RESUMEN
Fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva (FOP) is a rare genetic disorder characterized by the gradual heterotopic ossification of soft tissues, leading to abnormal bone growth within muscles, tendons, and ligaments, due to a mutation in the ACVR1 gene. This specific case report highlights an unusual occurrence of FOP, emphasizing the diagnostic challenges and the importance of quick identification and appropriate intervention to mitigate its debilitating effects. The report also underscores the need for comprehensive genetic counseling and a multidisciplinary treatment approach, involving experts, such as orthopedic specialists, geneticists, and physical therapists, to improve the prognosis and overall well-being of those affected by FOP.
RESUMEN
This comprehensive narrative review delves into the intricate interplay between diet and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), shedding light on the potential impact of dietary interventions in disease management. By analyzing nutritional interventions, risks, challenges, and future perspectives, this review serves as a vital resource for clinicians, researchers, and patients alike. The amalgamation of evidence underscores the significance of customizing dietary strategies for individual patients, considering disease phenotype and cultural factors. Through an exploration of dietary components' effects on IBD, including exclusive enteral nutrition and omega-3 fatty acids, this review offers pragmatic implementation advice and outlines avenues for further research. Bridging the gap between research findings and clinical applications, the review facilitates informed decision-making and patient-centric care. In the face of escalating IBD prevalence, this review emerges as an indispensable guide for healthcare professionals, empowering them to navigate the complexities of dietary management while enabling patients to actively participate in their care trajectory. Ultimately, this narrative review advances the understanding of diet's pivotal role in IBD management, fostering a more integrated approach to patient care and paving the way for improved research and policy initiatives in the field of inflammatory bowel diseases.
RESUMEN
Renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RAS) inhibitors include angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors decrease proteinuria, progression of chronic kidney disease (CKD), and protect against heart failure hospitalizations and cardiovascular events. There is uncertainty about the appropriate time for discontinuing ARB and ACE inhibitor treatment in patients with low estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). In the present meta-analysis, we examined the effect of RAS inhibitor discontinuation on clinical outcomes in patients with advanced CKD compared to the continuation of RAS inhibitors. Two authors conducted electronic database searches in PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE) for relevant studies published from the inception of the databases to March 15th, 2023, using the following combination of keywords or key terms: "Renin-angiotensin-system," "angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors", "Angiotensin receptor blockers," and "advanced chronic kidney disease." Primary outcomes assessed in this meta-analysis included cardiovascular events. Secondary outcomes assessed included all-cause mortality and end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). A total of four studies were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled analysis showed that cardiovascular events were significantly higher in patients in the discontinuation group compared to the continuation group (HR: 1.38, 95% CI: 1.21-1.58), ESKD was also significantly higher in the discontinuation group (HR: 1.29, 95% CI: 1.18-1.41). No significant differences were reported between the two groups in all-cause mortality. In conclusion, our meta-analysis provides evidence that continuation of RAS inhibitors could be beneficial in patients with advanced CKD, as it is associated with less risk of cardiovascular events and ESKD.
RESUMEN
This meta-analysis has been conducted to compare the clinical outcomes between culture-positive and culture-negative sepsis or septic patients. The present meta-analysis is reported as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Electronic databases, including PubMed and EMBASE, were searched by two authors independently from the inception to January 25, 2023, using the following key terms: "culture positive," "culture negative," "sepsis," and "septic shock." The primary outcome assessed in the present meta-analysis was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included the need for mechanical ventilation, renal replacement therapy, length of ICU stay in days, and length of hospital stay in days. Total 10 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis involving 23,973 patients. No statistically significant difference was found between culture-positive and culture-negative patients in terms of all-cause mortality (risk ratio [RR]: 1.09, 95% CI: 0.95-1.24, p-value: 0.23), the need for mechanical ventilation (RR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.93-1.05, p-value: 0.79), renal replacement therapy requirements (RR: 1.11, 95% CI: 0.95-1.31, p-value: 0.19), and ICU length of stay (mean difference [MD]: 1.70 days, 95% CI: -1.10, 4.49, p-value: 0.23). However, The mean hospital length of stay in days was significantly longer in patients in a culture-positive group compared to the culture-negative group (MD: 3.04, 95% CI: 2.25-3.82, p-value<0.001). In conclusion, the present meta-analysis of 10 studies, including 23,973 patients, found no significant differences in all-cause mortality, need for mechanical ventilation, need for renal replacement therapy, and length of ICU stay between culture-positive and culture-negative sepsis or septic patients. However, a significant difference was found in hospital length of stay, with culture-positive patients having a longer stay.
