Aims The EURO-ENDO registry aimed to study the management and outcomes of patients with infective endocarditis (IE). Methods and results Prospective cohort of 3116 adult patients (2470 from Europe, 646 from non-ESC countries), admitted to 156 hospitals in 40 countries between January 2016 and March 2018 with a diagnosis of IE based on ESC 2015 diagnostic criteria. Clinical, biological, microbiological, and imaging [echocardiography, computed tomography (CT) scan, 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (18F-FDG PET/CT)] data were collected. Infective endocarditis was native (NVE) in 1764 (56.6%) patients, prosthetic (PVIE) in 939 (30.1%), and device-related (CDRIE) in 308 (9.9%). Infective endocarditis was community-acquired in 2046 (65.66%) patients. Microorganisms involved were staphylococci in 1085 (44.1%) patients, oral streptococci in 304 (12.3%), enterococci in 390 (15.8%), and Streptococcus gallolyticus in 162 (6.6%). 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography was performed in 518 (16.6%) patients and presented with cardiac uptake (major criterion) in 222 (42.9%) patients, with a better sensitivity in PVIE (66.8%) than in NVE (28.0%) and CDRIE (16.3%). Embolic events occurred in 20.6% of patients, and were significantly associated with tricuspid or pulmonary IE, presence of a vegetation and Staphylococcus aureus IE. According to ESC guidelines, cardiac surgery was indicated in 2160 (69.3%) patients, but finally performed in only 1596 (73.9%) of them. In-hospital death occurred in 532 (17.1%) patients and was more frequent in PVIE. Independent predictors of mortality were Charlson index, creatinine > 2 mg/dL, congestive heart failure, vegetation length > 10 mm, cerebral complications, abscess, and failure to undertake surgery when indicated. Conclusion Infective endocarditis is still a life-threatening disease with frequent lethal outcome despite profound changes in its clinical, microbiological, imaging, and therapeutic profiles.

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) appears to be a significant risk factor for Alzheimer disease (AD). Insulin and insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) also have intense effects in the central nervous system (CNS), regulating key processes such as neuronal survival and longevity, as well as learning and memory. Hyperglycaemia induces increased peripheral utilization of insulin, resulting in reduced insulin transport into the brain. Whereas the density of brain insulin receptor decreases during age, IGF-1 receptor increases, suggesting that specific insulin-mediated signals is involved in aging and possibly in cognitive decline. Molecular mechanisms that protect CNS neurons against β-amyloid-derived-diffusible ligands (ADDL), responsible for synaptic deterioration underlying AD memory failure, have been identified. The protection mechanism does not involve simple competition between ADDLs and insulin, but rather it is signalling dependent down-regulation of ADDL-binding sites. Defective insulin signalling make neurons energy deficient and vulnerable to oxidizing or other metabolic insults and impairs synaptic plasticity. In fact, destruction of mitochondria, by oxidation of a dynamic-like transporter protein, may cause synapse loss in AD. Moreover, interaction between Aβ and τ proteins could be cause of neuronal loss. Hyperinsulinaemia as well as complete lack of insulin result in increased τ phosphorylation, leading to an imbalance of insulin-regulated τ kinases and phosphatates. However, amyloid peptides accumulation is currently seen as a key step in the pathogenesis of AD. Inflammation interacts with processing and deposit of β-amyloid. Chronic hyperinsulinemia may exacerbate inflammatory responses and increase markers of oxidative stress. In addition, insulin appears to act as ‘neuromodulator’, influencing release and reuptake of neurotransmitters, and improving learning and memory. Thus, experimental and clinical evidence show that insulin action influences cerebral functions. In this paper, we reviewed several mechanisms by which insulin may affect pathophysiology in AD.

Background: Strokes are the leading cause of epileptic seizures in adults and account for 50% of seizures in those over the age of 65 years. The use of antiepileptic drugs to prevent recurrent poststroke seizures is recommended. Methods: One hundred and twenty-eight patients with poststroke seizures were randomly allocated to treatment with either levetiracetam (LEV) or sustained-release carbamazepine (CBZ) in a multicenter randomized open-label study. After a titration study phase (2 weeks), the optimal individual dose of trial medication was determined and treatment was continued for another 52 weeks. The primary endpoint was defined as the proportion of seizure-free patients; the secondary endpoints were: evaluation of time recurrence to the first seizure, EEG tracings, cognitive functions and side effects. Results: Of 128 patients, 22 discontinued the trial prematurely; thus a total of 106 patients (52 treated with LEV and 54 treated with CBZ) were included in the analysis. The results of the study were as follows: no significant difference in number of seizure-free patients between LEV and CBZ (p = 0.08); time to the first recurrence tended to be longer among patients on LEV; there was no correlation between the therapeutic effect and the EEG findings in either treatment group; LEV caused significantly fewer (p = 0.02) side effects than CBZ; attention deficit, frontal executive functions and functional scales (Activities of Daily Living and Instrumental Activities of Daily Living indices) were significantly worse in the CBZ group. Conclusions: This trial suggests that LEV may be a valid alternative to CBZ in poststroke seizures, particularly in terms of efficacy and safety. In addition, our results show that LEV has significant advantages over CBZ on cognitive functions. This trial also indicates that LEV in monotherapy is a safe and effective therapeutic option in elderly patients who have suffered epileptic seizures following a stroke.

This may suggest that CM is associated with IR status, particularly when it is in partnership with obesity.

No abstract