ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Subthalamic stimulation reduces motor disability and improves quality of life in patients with advanced Parkinson's disease who have severe levodopa-induced motor complications. We hypothesized that neurostimulation would be beneficial at an earlier stage of Parkinson's disease. METHODS: In this 2-year trial, we randomly assigned 251 patients with Parkinson's disease and early motor complications (mean age, 52 years; mean duration of disease, 7.5 years) to undergo neurostimulation plus medical therapy or medical therapy alone. The primary end point was quality of life, as assessed with the use of the Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) summary index (with scores ranging from 0 to 100 and higher scores indicating worse function). Major secondary outcomes included parkinsonian motor disability, activities of daily living, levodopa-induced motor complications (as assessed with the use of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale, parts III, II, and IV, respectively), and time with good mobility and no dyskinesia. RESULTS: For the primary outcome of quality of life, the mean score for the neurostimulation group improved by 7.8 points, and that for the medical-therapy group worsened by 0.2 points (between-group difference in mean change from baseline to 2 years, 8.0 points; P=0.002). Neurostimulation was superior to medical therapy with respect to motor disability (P<0.001), activities of daily living (P<0.001), levodopa-induced motor complications (P<0.001), and time with good mobility and no dyskinesia (P=0.01). Serious adverse events occurred in 54.8% of the patients in the neurostimulation group and in 44.1% of those in the medical-therapy group. Serious adverse events related to surgical implantation or the neurostimulation device occurred in 17.7% of patients. An expert panel confirmed that medical therapy was consistent with practice guidelines for 96.8% of the patients in the neurostimulation group and for 94.5% of those in the medical-therapy group. CONCLUSIONS: Subthalamic stimulation was superior to medical therapy in patients with Parkinson's disease and early motor complications. (Funded by the German Ministry of Research and others; EARLYSTIM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00354133.).
Subject(s)
Electric Stimulation Therapy , Parkinson Disease/therapy , Quality of Life , Activities of Daily Living , Adult , Antiparkinson Agents/adverse effects , Antiparkinson Agents/therapeutic use , Combined Modality Therapy , Dopamine Agonists/adverse effects , Dopamine Agonists/therapeutic use , Dyskinesias/etiology , Electric Stimulation Therapy/adverse effects , Female , Humans , Implantable Neurostimulators/adverse effects , Intention to Treat Analysis , Male , Middle Aged , Parkinson Disease/drug therapy , Parkinson Disease/physiopathology , Subthalamic Nucleus , Surveys and Questionnaires , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
The adrenergic bronchodilators that have been developed for oral inhalation represent successive refinement in terms of receptor specificity and duration of action. Beta agonist bronchodilators have durations of 4-6 hours, or, in the case of salmeterol, of up to 12 hours, offering convenient dosing. Inhalation of the aerosol formulations targets the lung directly. The release of levalbuterol now provides an agent with a single isomer active on beta-2 receptors. The currently available agents offer clinicians and patients with reversible obstructive lung disease a choice of sophisticated drugs for airway smooth muscle relaxation. Although improvements in the drugs have reduced adverse effects and beta agonists are considered safe, concerns persist about the effect of beta agonists in asthma. An improved understanding of asthma pathophysiology may lead to more appropriate use of beta agonists in asthma.
Subject(s)
Adrenergic beta-Agonists/history , Asthma/history , Bronchodilator Agents/history , Drugs, Chinese Herbal/history , Administration, Inhalation , Adrenergic beta-Agonists/administration & dosage , Asthma/drug therapy , Bronchodilator Agents/administration & dosage , Drug Evaluation/history , Drugs, Chinese Herbal/administration & dosage , History, 19th Century , History, 20th Century , History, Ancient , HumansABSTRACT
We hypothesized that the concentration of propofol in the aqueous phase may be the most important variable responsible for the pain experienced during injection of the drug. The concentration of propofol in the aqueous phase (18.57 micrograms/mL) can be decreased by increasing the fat content of the solvent. To test this hypothesis, 36 patients were randomly allocated to one of three groups, each receiving a different formulation of propofol. Group A received 20 mL of propofol alone in a commercial preparation (Diprivan(R) with 10 mL of saline); Group B, 20 mL of propofol to which 5 mL of long-chain triglyceride (LCT) fat emulsion and 5 mL of saline and been added; and Group C, 20 mL of propofol and 10 mL of LCT fat emulsion. The propofol emulsion was injected over 30-60 s into a dorsal vein of the hand. Patients reported pain during injection as none, mild, moderate, or severe (almost intolerable). In Group A, 8 of 12 patients reported moderate or severe pain upon injection whereas in Group C only mild pain was reported by 6 of 12 patients. Our results suggest that a smaller concentration of propofol in the aqueous phase of the emulsion reduces pain on injection. With the addition of more lipid (10 mL), a higher percentage of propofol is absorbed by fat particles. If solvents that permit a smaller concentration of the drug in the aqueous phase of oil-in-water emulsions were used for propofol and other drugs that cause pain on injection, pain would be reduced and patient satisfaction may be increased.