Glycemic and lipid control in patients with diabetes at time of myocardial infarction.

OBJECTIVE: Cardiovascular risk is increased in patients with diabetes. Little is known about glycemic and lipid control in patients with diabetes. We aimed to assess glycemic and lipid controls in patients with diabetes at time of their myocardial infarction. METHOD: All known patients with type 2 diabetes consecutively admitted for a myocardial infarction in our coronary care unit between March 1st and December 31st, 2021 were included in this retrospective study. Glycemic and lipid control was assessed through individualized target of glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-c), respectively. At admission, the comprehensive list of chronic medications was obtained through medication reconciliation. RESULTS: This study included 112 patients with a median age of 72 years. Most of patients had an individualized target of HbA1c and LDL-c of 7.0% (67%) and 0.55g/L (96%), respectively. The rate of uncontrolled patients for HbA1c and LDL-c and both was 46%, 90%, and 42% respectively. The rate of patients with non-optimal glucose- and lipid-lowering medications in uncontrolled patients was 63% and 87%, respectively. The rate of inappropriate glucose- and lipid-lowering medications was 73% and 91%, respectively. CONCLUSION: We highlighted the poor glycemic and lipid control in high-risk CV patients. There is an urgent need to develop multidisciplinary approaches to optimize CV risk factors control to reduce myocardial infarction and strokes.

Efficiency and effectiveness of intensive multidisciplinary follow-up of patients with stroke/TIA or myocardial infarction compared to usual monitoring: protocol of a pragmatic randomised clinical trial. DiVa (Dijon vascular) study.

INTRODUCTION: The ongoing ageing population is associated with an increase in the number of patients suffering a stroke, transient ischaemic attack (TIA) or myocardial infarction (MI). In these patients, implementing secondary prevention is a critical challenge and new strategies need to be developed to close the gap between clinical practice and evidence-based recommendations. We describe the protocol of a randomised clinical trial that aims to evaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of an intensive multidisciplinary follow-up of patients compared with standard care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The DiVa study is a randomised, prospective, controlled, multicentre trial including patients >18 years old with a first or recurrent stroke (ischaemic or haemorrhagic) or TIA, or a type I or II MI, managed in one of the participating hospitals of the study area, with a survival expectancy >12 months. Patients will be randomised with an allocation ratio of 1:1 in two parallel groups: one group assigned to a multidisciplinary, nurse-based and pharmacist-based 2-year follow-up in association with general practitioners, neurologists and cardiologists versus one group with usual follow-up. In each group for each disease (stroke/TIA or MI), 430 patients will be enrolled (total of 1720 patients) over 3 years. The primary outcome will be the incremental cost-utility ratio at 24 months between intensive and standard follow-up in a society perspective. Secondary outcomes will include the incremental cost-utility ratio at 6 and 12 months, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio at 24 months, reduction at 6, 12 and 24 months of the rates of death, unscheduled rehospitalisation and iatrogenic complications, changes in quality of life, net budgetary impact at 5 years of the intensive follow-up on the national health insurance perspective and analysis of factors having positive or negative effects on the implementation of the project in the study area. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained and all patients receive information about the study and give their consent to participate before randomisation. Results of the main trial and each of the secondary analyses will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04188457. Registered on 6 December 2019.

Assessment of Prescriptions in Elderly Patients Hospitalized in Medicine Departments.

Drug-related iatrogenesis is an important issue in the elderly population, and preventing iatrogenic accidents helps to reduce hospitalizations. Our study's objective was to evaluate prescriptions in the geriatric population of our establishment. The study conducted is a targeted clinical audit. Ten criteria were tested on the hospital prescriptions of people over 75 years old in 11 medical departments, before and after improvement actions. The non-compliance threshold was set at 10% of prescriptions for each criterion. In each phase, 165 patients were included. Four criteria were non-compliant (NC) in the first phase: the presence of Potentially Inappropriate Medications for the Elderly (PIMs) (NC = 57.6%), the adaptation of the medication to renal clearance (NC = 24.9%), the presence of illogical combination (NC = 9.7%), and the total anti-cholinergic score of the prescription (NC = 12.1%). After the implementation of improvement actions, the number of non-compliant criteria decreased between the two phases, from four to two. We obtained a significant improvement for three of the four criteria found to be non-compliant in the first phase. The criterion adaptation to renal function is close to compliance (NC = 10.1%) and the PIMs criterion remained non-compliant after reassessment (NC = 32.1%). Vigilance must be ongoing in order to limit drug iatrogeny, particularly in frail elderly patients.

Changes in Treatment of Very Elderly Patients Six Weeks after Discharge from Geriatrics Department.

We assessed the prescriptions of patients hospitalized in a geriatric unit and subsequently discharged. This prospective and observational study was conducted over a two-month period in the geriatrics department (acute and rehabilitation units) of a university hospital. Patients discharged from this department were included over a two-month period. Prescriptions were analyzed at admission and discharge from the geriatrics department (DGD), and six weeks after DGD. We included 209 patients, 63% female, aged 86.8 years. The mean number of medications prescribed was significantly higher at DGD than at admission (7.8 vs. 7.1, p = 0.003). During hospitalization, 1217 prescriptions were changed (average 5.8 medications/patient): 52.8% were initiations, 39.3% were discontinuations, and 7.9% were dose adjustments. A total of 156 of the 209 patients initially enrolled completed the study. Among these patients, 81 (51.9%) had the same prescriptions six weeks after DGD. In univariate analysis, medications were changed more frequently in patients with cognitive impairment (p = 0.04) and in patients for whom the hospital report did not indicate in-hospital modifications (p = 0.007). Multivariate analysis found that six weeks after DGD, there were significantly more drug changes for patients for whom there were changes in prescription during hospitalization (p < 0.001). A total of 169 medications were changed (mean number of medications changed per patient: 1.1): 52.7% discontinuations, 34.3% initiations, and 13% dosage modifications. The drug regimens were often changed during hospitalization in the geriatrics department, and a majority of these changes were maintained six weeks after DGD. Improvements in patient adherence and hospital-general practitioner communication are necessary to promote continuity of care and to optimize patient supervision after hospital discharge.

Accuracy in obtaining 100 µg from 10 mg of morphine for spinal anesthesia.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Dilution is often required to obtain appropriate concentrations of intrathecal morphine for analgesia. We compared techniques of diluting by measuring the quantity of morphine actually obtained in the final solution. DESIGN: This is an experimental study by 3 experienced anesthesiologists. SETTING: The setting is at a university teaching hospital. PATIENTS: There are no patients. INTERVENTIONS: There are no interventions. MEASUREMENTS: Five techniques for obtaining 100 µg from 10 mg/mL were compared: technique 1 (T1) = extraction up to 0.1 graduation on a 1-mL syringe, followed by simple dilution (SD). Technique 2 (T2) = As for T1 but syringe was shaken to mix solution. Technique 3 (T3): SD with 10-mL syringe. Technique 4 (T4): Double dilution with 10-mL syringe. Technique 5 (T5): Extraction up to the 0.1 graduation of a 1-mL syringe, then SD, then shake solution by hand. Three tests using high-performance liquid chromatography with ultraviolet were performed on each syringe prepared 3 consecutive times, namely, at the first (beginning, B), fifth (middle, M) and last (end, E) milliliter or 0.1 mL (depending on syringe type). MAIN RESULTS: Average overall concentrations were 208 ±19, 199 ±24, 120 ±13, 136 ±9, and 119 ±16 µg/0.1 mL, T1-T5, respectively. By Kruskal-Wallis test, we classified the techniques according to the magnitude of the difference between the observed concentration of morphine and the desired (theoretical) concentration of 100 µg/0.1 mL. In ascending order, techniques ranked as follows: T5 (smallest difference), T3, T4, T2, and T1 (greatest difference) (P = .0001). CONCLUSIONS: There is significant variability in the concentration of morphine actually contained in final solutions after dilution. Morphine presented in different premixed concentrations increases the risk of error. We advocate technique 5 as described above, whereas technique 1 should be prohibited.

Comparison of two transarterial chemoembolization strategies for hepatocellular carcinoma.

AIM: This retrospective study aimed to compare the efficacy of and tolerance to two center-related conventional transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) strategies in the management of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: All HCC patients in whom TACE was initiated in the two centers from June 2008 to July 2011 were included. The TACE strategy performed in center 1 was "on demand" with selective injections of idarubicin, whereas the TACE strategy in center 2 was based "on scheduled" non-selective injections of epirubicin. Toxicity was evaluated using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.0. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty HCC patients were included. Median time to treatment failure was significantly higher in center 1, 13.1 months vs. 7.9 months in center 2 (hazard ratio, 2.32; p<10-3 in multivariate analysis). Median overall survival was 21.1 months in center 1 vs. 18.4 months in center 2 (p=NS). The proportion of grade ≥ 3 adverse events and mean hospitalisation duration for the overall TACE treatment were significantly greater in center 2 than in center 1: 56% vs. 32% (p<0.01) and 14.2 ± 7.2 days vs. 10.3 ± 7.0 days (p<0.01), respectively. CONCLUSION: Our results failed to show any significant survival differences between two center-related TACE strategies but showed a significantly smaller proportion of grade ≥ 3 adverse events and shorter hospitalisation for the overall treatment when the "on-demand" strategy was used.