Terlipressin given by continuous intravenous infusion versus intravenous boluses in the treatment of hepatorenal syndrome: A randomized controlled study.

UNLABELLED: In patients with cirrhosis and hepatorenal syndrome (HRS), terlipressin has been used either as continuous intravenous infusion or as intravenous boluses. To date, these two approaches have never been compared. The goal of this study was to compare the administration of terlipressin as continuous intravenous infusion versus intravenous boluses in the treatment of type 1 HRS. Seventy-eight patients were randomly assigned to receive either continuous intravenous infusion (TERLI-INF group) at the initial dose of 2 mg/day or intravenous boluses of terlipressin (TERLI-BOL group) at the initial dose of 0.5 mg every 4 hours. In case of no response, the dose was progressively increased to a final dose of 12 mg/day in both groups. Albumin was given at the same dose in both groups (1 g/kg of body weight at the first day followed by 20-40 g/day). Complete response was defined by decrease of serum creatinine (sCr) from baseline to a final value ≤133 µmol/L, partial response by a decrease ≥50% of sCr from baseline to a final value >133 µmol/L. The rate of adverse events was lower in the TERLI-INF group (35.29%) than in the TERLI-BOL group (62.16%, P < 0.025). The rate of response to treatment, including both complete and partial response, was not significantly different between the two groups (76.47% versus 64.85%; P value not significant). The mean daily effective dose of terlipressin was lower in the TERLI-INF group than in the TERLI-BOL group (2.23 ± 0.65 versus 3.51 ± 1.77 mg/day; P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Terlipressin given by continuous intravenous infusion is better tolerated than intravenous boluses in the treatment of type 1 HRS. Moreover, it is effective at doses lower than those required for intravenous bolus administration.

A program of professional accreditation of hospital wards by the Italian Society of Internal Medicine (SIMI): self- versus peer-evaluation.

The Italian Society of Internal Medicine has developed a voluntary program of professional accreditation of the medical units run by its constituency. Participation in the program, which is meant to foster staff involvement in clinical governance, includes all the medical personnel and nurses. Accreditation is awarded provided the candidate unit is able to adhere to a pre-established set of quality standards, meet a number of clinical and organizational requirements and monitor specific indicators. Self-evaluation is the first step in the program, followed by a site visit by a team of peer internists experienced in quality auditing. The program, which has involved so far 19 units, has considered a number of clinical requirements related to the three most frequent diseases in Italian internal medicine wards: chronic heart failure (CHF), exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and hepatic cirrhosis with ascites (HCA). The comparison between self- and peer-evaluation witnessed less discrepancies for disease-related than for organizational requirements, the latter being met to a smaller degree by most units. In particular, concordance was higher for requirements and indicators pertaining to CHF and HCA than to COPD. This program of professional accreditation developed by the Italian Society of Internal Medicine has the potential to describe, monitor and improve clinical and organizational performances in internal medicine. It should also be seen as a contribution to implement the strategy of professional governance in hospitals.

Daily dose of interferon alpha-2b and ribavirin in treatment-naive patients with chronic hepatitis C virus genotype 1 infection: a randomised controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: The treatment of patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1 infection remains disappointing. METHODS: In 1999, we started a multicentre study comparing two regimens of recombinant interferon (IFN) alpha-2b plus ribavirin. Group A (90 patients) received ribavirin plus IFN alpha-2b 5 MU/day for 1 month (induction therapy) followed by IFN alpha-2b 5 MU thrice weekly for 5 months. Group B (85 patients) received ribavirin plus IFN alpha-2b 5 MU thrice weekly for 6 months. Responders in both arms received IFN alpha-2b 3 MU thrice weekly for a further 6 months. A follow-up evaluation was performed at 18 months. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-five consecutive treatment-naive patients with HCV genotype 1 infection were enrolled in the study. A sustained virological response (SVR) was obtained in 51 (29%) patients: 28 in group A (31%) and 23 in group B (27%). HCV-RNA clearance was greater at 3 months among patients who received induction therapy (57 vs 39%; p < 0.02). Age, sex, and initial viral load did not influence the achievement of a SVR. HCV clearance at the end of the study was lower in cirrhotic patients (3/26 vs 48/149; p < 0.05). The only SVR in patients with cirrhosis occurred in those from group A (p < 0.05). Both regimens were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the low rate of SVR in treatment-naive patients with HCV genotype 1 infection treated with IFN alpha-2b plus ribavirin. A 4-week induction regimen was slightly superior to standard IFN alpha-2b plus ribavirin. Although the number of patients with cirrhosis was low, induction therapy seemed to be more effective in cirrhotics. Given its safety and tolerability, the induction regimen evaluated here may be a therapeutic option in treatment-naive patients with HCV genotype 1 infection.