ABSTRACT
Objetivos Valorar la eficacia y la seguridad de la urea en pacientes con hiponatremia e insuficiencia cardiaca (IC). Métodos y resultados Se trata de un estudio observacional retrospectivo analítico de pacientes con IC e hiponatremia (Na+ <135mmol/l). Se incluyeron 49 pacientes tratados con urea y 47 pacientes que no recibieron urea, todos ellos bajo tratamiento estándar (según práctica clínica habitual) de la IC, con seguimiento en el hospital Álvaro Cunqueiro de Vigo entre enero de 2013 y mayo de 2022. En el estudio se evaluó la normalización de los niveles de sodio (Na >135mmol/l). La natremia al inicio del tratamiento con urea oral era de 127±5,22mmol/l, a las 24horas el sodio era de 128±2,47 (p<0,009) y la media el día de la normalización fue de 135,19±4,23mmol/l (p<0,005). Los días de media para conseguir la normalización del sodio fueron 5,03±2,37. La uremia al inicio del tratamiento con urea era de 73±46,93mg/dl y la media el día de la normalización del Na+ fue de 116,05±63,64mg/dl (p<0,002). La dosis media de urea oral fue 22,5g/día. No se observaron efectos adversos relevantes, ni cambios en cuanto a las cifras de creatinina. Conclusiones El tratamiento con urea oral añadido al tratamiento estándar, durante cortos periodos de tiempo, es seguro y eficaz para corregir la natremia en pacientes con IC hipervolémica con hiponatremia.
Objectives To assess the efficacy and safety of urea in patients with hyponatremia and heart failure (HF). Methods and results This is a retrospective observational analytical study of patients with HF and hyponatremia (Na+ <135mmol/L). Forty-nine patients treated with urea and 47 patients who did not receive urea, all under standard treatment (according to usual clinical practice) for HF, were included and followed up at Álvaro Cunqueiro Hospital in Vigo (Spain) between January 2013 and May 2022. The study evaluated the normalization of sodium levels (Na >135mmol/L). The initial natremia at the start of oral urea treatment was 127±5.22 mmol/L, at 24h the sodium level was 128±2.47 (P<.009), and the mean on the day of normalization was 135.19±4.23mmol/L (P<.005). The average number of days to achieve sodium normalization was 5.03±2.37 days. The initial uremia at the start of urea treatment was 73±46.93mg/dL, and the mean on the day of Na+ normalization was 116.05±63.64mg/dL (P<.002). The average oral urea dose was 22.5g/day. No relevant adverse effects were observed, nor were there significant changes in creatinine levels. Conclusions Oral urea treatment, when added to standard treatment for short periods of time, is safe and effective in correcting natremia in patients with hypervolemic HF with hyponatremia. (AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Hyponatremia/drug therapy , Urea/administration & dosage , Urea/pharmacology , Urea/therapeutic use , Heart Failure , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
Objetivos Valorar la eficacia y la seguridad de la urea en pacientes con hiponatremia e insuficiencia cardiaca (IC). Métodos y resultados Se trata de un estudio observacional retrospectivo analítico de pacientes con IC e hiponatremia (Na+ <135mmol/l). Se incluyeron 49 pacientes tratados con urea y 47 pacientes que no recibieron urea, todos ellos bajo tratamiento estándar (según práctica clínica habitual) de la IC, con seguimiento en el hospital Álvaro Cunqueiro de Vigo entre enero de 2013 y mayo de 2022. En el estudio se evaluó la normalización de los niveles de sodio (Na >135mmol/l). La natremia al inicio del tratamiento con urea oral era de 127±5,22mmol/l, a las 24horas el sodio era de 128±2,47 (p<0,009) y la media el día de la normalización fue de 135,19±4,23mmol/l (p<0,005). Los días de media para conseguir la normalización del sodio fueron 5,03±2,37. La uremia al inicio del tratamiento con urea era de 73±46,93mg/dl y la media el día de la normalización del Na+ fue de 116,05±63,64mg/dl (p<0,002). La dosis media de urea oral fue 22,5g/día. No se observaron efectos adversos relevantes, ni cambios en cuanto a las cifras de creatinina. Conclusiones El tratamiento con urea oral añadido al tratamiento estándar, durante cortos periodos de tiempo, es seguro y eficaz para corregir la natremia en pacientes con IC hipervolémica con hiponatremia.
Objectives To assess the efficacy and safety of urea in patients with hyponatremia and heart failure (HF). Methods and results This is a retrospective observational analytical study of patients with HF and hyponatremia (Na+ <135mmol/L). Forty-nine patients treated with urea and 47 patients who did not receive urea, all under standard treatment (according to usual clinical practice) for HF, were included and followed up at Álvaro Cunqueiro Hospital in Vigo (Spain) between January 2013 and May 2022. The study evaluated the normalization of sodium levels (Na >135mmol/L). The initial natremia at the start of oral urea treatment was 127±5.22 mmol/L, at 24h the sodium level was 128±2.47 (P<.009), and the mean on the day of normalization was 135.19±4.23mmol/L (P<.005). The average number of days to achieve sodium normalization was 5.03±2.37 days. The initial uremia at the start of urea treatment was 73±46.93mg/dL, and the mean on the day of Na+ normalization was 116.05±63.64mg/dL (P<.002). The average oral urea dose was 22.5g/day. No relevant adverse effects were observed, nor were there significant changes in creatinine levels. Conclusions Oral urea treatment, when added to standard treatment for short periods of time, is safe and effective in correcting natremia in patients with hypervolemic HF with hyponatremia. (AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Hyponatremia/drug therapy , Urea/administration & dosage , Urea/pharmacology , Urea/therapeutic use , Heart Failure , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of urea in patients with hyponatremia and heart failure (HF). METHODS AND RESULTS: This is a retrospective observational analytical study of patients with HF and hyponatremia (Na+ <135mmol/L). Forty-nine patients treated with urea and 47 patients who did not receive urea, all under standard treatment (according to usual clinical practice) for HF, were included and followed up at Álvaro Cunqueiro Hospital in Vigo (Spain) between January 2013 and May 2022. The study evaluated the normalization of sodium levels (Na >135mmol/L). The initial natremia at the start of oral urea treatment was 127±5.22 mmol/L, at 24h the sodium level was 128±2.47 (P<.009), and the mean on the day of normalization was 135.19±4.23mmol/L (P<.005). The average number of days to achieve sodium normalization was 5.03±2.37 days. The initial uremia at the start of urea treatment was 73±46.93mg/dL, and the mean on the day of Na+ normalization was 116.05±63.64mg/dL (P<.002). The average oral urea dose was 22.5g/day. No relevant adverse effects were observed, nor were there significant changes in creatinine levels. CONCLUSIONS: Oral urea treatment, when added to standard treatment for short periods of time, is safe and effective in correcting natremia in patients with hypervolemic HF with hyponatremia.
Subject(s)
Heart Failure , Hyponatremia , Humans , Hyponatremia/drug therapy , Hyponatremia/etiology , Urea/therapeutic use , Sodium/therapeutic use , Heart Failure/complications , Heart Failure/drug therapy , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
El objetivo de este trabajo fue comparar ventajas potenciales de la radioterapia de intensidad modulada (IMRT) vs. la radioterapia 3D (3DRT) en el control loco-regional y la toxicidad aguda en pacientes con cáncer de recto localmente avanzado (CRLA). Se analizaron retrospectivamente 235 pacientes con adenocarcinoma de recto T2/T4 y N0/N1 sometidos a radioquimioterapia neoadyuvante entre febrero de 2010 y agosto de 2015. La modalidad radiante se correlacionó con los resultados clínicos (control local y a distancia) y las tasas de toxicidades agudas urinarias, hematológicas, gastrointestinales (GI) y dérmicas. Ciento cuarenta (59.6%) recibieron IMRT y 95 (40.4%) 3DRT. La mediana de seguimiento fue de 36 meses. Las tasas de recidiva local y metástasis a distancia fueron similares entre IMRT y 3DRT. No se encontraron diferencias estadísticamente significativas en control local (CL) ni en supervivencia global (SG) entre IMRT y 3DRT (p=0.56 y p=0.24, respectivamente), ni en colostomía libre para tumores rectales bajos (p=0.44). IMRT implicó menor toxicidad cutánea (p<0.001), hematológica (p<0.0001), urinaria (p=0.0017), y gastrointestinal (p=0.0006). La incidencia de diarrea grado ≥ 3 fue del 16% entre los pacientes del grupo 3DRT frente al 5% de del grupo IMRT. En el análisis univariado, el estadio clínico T, edad, KPS, y quimioterapia adyuvante se asociaron con mejor SG (todos p<0.05) y la dosis total de radiación se asoció con mejor período libre de enfermedad (p=0.0065) Postulamos que IMRT permitiría un aumento de dosis en forma segura con el potencial de aumentar la tasa de respuestas patológicas completas (RPC), en particular en tumores rectales bajos (AU)
The aim was to compare the advantages of IMRT vs. 3D in loco regional control and acute toxicity in patients with locally advanced rectum cancer. We analyzed retrospectively 235 patients with rectal adenocarcinoma T2/T4 and N0/N1 undergoing chemo radiation between February 2010 and August 2015. The radiant modality was correlated with clinical outcomes (local and systemic control) and rates of acute urinary, hematological, gastrointestinal and dermal toxicities. One hundred and forty patients (59.6%) received IMRT and 95 (40.4%) received 3D. The median follow-up time was 36 months. The rates of local recurrence and distant metastases were similar between IMRT vs. 3D. No statistically significant differences were found in local control or survival between IMRT and 3D (p=0.56 and p =0.24, respectively), nor in free colostomy for low rectal tumors (p= 0.44). IMRT resulted in lower dermal (p<0.001), hematological (p<0.0001), urinary (p=0.0017), and gastrointestinal toxicity (p=0.0006). The incidence of diarrhea grade ≥ 3 was 16% among 3D patients vs. 5% in IMRT. In the univariate analysis, clinical stage T, age, KPS, and adjuvant chemotherapy were associated with better overall survival (all p<0.05) and the total dose of radiation was associated with better disease-free period (p=0.0065). We postulate that IMRT would allow us to increase dose in a safe manner with the potential to increase rate of complete pathological responses, particularly in low rectal tumors (AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Middle Aged , Radiotherapy, Conformal , Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated , Rectal Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Neoadjuvant TherapyABSTRACT
Las técnicas definitivas de quimio-radioterapia para el cáncer anal, radioterapia tridimensional conformada (3DCRT) o radioterapia de intensidad modulada (IMRT) dan excelentes resultados a largo plazo. Evaluamos resultados en centros de radiación basados en la comunidad. Se evaluaron retrospectivamente 281 pacientes tratados con quimio-radioterapia definitiva para carcinoma anal loco-regional, entre 2006 y 2014. El 95% realizó quimioterapia. Se evaluaron datos de toxicidades, progresión de la enfermedad y necesidad de colostomía durante el período de seguimiento. La supervivencia global, supervivencia libre de progresión y colostomía libre se calcularon con métodos de Kaplan-Meier. La edad media fue 63.7 años con seguimiento medio de 60 meses. Ciento sesenta y nueve pacientes recibieron IMRT y 112 recibieron 3DCRT. La dosis total media tumoral fue 54 Gy. El 80% experimentó complicaciones agudas, y el 56% requirió interrupción de tratamiento. No hubo diferencias significativas en supervivencia global, supervivencia libre de progresión, supervivencia libre de colostomía ni control local a dos años entre ambos grupos. La IMRT tuvo menos suspensión del tratamiento (48% vs. 65%) (p=0.0261). El grupo IMRT tuvo una reducción significativa de todas las toxicidades agudas ≥3 y gastrointestinales (GI) tardías, en comparación con los tratados con 3DCRT. Esta serie representa una de las mayores comparaciones 3DCRT vs. IMRT para el tratamiento definitivo de cáncer anal. Los resultados a largo plazo no difieren significativamente en función de la técnica de radioterapia (RT). La IMRT reduce todas las toxicidades ≥ grado 3 y la necesidad de interrupción en comparación con 3DCRT (AU)
The definitive techniques of chemo-radiotherapy for anal cancer, 3DCRT or IMRT, give excellent long-term results. We evaluated results in community-based radiation centers. We retrospectively evaluated 281 patients treated with definitive chemo-radiotherapy for locoregional anal carcinoma, between 2006 and 2014. The 95% performed chemotherapy. Toxicity data, progression of the disease, need of colostomy during the follow-up period were evaluated. Global survival (GS), progression free survival (PFS), and free colostomy survival (CFS) were calculated with Kaplan-Meier methods. Mean age was 63.7 years with a mean follow-up of 60 months. One hundred and sixty nine patients received IMRT and 112 received 3DCRT. The total mean tumor dose was 54 Gy. The 80% experienced acute complications, and 56% required treatment interruption. There was no significant difference in GS, PFS, CFS or local control at two years between both groups. The IMRT had less treatment discontinuation (48% vs. 65%) (p = 0.0261). The IMRT group had a significant reduction in all acute toxicities ≥3 and late gastrointestinal, compared with those treated with 3DCRT. This series represents one of the largest 3DCRT vs. IMRT comparisons for the definitive treatment of anal cancer. The long-term results do not differ significantly depending on the RT technique. The IMRT reduces all toxicities ≥ grade 3 and the need for interruption compared to 3DCRT (AU)
