RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Protein-energy wasting (PEW) is common in patients undergoing hemodialysis (HD). Studies have assessed the positive effect of oral nutritional supplementation (ONS) or resistance exercise (RE) on nutritional status (NS) markers in patients undergoing HD. METHODS: The aim of this study was to assess the effect of ONS and RE on NS and the quality of life (QOL) of 36 patients undergoing HD. In a randomized clinical trial, patients were divided into the following two groups: a control group (ONS) that received a can of ONS during their HD sessions and an intervention group (ONS + RE) that received a can of ONS and underwent a 40-min session of RE during their HD sessions. Both interventions lasted 12 weeks. The patients' anthropometric, biochemical, dietetic and bioelectrical impedance measurements as well as their QOL, evaluated using the Kidney Disease Quality of Life Short Form, were recorded. RESULTS: At baseline, 55.5% of patients presented with PEW according to International Society of Renal Nutrition and Metabolism criteria (20 patients). We found statistically significant changes from baseline in both groups, such as increases in body weight, body mass index, midarm circumference, midarm muscle circumference, triceps skinfold thickness, fat mass percentage, handgrip strength, phase angle and serum albumin. A decrease in the prevalence of PEW was observed in both groups at the end of the intervention. A delta comparison between groups showed no statistically significant differences in the anthropometric and biochemical parameters. No significant improvement was observed in QOL and body composition measured by bioimpedance vector analysis. Dietary energy and protein intake increased significantly during the study period for all patients. CONCLUSION: Oral nutritional supplementation during HD improves NS. The addition of RE during HD does not seem to augment the acute anabolic effects of intradialytic ONS on NS.
Assuntos
Suplementos Nutricionais , Exercício Físico/fisiologia , Nefropatias/terapia , Estado Nutricional , Qualidade de Vida , Diálise Renal , Administração Oral , Adulto , Antropometria , Composição Corporal , Índice de Massa Corporal , Peso Corporal , Impedância Elétrica , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-IdadeRESUMO
Therapeutic advances in rheumatoid arthritis require periodic review of treatment guidelines. OBJECTIVE: To update the Mexican College of Rheumatology guidelines on the pharmacological treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. METHOD: Board certified rheumatologists from different health institutions and regions of the country participated. Work teams were formed that reviewed the previous guidelines, elaborated new questions, reviewed the literature, and scored the evidence that was presented and discussed in plenary session. The conclusions were presented to infectologists, gynaecologists and patients. Recommendations were based on levels of evidence according to GRADE methodology. RESULTS: Updated recommendations on the use of available medications for rheumatoid arthritis treatment in Mexico up to 2017 are presented. The importance of adequate and sustained control of the disease is emphasized and relevant safety aspects are described. Bioethical conflicts are included, and government action is invited to strengthen correct treatment of the disease. CONCLUSIONS: The updated recommendations of the Mexican College of Rheumatology on the pharmacological treatment of rheumatoid arthritis incorporate the best available information to be used in the Mexican health care system.
RESUMO
The present document is a position statement of the Mexican College of Rheumatology on the use of biosimilars in rheumatic diseases. This position considers that biosimilars should be considered as interchangeable, that automatic substitution without previous notice in stable patients during follow-up is not ethical, that the approval of a biosimilar should only be given after exhaustive review of preclinical and clinical data marked by Mexican regulations, that it should be clearly stated in the nomenclature of biologic drugs which is the innovator and which is the biosimilar, that it is not correct to choose a biosimilar as treatment based only on economic reasons or extrapolate indications based only on the approval of the innovator and in the absence of safety and efficacy data for the biosimilar.