Accurate determination of energy requirements in hospitalised patients with parenteral nutrition.

BACKGROUND: The prescription of parenteral nutrition (PN) in hospitalised patients requires an estimation of the energy requirements. Most studies employing prediction equations (PEs) to estimate energy requirements have focused on critically ill patients. The present study aimed to evaluate several PEs of the resting energy expenditure (REE) to identify the most accurate equation for estimating the REE required for PN. METHODS: This cross-sectional and descriptive study included patients hospitalised with medical or surgical diagnoses, making them candidates for PN. Epidemiological data, the reason for hospital admission, nutritional screening results, characteristics of the PN administered and REE by indirect calorimetry (IC) were recorded and, subsequently, PEs were calculated. RESULTS: In total, 116 patients were recruited with a mean (SD) age of 56.7 (13.8) years and body mass index of 21.3 (4.25) kg m-2 . The diagnosis was medical in 52% of patients and surgical in 48%. The mean (SD) REEs of patients, according to IC, were: 6.11 (1.18) MJ [1461 (281) kcal]; and according to PEs: Mifflin, 5.07 (1.05) MJ [1212 (252) kcal]; Owen, 5.43 (0.72) MJ [1298 (172) kcal]; Harris-Benedict, 5.38 (0.85) MJ [1285 (204) kcal]; Ireton-Jones, 6.20 (1.69) MJ [1481 (403) kcal]; and short equation, 6.12 (0.92) MJ [1464 (220) kcal]. A comparison of the results obtained for the REE by IC and with PEs indicated that the short equation had less bias than the other equations, with an accuracy of 54% CONCLUSIONS: In hospitalised patients who receive PN, determination of the REE should ideally be made by IC. PEs are acceptable but not exact and so their estimation could overfeed or underfeed the patient.

The combination metformin/glyburide exerts its hypoglycemic effect mainly by increasing insulin secretion: a controlled, randomized, double-blind, crossover study.

The aim of the present study was to describe the mechanism by which the combination glyburide/metformin exerts its additive hypoglycemic effects. This is a double-blind, randomized and crossover clinical trial. Patients (n = 20) were included in a run-in period of 8 weeks in which an isocaloric diet was prescribed. If they did not achieve the treatment goals (n = 15), they received glyburide, metformin or combined treatment for 10 weeks each using three possible sequences. The dosage was adjusted to reach fasting plasma glucose (FPG) < 7.7 mmol/l. Treatment periods were separated by a 6-12 week washout period. At the beginning and the end of every treatment, insulin sensitivity and insulin secretion were measured by means of a minimal model and an oral glucose tolerance test. All treatment periods were completed by 12 cases. The glycemic goal was reached in 1 case during metformin, in 5 during glyburide and in 10 during the combination. The greatest reduction in HbA1c was achieved during the combination (HbA1c 11 +/- 1.6 vs 9.8 +/- 1.9 vs 9.0 +/- 2.1% for metformin, glyburide and the combination, p < 0.001). Increased insulin secretion was the explanation for the additive effects of the combination (percentual change in acute insulin response during the minimal model = 5.8 vs 51.5 vs 88.2% for metformin, glyburide and the combination, p < 0.05). No change in insulin sensitivity resulted from the treatments. In conclusion, the additive hypoglycemic effects of the combination glyburide/metformin was caused by increased insulin secretion.

Ciprofibrate versus gemfibrozil in the treatment of mixed hyperlipidemias: an open-label, multicenter study.

Mixed hyperlipidemia is a common risk factor for cardiovascular disease. The aim of this trial was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ciprofibrate versus gemfibrozil for the treatment of patients with mixed hyperlipidemia carefully selected for similar lipid profiles. A total of 68 patients who had mixed hyperlipidemia after following an isocaloric American Heart Association (AHA) phase I diet for 4 weeks were included. The plasma lipid levels at the inclusion were low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) > or = 130 mg/dL, cholesterol > or = 240 mg/dL, and triglycerides > or = 200 mg/dL. Patients were randomly assigned to receive ciprofibrate 100 mg/d or gemfibrozil 1,200 mg/d. At the end of the 8-week treatment period, efficacy and safety parameters were compared with baseline values. The primary efficacy parameters of the study were percentage changes in triglycerides and LDL-C from baseline. After 8 weeks, plasma triglyceride concentrations were decreased by 43.5% and 54% compared with baseline during ciprofibrate and gemfibrozil therapy, respectively (P <.001). High-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C) concentrations were increased 20.8% and 19.3% during ciprofibrate and gemfibrozil, respectively (P <.001). Apoprotein B, cholesterol, and very-low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (VLDL-C) concentrations were also improved by the study drugs (18.6%, 13.2%, and 30.9%, respectively, during ciprofibrate and 44%, 13.8%, and 14.4%, respectively, during gemfibrozil). Meanwhile, the effect of the drug was minimal on LDL-C. A significant decrease in non-HDL-C resulted from both treatments (19% and 19.5%, respectively, P <.05). The only statistically significant difference observed between treatments was the effects on fibrinogen concentration, a coronary risk factor. Ciprofibrate significantly decreased its concentration by 18.8%, fibrinogen was slightly increased during gemfibrozil treatment. No patient had a significant modification on any of the safety tests. In summary, ciprofibrate and gemfibrozil are well-tolerated and efficacious treatments for mixed hyperlipidemia. Significant reductions in triglycerides, non-HDL-C, and apolipoprotein B were achieved with both drugs. A significant fibrinogen reduction was obtained with ciprofibrate.

Efficacy and safety of atorvastatin in hyperlipidemic, type 2 diabetic patients. A 34-week, multicenter, open-label study.

Hyperlipidemia is common in type 2 diabetic patients and is an independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease. The aim of this trial was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of once-daily atorvastatin 10-80 mg for the treatment of hyperlipidemia in type 2 diabetics with plasma low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels exceeding 3.4 mmol/l (130 mg/dl). One hundred and two patients met the study criteria and received 10 mg/day atorvastatin. Patients who reached the target LDL-C level of