ABSTRACT
Preeclampsia is a pregnancy-specific condition characterized by gestational hypertension associated with proteinuria or organ dysfunction after 20 weeks of gestation. It complicates 2 to 8 % of pregnancies worldwide and represents the leading cause of maternal and fetal mortality in developed countries. The only definitive treatment remains termination of pregnancy and delivery of the placenta. Prompt assessment of maternal and fetal status should be held in search of severity criteria and adequate management of this condition according to gestational age. Foremost concerns for pregnant patients are impending eclampsia or placental abruption, while fetal complications arise from placental insufficiency and risks associated with premature pregnancy termination. The sole efficient prophylaxis of preeclampsia in current state of evidence is aspirin at a dosage of 160 mg per day in high risk patients. Preeclampsia is now recognized as a high-risk factor for cardiovascular, renal, and neurological diseases and should therefore be considered as an opportunity for screening and prevention.
La prééclampsie (PE) est un syndrome unique à la grossesse défini par une hypertension artérielle gravidique, associée à une protéinurie ou une atteinte d'organe après 20 semaines d'aménorrhée. Elle complique 2 à 8 % des grossesses à l'échelle mondiale, et représente la première cause de mortalité maternelle et fÅtale dans les pays industrialisés. Le seul traitement curatif demeure l'arrêt de la grossesse et la délivrance du placenta. Cette pathologie justifie une évaluation rapide de l'état maternel et fÅtal, afin de juger des critères de sévérité et d'orienter la prise en charge selon le terme de la grossesse. La menace maternelle est dominée par le risque de survenue d'une éclampsie ou d'un hématome rétroplacentaire alors que les complications fÅtales découlent de l'insuffisance placentaire et des risques inhérents à un arrêt prématuré de grossesse. Le seul traitement préventif actuellement validé en prévention secondaire chez les patientes à haut risque est l'aspirine à une dose de 160 mg par jour. La PE est désormais reconnue comme un facteur de risque cardiovasculaire, rénal et neurologique, et doit être considérée, de ce fait, comme une opportunité de dépistage et de prévention.
Subject(s)
Pre-Eclampsia , Humans , Pregnancy , Pre-Eclampsia/prevention & control , Pre-Eclampsia/diagnosis , Female , Risk FactorsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: In hemodialysis patients, monitoring 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) levels is recommended. It is however unclear if monitoring 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (1,25(OH)2D) levels is interesting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We repeatedly measured 1,25(OH)2D (DiaSorin Liaison analyser) and 25(OH)D (LCMS/MS) concentrations in patients newly treated by active or native vitamin D to study the impact of such treatments on serum concentrations. RESULTS: Ten patients were included in the native and 12 in the active vitamin D group. In the native group, a significant increase was observed between the baseline and the last 25(OH)D concentrations available (21.65[17.39;25.26] versus 33.49[28.60;40.30] ng/mL, p = 0.0059). The baseline and last available 1,25(OH)2D concentrations were not different (12.15[4.25;15.40] versus 11.35[9.72;21.85] pg/mL, p = 0.5566). In the active group, no difference was observed between the baseline and the last 25(OH)D concentrations (51.70[42.97;63.95] versus 50.89[42.02;64.49] ng/mL, p = 0.5186). The same observation was made for 1,25 (OH)2D concentrations (25.65[17.05;41.85] versus 28.70[23.36;43.73] pg/mL, p = 0.6221). Using a linear mixed model, a significant change over time was only observed in 25(OH)D serum levels for patients treated by with native vitamin D. CONCLUSION: Measuring 1,25(OH)2D levels in patients newly treated by active vitamin D does not seem useful in monitoring active vitamin D therapy.
Subject(s)
Cholecalciferol , Vitamin D Deficiency , Humans , Vitamin D , Calcifediol , Renal Dialysis , Vitamin D Deficiency/drug therapyABSTRACT
Definition and classification of acute renal failure evolved in recent years. The acronym "Acute Kidney Injury" replaces "Acute Renal Failure". The RIFLE classification spreads the AKI in three degrees of severity, and two degrees of disease duration. The group Acute Kidney Injury Network refines this classification into three stages, to improve the sensitivity in detecting moderate forms. The epidemiology of AKI remains imprecise. In the ICU, more than 30% of patients suffered from AKI, often in a context of multiple organs failure. In addition to serum creatinine and urine output, new biomarkers can be assessed. Their early detection should enable a clearer distinction between "acute tubular necrosis" and other causes of AKI, but also to distinguish patients at risk for pejorative evolution of renal function. The management of AKI based on an optimal resuscitation. The administration of loop diuretics or low dose dopamine showed no benefit. Hydration in prevention of the contrast-induced nephropathy is confirmed. The role of acetylcysteine must be determined. The ideal time to initiate a renal replacement therapy and the choice of the technique remain unresolved. The same goes for the dose of dialysis administered. A systematic application of an algorithm, such as proposed by Bagshow would make comparisons easier and the realisation of multicenter studies will help to clarify these points.
