical significance and additional targeted prognostic studies to properly define their applicability as prognostic markers. Therefore, clinicians should interpret fractal and traditional measures with caution since such measures have yet to be fully described as biomarkers for clinical application.

No abstract

Background: Observational series suggest a mortality benefit from metformin in the heart failure (HF) population. However, the benefit of metformin in HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) has yet to be explored. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify whether variation in EF impacts mortality outcomes in HF patients treated with metformin. Methods: MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched up to October 2019. Observational studies and randomised trials reporting mortality in HF patients and the proportion of patients with an EF > 50% at baseline were included. Other baseline variables were used to assess for heterogeneity in treatment outcomes between groups. Regression models were used to determine the interaction between metformin and subgroups on mortality. Results: Four studies reported the proportion of patients with a preserved EF and were analysed. Metformin reduced mortality in both preserved or reduced EF after adjustment with HF therapies such as angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and beta-blockers (β = − 0.2 [95% CI − 0.3 to − 0.1], p = 0.02). Significantly greater protective effects were seen with EF > 50% (p = 0.003). Metformin treatment with insulin, ACEi and beta-blocker therapy were also shown to have a reduction in mortality (insulin p = 0.002; ACEi p < 0.001; beta-blocker p = 0.017), whereas female gender was associated with worse outcomes (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Metformin treatment is associated with a reduction in mortality in patients with HFpEF.

The authors apologise for the publication of an error in Table 2 of this article published in the European Journal of Endocrinology 167 137–143. They wish to make clear in Table 2 that they are stipulating the dose of etomidate and that the corresponding dose of hydrocortisone for complete blockade should be 0.5–1.0 mg/h. The correct table is published in full below.Table 2Treatment of hypercorticolism with etomidate: Recommendations.Infusion rate optionsBlockadeCortisol levelBiochemical monitoringOtherEtomidate (IV) 0.04–0.05 m/kg per h=2.5–3.0 mg/hPartial to complete depending on clinical circumstance of the patientTitrate to serum cortisol 500–800 nmol/l in physiologically stressed patient, 150–300 nmol/l in non-physiologically stressed patientPotassium level Cortisol levelSedation scoring initially every two hours then every 12 hours after first 24 hoursHydrocortisone IV 0.5–1.0 mg/hComplete (will need steroid replacement)<150 nmol/lPotassium level Cortisol levelThis table could now be used as a practical guide for clinicians commencing infusions on the ward of etomidate and required hydrocortisone replacement.

No abstract