Pulmonary functions at rest and cardiorespiratory responses to low speed treadmill walking were investigated in 24 patients (P), (mean age, 38 years; range, 20 to 56 yr) with multiple sclerosis and compared with a control group (C). The following parameters were significantly (p less than 0.01) different in P from those in C. At rest in P, the residual volume to TLC ratio was 21% greater, respiratory muscle strength index was 28% lower, and heart rate (HR) was 11 beats/min-1 higher. During treadmill walking at a given speed, HR, minute ventilation (VE), and O2 consumption (VO2) were all elevated (37 to 119%). In addition, the energy cost of walking, per unit distance, above resting, was 2 to 3 times greater, with mean +/- SEM values for P of 0.299 +/- 0.019 and C of 0.147 +/- 0.006 at 2 km/h and 0.275 +/- 0.042 and 0.110 +/- 0.005 (for P and C, respectively) ml O2 kg-1 m-1 at 4 km/h; the HR and VE/VO2, also when referred to a given VO2, were higher. We conclude that a high energy cost of walking may be an important contributing factor to breathlessness and leg fatigue in patients with multiple sclerosis. Poor conditioning, altered cardiovascular control, and respiratory muscle weakness may play additional roles.
6This 8-week, randomized, double-blind, controlled study compared efficacy and tolerability of telmisartan ⁄ amlodipine (T ⁄ A) single-pill combination (SPC) vs the respective monotherapies in 858 patients with severe hypertension (systolic ⁄ diastolic blood pressure [SBP ⁄ DBP] !180 ⁄ 95 mm Hg). At 8 weeks, T ⁄ A provided significantly greater reductions from baseline in seated trough cuff SBP ⁄ DBP ()47.5 mm Hg ⁄ )18.7 mm Hg) vs T (P<.0001) or A (P=.0002) monotherapy; superior reductions were also evident at 1, 2, 4, and 6 weeks. Blood pressure (BP) goal and response rates were consistently higher with T ⁄ A vs T or A. T ⁄ A was well tolerated, with less frequent treatmentrelated adverse events vs A (12.6% vs 16.4%) and a numerically lower incidence of peripheral edema and treatment discontinuation. In conclusion, treatment of patients with substantially elevated BP with T ⁄ A SPCs resulted in high and significantly greater BP reductions and higher BP goal and response rates than the respective monotherapies. T ⁄ A SPCs were well tolerated. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2012;14:206-215. Ó2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.Based on evidence from a number of large antihypertensive trials, 1-9 most guidelines acknowledge that combination therapy is needed to reduce blood pressure (BP) successfully to goal in the majority of patients; only a minority of patients achieve their BP goal with a single agent.10-14 Also, the Avoiding Cardiovascular Events Through Combination Therapy in Patients Living With Systolic Hypertension (ACCOMPLISH) study showed a significant reduction of cardiovascular (CV) events and death in hypertensive patients at high CV risk treated with a combination of an angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor and a calcium channel blocker (CCB).15 Nevertheless, despite rigorous and comprehensive guidelines, and a trend towards an increase in the use of combination therapy in treatment practice, 16 several studies have demonstrated the persistence of poor BP goal rates in treated patients. [17][18][19] The impact of poor BP control is compounded by the often high prevalence of other CV risk factors in hypertensive patients (eg, hypercholesterolemia, obesity, type 2 diabetes mellitus [T2DM], and smoking).13 Therefore, an urgent need still remains to improve the management of hypertension. One logical approach would be to use 2 drugs from different classes and complementary mechanisms of action in combination. Such combinations may result in additional BP decreases and improved goal rates, compared with either agent used alone. 20-23Furthermore, single-pill combinations (SPCs) are known to increase treatment adherence and reduce health care costs. [24][25][26][27] A combination of a CCB and an angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) is a rational approach for managing hypertension and there is increasing evidence that this combination is effective. 11,13,28,29 The aim of the current study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of the SPC of telmisartan 80 mg ⁄ amlodipine 10 mg (T80 ⁄ A10) with that of...
Objective-To report a technique for minimally invasive occlusion of patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) and outcome in 5 dogs. Study Design-Clinical cases. Animals-Five, 4-6-month-old, dogs with PDA. Materials and Methods-Titanium ligating clips were used for PDA closure in all dogs. Three dogs had video-enhanced mini-thoracotomy PDA occlusion. Two other dogs had thoracoscopic PDA occlusion using a custom-designed thoracoscopy clip applicator. Results-Thoracoscopic PDA occlusion was successful in both dogs in which it was attempted. Complete PDA closure was achieved in 4 dogs. Three months after surgery, the largest dog had residual ductal flow that hemodynamically was insignificant. Conclusions-Although technically demanding, minimally invasive PDA occlusion is a safe and reliable technique in dogs. Preoperative measurement of the diameter of the PDA is crucial to determine if complete closure with metal clips can be achieved. Clinical Relevance-Minimally invasive PDA occlusion should be considered as an alternative to occlusion via conventional thoracotomy. r
A patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) was detected in a 10-month-old Pyrenean Shepherd. The PDA was occluded with hemostatic clips. One month after surgery, an aneurysmal dilatation of the ductus was diagnosed using Doppler echocardiography. The authors present the echo-Doppler findings and the follow-up of the ductus aneurysm. The pathogenesis and significance of such an aneurysm are discussed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.