Biochemical profile of renal amyloidosis in a Latin American cohort.

BACKGROUND: Two-thirds of patients with immunoglobulin light chain (AL) amyloidosis have renal involvement. The biochemical profile of kidney damage is poorly described. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted involving patients diagnosed with AL amyloidosis and renal involvement between January 1, 2010, and April 30, 2022 at the Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires. Participants were retrospectively identified from the Institutional Amyloidosis Registry. Patients diagnosed with AL amyloidosis and evidence of renal involvement were included. Individuals with other types of amyloidosis were excluded. The selection process involved a thorough review of medical records and registry data to ensure accurate identification and inclusion of eligible participants. RESULTS: Seventy-seven patients were included. At diagnosis, 90% of the subjects had proteinuria, with a median of 4.3 g/24 h, 61% had renal failure, and 47% presented nephrotic syndrome. Semi-automated urinary electrophoresis revealed 55% with non-selective and 21% with moderately selective glomerular proteinuria. Urine immunofixation indicated 64% with lambda monoclonal free light chains and 12% with kappa. Serum immunofixation demonstrated 48% with lambda monoclonal type and 25% with lambda IgG. At the time of diagnosis of AL amyloidosis, the median age was 66 years (IQR 53-72) and 49% were men. In addition to kidney involvement, other organs were also affected: heart in 53%, gastrointestinal system in 19%, peripheral nervous system in 16%, and liver in 16% of patients. CONCLUSION: Our study provides a biochemical profile in renal amyloidosis due to immunoglobulin light chains in a Latin American population. Proteinuria emerged as the most common finding in this cohort with frequent multiorgan involvement.

Evaluación de la tendencia de diabetes gestacional en un período de 11 años en Buenos Aires, Argentina

Background: The prevalence of gestational diabetes (GDM) is increasing along with obesity and gestational age. This prevalence varies in populations and with different guidelines used for the diagnoses. Aim: To estimate the change in prevalence of GDM and obesity in a period 11 years. Material and Methods: Analysis of pregnancies attended at an obstetrics ward of a general hospital between 2001 and 2018. Those women who were diabetic prior to their pregnancy were excluded from the analysis. Annual crude and adjusted prevalence using direct standardization by age were estimated. Results: We analyzed 33,985 pregnancies. GDM screening was performed in 20,139 (59%), and 1,466 (7%) had GDM. In 2007 the crude and adjusted prevalence of GDM were 4.9 and 5.2%, respectively. The figures in 2018 were 8.8 and 8.5%, respectively, with an annual percentage of change (APC) of 6.9% (p < 0.001). The frequency of obesity also increased with an APC of 4.1% (p < 0.001). In women with GDM the APC of obesity was 4.6% (p < 0.001). There was also an increase in the frequency of screening, with a joinpoint in 2011. The APC of screening in the periods 2007-2011 and 2011-2018 were 16.6 and 2.9%, respectively (p < 0.001). Conclusions: The prevalence of GDM increased in this period of eleven years along with the prevalence of obesity.

[Trends in the frequency of obesity and gestational diabetes in an eleven years period]. / Evaluación de la tendencia de diabetes gestacional en un período de 11 años en Buenos Aires, Argentina.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of gestational diabetes (GDM) is increasing along with obesity and gestational age. This prevalence varies in populations and with different guidelines used for the diagnoses. AIM: To estimate the change in prevalence of GDM and obesity in a period 11 years. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Analysis of pregnancies attended at an obstetrics ward of a general hospital between 2001 and 2018. Those women who were diabetic prior to their pregnancy were excluded from the analysis. Annual crude and adjusted prevalence using direct standardization by age were estimated. RESULTS: We analyzed 33,985 pregnancies. GDM screening was performed in 20,139 (59%), and 1,466 (7%) had GDM. In 2007 the crude and adjusted prevalence of GDM were 4.9 and 5.2%, respectively. The figures in 2018 were 8.8 and 8.5%, respectively, with an annual percentage of change (APC) of 6.9% (p < 0.001). The frequency of obesity also increased with an APC of 4.1% (p < 0.001). In women with GDM the APC of obesity was 4.6% (p < 0.001). There was also an increase in the frequency of screening, with a joinpoint in 2011. The APC of screening in the periods 2007-2011 and 2011-2018 were 16.6 and 2.9%, respectively (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of GDM increased in this period of eleven years along with the prevalence of obesity.

[Bowel preparation for colonoscopy: comparative study using Boston Bowel Preparation Scale]. / Estudio comparativo de tres preparaciones para colonoscopía utilizando la escala Boston Bowel Praparation Scale.

BACKGROUND: Most comparative studies on different preparations for colonic cleanliness use unvalidated scales with terms as "excellent," "good," "fair," and "poor" which lack standardized definitions. The Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) is a valid and simple measure of bowel preparation. OBJECTIVE: To compare three different bowel preparations [polyethylenglycol (PEG), sodium phosphates, and PEG + bisacodyl tablets] using BBPS. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients undergoing screening colonoscopies were included during a period of 6 months. Every patient was scored according to BBPS. RESULTS: Six endoscopists prospectively enrolled 374 patients (200 female and 174 male, median age 56.9 years old). Physicians chose the preparation method, and in spite of not being a randomized trial, numbers in each group allowed statistical analysis: PEG 116patients (31%), sodium phosphates 212 (56.7%) and bisacodyl 46 (12.3%). There was statistical difference between the three preparations in favor of the 4 litre solution of PEG, with a median score of 7, towards sodium phosphates and bisacodyl, with median scores of 6 (P < 0.001). Depending on bowel preparation, there were positive polyp findings in 40% of colonoscopies with PEG, 26% with sodium phosphates and 22% with bisacodyl (P = 0.01). Afternoon procedures had better preparation scores than morning procedures, 7 and 6, respectively (P < 0.001). In the afternoon colonoscopies, there were no statisticaIly significant differences between the preparations (P = 0.12) or polyp findings (P = 0.13). In the morning shift, PEG prepared patients had better scores (score of 6) when compared to sodium phosphate (score of 5) and bisacodyl (score of 6) (P = 0.001). We also noticed that the shorter the time interval between the last intake of the preparation and the procedure, the better the score. CONCLUSIONS: Bowel preparations for colonoscopy with PEG are significantly better than sodium phosphate and bisacodyl preparations, with higher BBPS scores and polyp detection rates.