Detailed information on selected risk factors was obtained from d

Detailed information on selected risk factors was obtained from direct measurement (Body Mass Index (BMI)), self-complete questionnaires (excessive use of hands, previous hand injury) and

medical record review (hypertension, dyslipidaemia, type 2 diabetes). Hand pain and disability were self-reported at baseline and 3-year follow-up using Australian/Canadian Osteoarthritis Hand Index (AUSCAN).

Results: Crude population prevalence estimates for symptomatic hand OA subsets in the adult population aged 50 years and over were: thumb base OA (22.4%), nodal interphalangeal joint (IPJ) OA (15.5%), generalised hand OA (10.4%), non-nodal IPJ OA (4.9%), erosive OA (1.0%). Apart from thumb base OA, there was considerable overlap between the subsets. Erosive OA appeared

the BMS-345541 cell line most distinctive with the highest female: male ratio, and the most disability at baseline and 3-years. A higher frequency of obesity, hypertension, dyslipidaemia, and metabolic syndrome was observed in this subset.

Conclusion: Overlap in the occurrence of hand OA subsets poses conceptual and practical challenges to the pursuit of distinct phenotypes. Erosive OA may nevertheless provide particular insight into the role Selleck YM155 of metabolic and cardiovascular risk factors in the pathogenesis of OA. (C) 2013 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of Osteoarthritis Research Society International.”
“Purpose: To evaluate a real-time myocardial contrast echocardiography (MCE) as a tool to select candidates for coronary revascularization among patients buy C59 Wnt with ESRD and to assess the rate of revascularization and


Material/Methods: 58 ESRD patients were screened for CAD using MCE. We analyzed the rate of coronary revascularization during 3-year follow-up. Patients with and without perfusion disturbances on MCE were compared.

Results: CAD was found in 46.2% patients out of 39 who underwent coronary angiography. 11 (39.3%) patients out of 28 from the group with perfusion defects on MCE underwent revascularization procedure (21.4% – PCI, 17.9% – CABG). No one from the group without perfusion defects had revascularization procedure. Perfusion defect (OR 1.37 CI 1.37-1.86, p=0.022) was related to revascularization in multivariant analysis (OR 12.87, CI 1.86-89.21, p=0.025). There was no difference in mortality between the group which underwent invasive procedures and treated conservatively (p=0.6643). In ROC analysis defects on MCE and CAD on angiography were equally good in anticipating combined end-point (AUC 0.716, CI 95% 0.544-0.851 and AUC 0.747, CI 95% 0.577-0.875, p=0.701) and death (AUC 0.752, CI 95% 0.582-0.878 and AUC 0.729, CI 95% 0.558-0.861, p=0.805).

Conclusions: Our results indicate that MCE is a safe and uncomplicated method which may help along with other methods to select candidates for coronary revascularization among ESRD patients.

Comments are closed.