Evaluation of an Elective Induction Protocol at a Regional Tertiary Obstetric Care Center

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety of elective induction at or beyond 39 weeks gestation in the setting of a regional tertiary obstetric care center.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective cohort feasibility study of low-risk pregnant women who delivered at a regional tertiary obstetric care center. We compared maternal and neonatal outcomes of low risk pregnant women who opted for elective induction at or beyond 39 weeks gestation (n = 112) to a comparison group who opted for expectant management (n = 116). All deliveries occurred between May 1, 2019 and November 30, 2019 and February 15, 2020 and August 15, 2020.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in the rates of cesarean deliveries or hypertensive disorders between women who underwent elective induction and those who chose expectant management. There were also no differences in neonatal outcomes. Women in the elective induction group received significantly more cervical ripening agents (p < 0.0001) and had significantly longer stays on the antepartum (p < 0.0001) and labor and delivery units (p = 0.0015) but experienced significantly shorter stays on the postpartum unit (p = 0.0368). There was no difference in total length of hospital stay between groups.

CONCLUSION

Elective induction protocols can be safely implemented in our regional tertiary obstetric care center without increased risk of maternal complications or neonatal morbidity. Women considering elective induction should be adequately counseled on use of cervical ripening agents and length of stay on antepartum and labor and delivery units.

The good and the bad: what researchers have learned about dietary cholesterol, lipid management and cardiovascular disease risk since the Harvard Egg Study

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of cardiovascular diseases, while lower than it once was, remains a significant health consideration.

AIMS AND METHODS

To review the evolving evidence with respect to what role various factors play in the aetiology of coronary heart disease (CHD).

RESULTS

While total cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) were previously believed to play central roles, it has now become clear that neither in isolation is highly significant. For example, some people with very high LDL-C levels do not develop CHD, while others with very low LDL-C levels do. Furthermore, there is a difference between dietary cholesterol and serum cholesterol. Dietary cholesterol, which is found in animal-based foods, raises blood cholesterol in only approximately one-third of people. Conversely, intake of saturated fatty acids and trans fatty acids can result in dyslipidaemia. Furthermore, obesity--particularly abdominal obesity--and metabolic syndrome both are strong independent risk factors for development of cardiovascular disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Statin therapy and a diet comprising a portfolio of plant sterols and viscous fibres can both significantly reduce LDL-C levels and C-reactive protein. The latter is a key marker of inflammation and of elevated risk for cardiovascular disease.

Efficacy of ezetimibe/simvastatin 10/20 and 10/40 mg compared with atorvastatin 20 mg in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

AIM

This randomized, double-blind study evaluated the efficacy of switching from atorvastatin (ATV) 10 mg to ezetimibe/simvastatin (EZE/SIMVA) 10/20 mg, EZE/SIMVA 10/40 mg or doubling the dose of ATV from 10 to 20 mg in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

METHODS

Eligible patients had haemoglobin A(1C)< or =10%, were aged > or =18 years and were on ATV 10 mg for > or =6 weeks before study entry. After a 4-week open-label ATV 10 mg run-in, patients were randomized to EZE/SIMVA 10/20 mg (n = 220), EZE/SIMVA 10/40 mg (n = 222) or ATV 20 g (n = 219) daily for 6 weeks.

RESULTS

Greater (p < or = 0.001) reductions in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) (the primary end-point) were achieved by switching to EZE/SIMVA 10/20 mg (26.2%) or 10/40 mg (30.1%) than by doubling the dose of ATV to 20 mg (8.5%). EZE/SIMVA 10/20 mg and 10/40 mg produced greater (p < or = 0.001) reductions in total cholesterol, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and apolipoprotein B relative to ATV 20 mg. A reduction (p < or = 0.050) in C-reactive protein was observed with EZE/SIMVA 10/40 mg vs. ATV 20 mg. Similar reductions in triglycerides were observed across the three groups, and none of the treatments produced a significant change in HDL-C. A greater (p < or = 0.001) proportion of patients achieved LDL-C <2.5 mmol/l with EZE/SIMVA 10/20 mg (90.5%) and 10/40 mg (87.0%) than with ATV 20 mg (70.4%). Both EZE/SIMVA doses were generally well tolerated, with an overall safety profile similar to ATV 20 mg.

CONCLUSIONS

EZE/SIMVA 10/20 and 10/40 mg provided greater lipid-altering efficacy than doubling the dose of ATV from 10 to 20 mg and were well tolerated in patients with T2D.

Six-month results of small vessel stenting (2.0-2.8 mm) with the Biodivysio SV stent

We report the 6-month follow-up results of our initial retrospective experience with the Biodivysio small vessel (SV) stent (Biocompatibles, Galway, United Kingdom) designed for 2.0-2.8 mm vessel diameters. This stent is manufactured with a smaller stainless-steel tube (1.0 mm) and is coated with phosphorylcholine. Procedural success was 95.7% and the major adverse cardiac events at 6 months were 20%. We conclude that the Biodivysio SV stent is a safe device that does not induce excessive acute thrombosis or early restenosis.