[Recommendations for nutritional assessment and specialized nutritional support of critically ill patients]. / Recomendaciones para la valoración nutricional y el soporte nutricional especializado de los pacientes críticos.

Due to the characteristics of critically ill patients, elaborating recommendations on nutritional support for these patients is difficult. Usually the time of onset of nutritional support or its features are not well established, so that its application is based on experts' opinion. In the present document, recommendations formulated by the Metabolism and Nutrition Working Group of the Spanish Society of Intensive and Critical Medicine and Coronary Units (SEMICYUC) are presented. Recommendations are based on the literature analysis and further discussion by the working group members in order to define, consensually, the more relevant issues of metabolic and nutritional support of patients in a critical condition. Several clinical situations have been considered which are developed in the following articles of this publication. The present recommendations aim at providing a guideline for the less experienced clinicians when considering the metabolic and nutritional issues of critically ill patients.

Recomendaciones para la valoración nutricional y el soporte nutricional especializado de los pacientes críticos / Recommendations for nutritional assessment and specialized nutritional support of critically ill patients

Debido a las características de los pacientes críticos, la elaboración de recomendaciones sobre el soporte nutricional en estos pacientes es difícil. En muchas ocasiones no está claramente establecido el momento de inicio del soporte nutricional ni las características del mismo, por lo que su aplicación está basada en opiniones de expertos. En el presente documento se presentan las recomendaciones elaboradas por el Grupo de Trabajo de Metabolismo y Nutrición de la sociedad Española de Medicina Intensiva, Crítica y Unidades Coronarias (SEMICYUC). Las recomendaciones están basadas en el análisis de la literatura y en la posterior discusión entre los miembros del grupo de trabajo para definir, mediante consenso, los aspectos más relevantes del soporte metabólico y nutricional de los pacientes en situación crítica. Se han considerado diferentes situaciones clínicas, que se desarrollan en los artículos siguientes de esta publicación. Las presentes recomendaciones pretenden servir de guía para los clínicos con menor experiencia en la consideración de los aspectos metabólicos y nutricionales de los pacientes críticos (AU)

Due to the characteristics of critically ill patients, elaborating recommendations on nutritional support for these patients is difficult. Usually the time of onset of nutritional support or its features are not well established, so that its application is based on experts' opinion. In the present document, recommendations formulated by the Metabolism and Nutrition Working Group of the Spanish Society of Intensive and Critical Medicine and Coronary Units (SEMICYUC) are presented. Recommendations are based on the literature analysis and further discussion by the working group members in order to define, consensually, the more relevant issues of metabolic and nutritional support of patients in a critical condition. Several clinical situations have been considered which are developed in the following articles of this publication. The present recommendations aim at providing a guideline for the less experienced clinicians when considering the metabolic and nutritional issues of critically ill patients (AU)

[Meta-analysis in urological clinical research]. / Metaanálisis en investigación clínica en urología.

A systematic review is characterized by the application of the scientific method to the evaluation of scientific literature. When a systematic review uses statistical techniques to combine and summarize the results from previous studies, it is called meta-analysis. Meta-analysis is a working tool that facilitates the realization of systematic and quantitative reviews. Its greater objectivity and rigour in comparison with the traditional reviews make that meta-analysis techniques are little by little being generalized as standard instrument to evaluate scientific evidence. In this article we detail the objectives and applications of this type of studies, as well as the stages in its preparation, including the presentation of results.

Metaanálisis en investigación clínica en urología / Meta-analysis in clinical research in urology

Una revisión sistemática se caracteriza por la aplicación del método científico a la evaluación de la literatura científica. Cuando una revisión sistemática utiliza técnicas estadísticas para combinar y resumir los resultados de estudios previos, recibe el nombre de metaanálisis. El meta-análisis es una herramienta de trabajo que facilita la realización de revisiones sistemáticas y cuantitativas. Su mayor objetividad y rigor con respecto a las revisiones tradicionales hacen que poco a poco las técnicas de meta-análisis se generalicen como instrumento estándar para evaluar la evidencia científica. En este artículo se detallan los objetivos y aplicaciones de este tipo de estudios, así como las etapas en su elaboración, incluyendo la presentación de resultados. (AU)

[Control of blood pressure in diabetic patients in primary care setting. DIAPA study]. / Control de la presión arterial de los pacientes diabéticos en el ámbito de atención primaria. Estudio DIAPA.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the blood pressure (BP) control in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) treated in primary care (PC) and to establish the factors associated with a suboptimal control of BP. PATIENTS AND METHOD: This was a multicenter, transverse study. Ninety investigators included 875 patients with DM (57.8% women), with a mean (SD) age of 64 (11.8) years. BP was measured according to the Sixth Report of Joint National Committee (JNC-VI) and Word Health Organization/International Society Hypertension (WHO/ISH) recommendations, calculating the arithmetic mean of three consecutive measurements. Patients with a previous established diagnosis were considered to be hypertensive, and an optimal control was considered when BP values were lower than 130/85 mmHg. RESULTS: 66.7% (n = 583) patients with DM were previously diagnosed of hypertension (HT); 86.3% (CI 95%: 83.0-89.1) of those with type 2 DM and 87.8% (CI95%: 70.9-96.0) of those with type 1 DM did not have an optimal control of BP at the visit (BP >= 130 and/or 85 mmHg). 56.8% (CI 95%: 50.1-63.3) of those with type 2 DM and 23.8% (CI 95%: 12.6-39.8) of those with type 1 DM with unknown HT had a BP >= 130 and/or 85 mmHg at the visit. The median of antihypertensive drugs used was 1 (1-2). In a multivariate analysis, age, higher body mass index (BMI), higher cholesterol levels and uric acid were associated with a worse BP control (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In our study, 66.7% of patients with DM attended in PC had known HT and only 13.6% had an optimal BP control. Diabetic patients with HT were undertreated, with a median of one antihypertensive drug.

Control de la presión arterial de los pacientes diabéticos en el ámbito de atención primaria. Estudio DIAPA / Control of blood pressure in diabetic patients in primary care setting. DIAPA study

FUNDAMENTO Y OBJETIVO: Conocer el control de la presión arterial (PA) en pacientes con diabetes mellitus (DM) visitados en atención primaria (AP), y determinar los factores asociados a un control subóptimo de la PA. PACIENTES Y MÉTODO: Estudio transversal y multicéntrico. Noventa investigadores incluyeron a 875 pacientes con DM (57,8 por ciento mujeres), con edad media (DE) de 64 (11,8) años. La PA se midió según las recomendaciones del Sexto Informe del Joint National Committee (JNC-VI) y de la Organización Mundial de la Salud/Sociedad Internacional de Hipertensión (OMS/ISH), calculándose la media aritmética de tres tomas sucesivas. Se consideró hipertensos a los pacientes con diagnóstico previo establecido, y control óptimo a los valores de PA inferiores a 130/85 mmHg. RESULTADOS: El 66,7 por ciento (n = 583) de los pacientes con DM estaban previamente diagnosticados de hipertensión arterial (HTA); de éstos, el 86,3 por ciento (intervalo de confianza [IC] del 95 por ciento, 83,089,1) de los pacientes con DM tipo 2 y el 87,8 por ciento (IC del 95 por ciento, 70,9-96,0) de los pacientes con DM tipo 1 no tenían un control óptimo de la PA en la visita (PA mayor o igual de 130 y/o 85 mmHg). El 56,8 por ciento (IC del 95 por ciento, 50,1-63,3) de los enfermos con DM tipo 2 y el 23,8 por ciento (IC del 95 por ciento, 12,6-39,8) de los enfermos con DM tipo 1 sin HTA conocida tenían una PA igual o superior a 130 y/o 85 mmHg en la visita. La mediana de fármacos antihipertensivos utilizados fue de 1 (1-2). En el análisis multivariante, la edad, un mayor índice de masa corporal y los valores de colesterol y ácido úrico se asociaron a un peor control de la PA (p < 0,001). CONCLUSIONES: En nuestro estudio, el 66,7 por ciento de los pacientes con DM atendidos en AP eran hipertensos conocidos y sólo el 13,6 por ciento tenía un control óptimo de la PA. Los pacientes diabéticos con HTA estaban infratratados, con una mediana de un fármaco antihipertensivo (AU)

Molecular findings in familial Parkinson disease in Spain.

BACKGROUND: Several genetic errors in alpha-synuclein (Park1) and ubiquitin carboxyl-terminal-hydrolase L1(Park5) genes cause autosomal dominant familial Parkinson disease. Mutations in the parkin gene (Park2) are the major cause of autosomal recessive Parkinson disease. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the clinical and molecular data of 19 Spanish kindreds (13 with recessive, 4 with dominant, and 2 with uncertain inheritance) who have familial Parkinson disease. METHODS: We searched for the previously described mutations in Park1 and Park5 genes and for new or described mutations in Park2. We used single-strand conformation polymorphism, direct sequencing, and restriction digestion of polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-amplified genomic DNA for this study. RESULTS: None of these families have either Park1 or Park5 mutations. We found 5 different mutations in Park2 gene in 5 of the families with recessive inheritance. To our knowledge, 2 of these mutations, V56E and C212Y, have not been previously reported. The other mutations found (deletion of exons 3 and 5 and 225delA) have been described in other ethnic groups. Heterozygous carriers of a single Park2 mutation either were asymptomatic or developed clinical symptoms in late adulthood or after brief exposure to haloperidol therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Mutations in Park2 gene account for 38% of the families with recessive parkinsonism in Spain. We found 2 cases of simple heterozygous Park2 mutation carriers that developed clinical symptoms, either in late adulthood or after brief exposure to parkinsonizing agents. Thus, hereditary Parkinson disease has more variable clinical phenotype and molecular defects than previously thought since heterozygous mutations could be a risk factor for parkinsonism.