Evaluation of risk factors in the development of type 2 diabetes in a Mexican population.

Type 2 diabetes (T2D), which causes many adverse effects such as endothelial dysfunction and cardiovascular disease, affects approximately 425 million people worldwide. However, about half have not yet been diagnosed. For what is recommended the use of screening tools to identify individuals at risk for T2D or in the early stages of the disease in order to impement preventive strategies or early treatment. According to a widely used survey, the FINDRISC scale, a hereditary family history of T2D (FH-T2D) is as important a risk factor as having had high glucose levels. The aim of the present study was to carry out non-probabilistic sampling in a Mexican population to evaluate key factors in the development of diabetes. The participants were divided into three groups: with and without FH-T2D and diagnosed with T2D. A comparison of the groups with and without FH-T2D revealed higher values in the former for body mass index (BMI: 24.5 vs 21.9 kg/m2), glycosylated hemoglobin [Hb1Ac: 5.775% (39 mmol/mol) vs 4.825% (29 mmol/mol)] and triglycerides (164.18 vs 68.12 mg/dL), and a lower value for the BH4/BH2 index (0.7846 vs 1.6117). These results indicate significant metabolic alterations and endothelial dysfunction for the FH-T2D group. This strongly suggests the need to screen individuals with a family history of inherited T2D based on their level of HbA1c, triglycerides and BH4.

Circulating Adipokine Levels in Non-diabetic Subjects with High Normal Blood Pressure.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the levels of the adipokines, resistin and adiponectin in normotensive and high normal blood pressure patients. METHODS: Circulating levels of the adipokines, resistin and adiponectin were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA; R'D Systems, Minneapolis) in 20 high normal blood pressure patients and in 20 age-matched normotensive non-diabetic subjects. Statistical analysis was performed with analysis of variance (ANOVA). RESULTS: The control group showed non-significantly decreased levels of resistin when compared with patients with high normal blood pressure [systolic 130-139 mmHg; diastolic 85-89 mmHg] (12.25 vs 14.38 pg/mL, p = 0.40). There were significantly higher levels of adiponectin in the control group when compared with high normal blood pressure patients (11.3 vs 7.51 µg/mL, p = 0.028). CONCLUSIONS: High normal blood pressure patients have increased levels of resistin and lower values of adiponectin when compared with age-matched non-diabetic normotensive subjects. This may explain why those patients showed more progression to hypertension, atherosclerosis and cardiovascular risk than normotensive subjects.

Efficacy of Change to New P2Y12 Receptor Antagonists in Patients High on Treatment Platelet Reactivity Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

Selective intensification of platelet inhibition may improve high on treatment platelet reactivity (HPR). We evaluated the efficacy of dual-antiplatelet therapy, including clopidogrel (CPG), compared to new P2Y12-receptor antagonists in patients with HPR undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, regarding the outcome of composite major adverse cardiac events (MACEs, including death, acute coronary syndrome [ACS], and stent restenosis). The presence of HPR (71 of 181 patients) almost doubled the risk of MACEs. The new antiplatelet agent reduced MACEs (45.8%, 26%, and 16.7% for CPG, prasugrel, and ticagrelor [TGL]; RR 0.36; 0.13-0.98, P = .03, TGL), specifically in patients with ACS. Failure to reduce HPR after the antiplatelet change and diabetes were independent predictors for MACEs. The HPR was early and effectively reduced after changing the antiplatelet therapy, but the intensity of this reduction did not significantly decrease the risk of MACEs. These findings support the benefit of HPR-guided intensification of platelet inhibition. Whether the intensity of this reduction improves the patient's clinical outcomes deserves further investigation.

Comparison between isosorbide dinitrate in aerosol and in tablets for the treatment of hypertensive emergencies.

Sixty patients with a hypertensive emergency (mean arterial pressure >130 mm Hg and evidence of target organ damage) were randomly divided into two groups of 30 patients each. Group A received 1.25 mg of isosorbide dinitrate aerosol upon arrival and a second dose 15 minutes later when the mean arterial pressure reduction was < 15%. Group B received a single 5 mg tablet of sublingual isosorbide dinitrate. Electrocardiography was performed in both groups prior to and 30 minutes after the medication. Blood pressure was monitored for 6 hours. Blood pressure in Group A patients decreased in an average time of 10 minutes from 191 +/- 12/122.3 +/- 5 to 151.5 +/- 9.2/93 +/- 4 mm Hg, p < 0.005. Mean arterial pressure decreased by 22.8%: 145 +/- 7 to 112 +/- 7.5 mm Hg, p < 0.005. No adverse effects occurred. Five patients in Group B did not respond; in the rest of the group blood pressure decreased 45 minutes after receiving the medication from 194 +/- 8/125 +/- 5.5 to 160 +/- 11/98 +/- 6 mm Hg; p < 0.005. Mean arterial pressure decreased by 20.1%: 148.3 +/- 12 to 118.6 +/- 9 mm Hg, p < 0.002; ten patients suffered headache. Three patients in Group A had a subepicardial lesion in the first electrocardiograph, which disappeared with the use of the aerosol. In Group B, electrocardiography results were normal. These results seem to indicate that isosorbide dinitrate aerosol is better than tablets for the treatment of patients with a hypertensive emergencies.

[Management of hypertension emergencies in elderly patients with isosorbide dinitrate aerosol]. / Manejo de las emergenecias hipertensivas en el anciano con dinitrato de isosorbide en nebulizador.

In this clinical trial, we assessed the effectiveness and safety of isosorbide dinitrate spray administered through the oral mucosa in 20 elderly patients (> 60 years old) with a hypertensive emergency (mean arterial pressure > 140 mmHg and target-organ damage). The patents were given a first dose of 1.25 mg of spray when they were admitted; a second dose was administered 15 min. later if the mean arterial pressure had not decreased by > 15%. An electrocardiogram (ECG) was done on every patient immediately prior and 30 min. after administering the medication. Three patients (15%) had a good response with one dose while 17 patients (85%) required a second dose. Thirty patients had a significant reduction in arterial blood pressure (193 +/- 91,123 +/- 5.4 to 154 + 7.1/92.5 + 6.2 mmHg p < 0.005) as well as of the mean arterial pressure (146.8 +/- B to 113 +/- 5 mmHg 23%, p < 0.005 > in a period of 30 min. No adverse effects, rebound hypertension nor severe hypotension were observed. These figures remained under control for 3 h. Both ECG, were normal. A reduction of 13.5% heart rate was obtained (p < 0.005). Our observations suggest that isosorbide dinitrate aerosol is an effective and safe alternative for the treatment of elderly patients with hypertensive emergencies.

Comparison between isosorbide dinitrate in aerosol and in tablet form for the treatment of hypertensive emergencies in the elderly.

BACKGROUND: Isosorbide dinitrate in spray form is an effective and safe option for the treatment of hypertensive emergencies. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether isosorbide dinitrate spray is as effective and safe as treatment in tablet form for the management of hypertensive emergencies in the elderly. METHODS: Forty patients with hypertensive emergencies were randomly divided into two groups of 20 patients each. Group A received 1.25 mg isosorbide dinitrate aerosol upon arrival and a second dose 15 min later when mean systemic arterial pressure (MAP) reduction was <15% . Group B patients received a single 5 mg tablet of sublingual isosorbide dinitrate. RESULTS: Blood pressure in Group A patients decreased from 193 +/- 13/123 +/- 6.6 mmHg to 154 +/- 15/92.5 +/- 7.6 mmHg (p < 0.005), the reduction beginning 10 min after drug administration; no adverse effects were found. Two patients in Group B did not respond but for the other patients in this group blood pressure decreased from 197 +/- 10/121 +/- 7 to 154 +/- 11/90 +/- 4 mmHg, (p < 0.005), the reduction beginning 45 min after receiving the medication; 8 patients suffered headache. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that isosorbide dinitrate aerosol is more effective than tablets for the treatment of elderly patients with hypertensive emergencies.

Comparison between isosorbide dinitrate aerosol and nifedipine in the treatment of hypertensive emergencies.

BACKGROUND: Nitric oxide donors have been used in the management of hypertensive emergencies (HE). Isosorbide dinitrate aerosol (ISA) is a nitric oxide fast-acting donor. The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of ISA and nifedipine in the treatment of HE. METHODS: Sixty adult patients with an HE were randomised to receive either ISA (2.5 mg) or nifedipine (10 mg). Patients were given an electrocardiogram (ECG) immediately prior, and 30 min after administering the medication. Blood pressure (BP) was measured every 5 min for the first 30 min, and then every 30 min for a period of 6 h. RESULTS: Blood pressure values for all patients in the ISA group decreased significantly (187 +/- 13/121 +/- 6 to 153 +/- 15/92.3 +/- 7.6 mmHg, P < 0.005). Two of the patients in this group had angor pectoris with evidence of subepicardial ischaemia as seen in the first ECG, both of which disappeared with the drug. Heart rate decreased by 14%. Similarly, all patients in the nifedipine group had significant decreases in BP (190 +/- 23/115 +/- 7 to 153 +/- 26/86 +/- 6 mm Hg, P < 0.005). Their first ECG was normal. Two patients suffered angor pectoris after nifedipine, with subepicardial ischaemia registering in the second ECG. Heart rate increased 11.9% in this group. During the follow-up period, no clinically significant side effects or cases of rebound hypertension were observed in the ISA group, whereas in the nifedipine group, eight patients reported having headaches and four others rebound hypertension. CONCLUSION: Our results show a favourable effect of ISA in the treatment of HE.

Isosorbide aerosol: an option for the treatment of hypertensive crises.

In this study the authors assessed the effectiveness and safety of isosorbide dinitrate aerosol administered through the oral mucosa in 30 adult patients who presented with a hypertensive crisis (mean arterial pressure > 130 mm Hg and evidence of target organ damage). The patients were given a first dose of 1.25 mg of aerosol when they were admitted to the hospital; a second dose was administered 15 minutes later if the mean arterial pressure had not decreased by > 15%. An electrocardiogram (ECG) was obtained for every patient immediately prior to and 30 minutes after administration of the medication. Nine patients (30%) had a good response with one dose, whereas 21 patients (70%) required a second dose. All 30 patients had a significant reduction of the arterial blood pressure (187+/-13 / 121+/-6.6 to 153+/-15.3 / 92.3+/-7.6 mm Hg; p<0.005) as well as of the mean arterial pressure (136.6+/-8 to 109.5+/-7 mm Hg; p<0.005) in a period of 30 minutes. No adverse effects, rebound hypertension, or severe hypotension were observed. These figures remained under control for 6 hours. Two of the patients had angina pectoris at admission and their ECG showed subepicardial ischemia, both of which disappeared with the medication. A second ECG appeared normal. A reduction of 14% in heart rate was obtained (95+/-15 to 82+/-14 beats per minute; p<0.005). These observations suggest that isosorbide dinitrate aerosol is an effective and safe alternative for the treatment of patients with hypertensive crises.

[Efficacy of isosorbide in aerosol form in the management of hypertensive crisis in severe preeclampsia]. / Eficacia del isosorbide en aerosol en el manejo de la crisis hipertensiva de la preeclampsia severa.

In this assay, we evaluated the utility of isosorbide given by a sprayer in the management of hypertensive crisis of severe preeclampsia. 36 pregnant women with severe preeclampsia received fluid therapy and were randomly dividend in two groups of 18 patients each. Group A, received isosorbide in spray 1.25 mg when admitted and a second dose 10 minutes after if mean arterial blood pressure decreased less than 15%. and group B, in whom 4 g of magnesium sulphate was infused in one hour and then 1 g each hour for a maximum of five hours. In all patients blood pressure, proteinuria, fetal and maternal heart rate and Apgar score at minute and five minutes were obtained. In Group A 13 patients had a significative blood pressure reduction with one application and 5 needed a second one (p < 0.002). fetal (p < 0.005), and maternal (p < 0.005) heart rate also had a significative reduction. Whereas three patients in Group B did not respond and the rest had a poor blood pressure control (p > 0.05) with no changes in fetal and maternal heart rate. No patient developed eclampsia. When compared both groups, there were a significative difference for blood pressure (p < 0.005), fetal heart rate (p < 0.002), maternal heart rate (p < 0.05) and Apgar at minute (p < 0.01) in isosorbide's group. Our data suggest that isosorbide given by a sprayer is effective and safer in the management of the hypertensive crisis of severe preeclampsia.