-
Acta Obstetricia Et Gynecologica... Nov 2016Peripartum cardiomyopathy (PPCM) is a rare but potentially fatal disease defined by heart failure towards the end of pregnancy or in the months following delivery. We... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Peripartum cardiomyopathy (PPCM) is a rare but potentially fatal disease defined by heart failure towards the end of pregnancy or in the months following delivery. We aim to raise awareness of the condition and give the clinician an overview of current knowledge on the mechanisms of pathophysiology, diagnostics and clinical management.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Systematic literature searches were performed in PubMed and Embase up to June 2016. Cohorts of more than 20 women with PPCM conducted after 2000 were selected to report contemporary outcomes and prognostic data. Guidelines and reviews that provided comprehensive overviews were included, too.
RESULTS
New research on the pathophysiological mechanisms of PPCM points towards a two-hit multifactorial cause involving genetic factors and an antiangiogenic hormonal environment of late gestation with high levels of prolactin and sFlt-1. The prevalence of concomitant preeclampsia is high (often 30-45%) and symptoms can be similar, posing diagnostic difficulties. Most women (71-98%) present postpartum. Echocardiography is essential for diagnosis, and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging may provide new insights to pathophysiology and prognosis. Management is multidisciplinary and involves advanced heart failure therapy. Treatment, timing and mode of delivery in pregnant women depend on disease severity. The risk of relapse in subsequent pregnancies is >20%, and women are often advised against a new pregnancy.
CONCLUSIONS
PPCM has a huge impact on cardiovascular health and reproductive life perspective. New insights into genetics, molecular pathophysiological mechanisms and clinical studies have resulted in potential disease-specific therapies, but many questions remain unanswered.
Topics: Cardiomyopathies; Echocardiography; Female; Heart Failure; Humans; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications, Cardiovascular; Puerperal Disorders
PubMed: 27545093
DOI: 10.1111/aogs.13005 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2016Breastfeeding is important, however not all infants can feed at the breast and methods of expressing milk need evaluation. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Breastfeeding is important, however not all infants can feed at the breast and methods of expressing milk need evaluation.
OBJECTIVES
To assess acceptability, effectiveness, safety, effect on milk composition, contamination and costs of methods of milk expression.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (21 March 2016), handsearched relevant journals and conference proceedings, and contacted experts in the field to seek additional published or unpublished studies. We also examined reference lists of all relevant retrieved papers.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing methods at any time after birth.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Three review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy.
MAIN RESULTS
This updated review includes 41 trials involving 2293 participants, with 22 trials involving 1339 participants contributing data for analysis. Twenty-six of the trials referred to mothers of infants in neonatal units (n = 1547) and 14 to mothers of healthy infants at home (n = 730), with one trial containing mothers of both neonatal and healthy older infants (n = 16). Eleven trials compared one or more types of pump versus hand expression and 14 studies compared one type of pump versus another type of pump, with three of these studies comparing both hand expression and pump types. Twenty studies compared a specific protocol or adjunct behaviour including sequential versus simultaneous pumping protocols, pumping frequency, provision of an education and support intervention, relaxation, breast massage, combining hand expression with pumping and a breast cleansing protocol.Due to heterogeneity in participants, interventions, and outcomes measured or reported, we were unable to pool findings for most of the specified outcomes. It was not possible therefore to produce a 'Summary of findings' table in this update. Most of the included results were derived from single studies. Trials took place in 14 countries under a variety of circumstances and were published from 1982 to 2015. Sixteen of the 30 trials that evaluated pumps or products had support from the manufacturers. The risk of bias of the included studies was variable. Primary outcomesOnly one of the 17 studies examining maternal satisfaction/acceptability with the method or adjunct behaviour provided data suitable for analysis. In this study, self-efficacy was assessed by asking mothers if they agreed or disagreed with the following statement: 'I don't want anyone to see me (hand expressing/pumping)'. The study found that mothers who were using the electric pump were more likely to agree with the statement compared to mothers hand expressing, (mean difference (MD) 0.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15 to 1.25; P = 0.01, participants = 68). Mothers who were hand expressing reported that the instructions for expression were clearer compared to the electric pump, (MD -0.40, 95% CI -0.75 to -0.05; P = 0.02, participants = 68). Descriptive reporting of satisfaction in the other studies varied in the measures used, did not indicate a clear preference for one pump type, although there was satisfaction with some relaxation and support interventions.We found no clinically significant differences between methods related to contamination of the milk that compared any type of pump to hand expression (risk ratio (RR) 1.13, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.61; P = 0.51, participants = 28), manual pump compared to hand expression, (MD 0.20, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.58; P = 0.30, participants = 142) a large electric pump compared to hand expression (MD 0.10, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.49; P = 0.61, participants = 123), or a large electric pump compared to a manual pump (MD -0.10, 95% CI -0.46 to 0.26; P = 0.59, participants = 141).The level of maternal breast or nipple pain or damage was similar in comparisons of a large electric pump to hand expression (MD 0.02, 95% CI -0.67 to 0.71; P = 0.96, participants = 68). A study comparing a manual and large electric pump, reported sore nipples in 7% for both groups and engorgement in 4% using a manual pump versus 6% using an electric pump; and in one study no nipple damage was reported in the hand-expression group, and one case of nipple damage in each of the manual pump and the large electric pump groups.One study examined adverse effects on infants, however as the infants did not all receive their mothers' expressed milk, we have not included the results. Secondary outcomesThe quantity of expressed milk obtained was increased, in some studies by a clinically significant amount, in interventions involving relaxation, music, warmth, massage, initiation of pumping, increased frequency of pumping and suitable breast shield size. Support programmes and simultaneous compared to sequential pumping did not show a difference in milk obtained. No pump consistently increased the milk volume obtained significantly.In relation to nutrient quality, hand expression or a large electric pump were found to provide higher protein than a manual pump, and hand expression provided higher sodium and lower potassium compared to a large electric pump or a manual pump. Fat content was higher with breast massage when pumping; no evidence of difference was found for energy content between methods.No consistent effect was found related to prolactin change or effect on oxytocin release with pump type or method. Economic aspects were not reported.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The most suitable method for milk expression may depend on the time since birth, purpose of expression and the individual mother and infant. Low-cost interventions including initiation of milk expression sooner after birth when not feeding at the breast, relaxation, massage, warming the breasts, hand expression and lower cost pumps may be as effective, or more effective, than large electric pumps for some outcomes. Variation in nutrient content across methods may be relevant to some infants. Small sample sizes, large standard deviations, and the diversity of the interventions argue caution in applying these results beyond the specific method tested in the specific settings. Independently funded research is needed for more trials on hand expression, relaxation and other techniques that do not have a commercial potential.
PubMed: 27684560
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006170.pub5 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2016Hyperprolactinemia is the presence of abnormally high circulating levels of prolactin. Idopathic hyperprolactinemia is the term used when no cause of prolactin... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Hyperprolactinemia is the presence of abnormally high circulating levels of prolactin. Idopathic hyperprolactinemia is the term used when no cause of prolactin hypersecretion can be identified and it is causally related to the development of miscarriage in pregnant women, especially women who have a history of recurrent miscarriage. A possible mechanism is that high levels of prolactin affect the function of the ovaries, resulting in a luteal phase defect and miscarriage. A dopamine agonist is a compound with high efficacy in lowering prolactin levels and restoring gonadal function.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and safety of different types of dopamine agonists in preventing future miscarriage given to women with idiopathic hyperprolactinemia and a history of recurrent miscarriage.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 June 2016) and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in all languages examining the effect of dopamine agonists on preventing future miscarriage. Women who had idiopathic hyperprolactinemia with a history of recurrent miscarriages were eligible for inclusion in this review. Comparisons planned included: dopamine agonists alone versus placebo/no treatment; and dopamine agonists combined with other therapy versus other therapy alone.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed a single trial for inclusion, evaluated trial quality and extracted data. Data were checked for accuracy.
MAIN RESULTS
One study (recruiting 48 women with idiopathic hyperprolactinemia) met our inclusion criteria; 46 women (42 pregnancies - 4/46 women did not conceive during the study period) were included in the analysis. The study compared the use of a dopamine agonist (bromocriptine, 2.5 mg to 5.0 mg/day until the end of the ninth week of gestation) versus a no-treatment control. The study was judged as being at a high risk of bias. It was not possible to carry out meta-analysis due to insufficient data.The study reported both of this review's primary outcomes of miscarriage and live birth. Results from this single study suggest that, compared to no treatment, oral bromocriptine was effective in preventing future miscarriage (risk ratio (RR) 0.28, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.09 to 0.87, 46 participants (low-quality evidence)) in women with idiopathic hyperprolactinemia. There was no clear difference with regard to the other primary outcome of live births (RR 1.50, 95% CI 0.93 to 2.42, 46 participants (very low-quality evidence)).There was no difference with regard to this review's secondary outcome of conception (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.09, 46 participants (very low-quality evidence)) between the group of women who received dopamine (21 out of 24 women conceived) and women in the no-treatment group (21 out of 22 women conceived). The included study only reported the serum prolactin levels in pregnant women and therefore the data could not be analyzed in this review. No other secondary outcomes relevant to this review were reported; adverse effects for women (nausea, vomiting, headache, vertigo, fatigue, hypotension, arrhythmia, and psychotic symptoms) and infants (birth defects, low birthweight, and developmental disabilities) were not reported.We downgraded the quality of the evidence for risk of bias in the one trial contributing outcome data (no description of allocation concealment, lack of blinding and possible reporting bias) and for imprecision (all effect estimates were based on small sample size, miscarriage was based on few events, and the 95% CIs of live birth and conception cross the line of no effect).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Currently, there is insufficient evidence (from a single randomized trial with a small sample size, and judged to be at high risk of bias) to evaluate the effectiveness of dopamine agonists for preventing future miscarriage in women with idiopathic hyperprolactinemia and a history of recurrent miscarriage. We assessed outcomes using GRADE methodology. Miscarriage was assessed as low quality due to risk of bias concerns in the one trial contributing data (no description of allocation concealment, lack of blinding and possible reporting bias) and to imprecision (effect estimates were based on small sample size and few events). Live births and conception were assessed as of very low quality due to the same risk of bias concerns in study design and to imprecision (with a wide 95% CI consistent with either benefit or harm), and a small sample size. There were no data relating to adverse effects of the intervention for either the mother or her baby.Futher high-quality research in this area is warranted. There is a need for well-designed, larger RCTs to confirm and extend the findings of the trial reviewed here. Many questions remain unanswered. Some important considerations for future research include, the need for well-designed RCTs with large sample sizes, and for those studies to consider important outcomes (including adverse effects for both the mother and her baby). Future studies should examine the effectiveness and safety of various dopamine agonists including bromocriptine, cabergoline and quinagolide.
Topics: Abortion, Habitual; Bromocriptine; Dopamine Agonists; Female; Humans; Hyperprolactinemia; Live Birth; Pregnancy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 27455388
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008883.pub2 -
JBRA Assisted Reproduction May 2016The aim of this study as to analyze published evidence regarding the effectiveness of aromatase inhibitor therapy on improving spermatogenesis in infertile men. We... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The aim of this study as to analyze published evidence regarding the effectiveness of aromatase inhibitor therapy on improving spermatogenesis in infertile men. We carried out a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. The date of the most recent search was October 4, 2015. Two authors independently selected relevant clinical trials, assessing their methodological quality and extracting data. Three studies were included in this review with a total of 100 participants; however, we were able to include data from only 54 participants in the analysis. In the representation of meta-analysis with a single study comparing testolactone versus placebo, related to the hormone concentrations, there was a statistically significance difference favoring the use of testolactone for Luteinizing Hormone (LH); Estrogen (E2); free Testosterone (free T); free Estrogen (free E2); 17-Hydroxyprogesterone (17OHP); prolactin (PRL). In another analysis from a single study comparing letrozole versus anastrozole, there was also a statistically significance difference favoring the use of letrozole for the increase in both the sperm count and LH. There is only low quality evidence regarding the effectiveness of aromatase inhibitor therapy in infertile men. Further trials are needed with standardized interventions and outcomes.
Topics: Aromatase Inhibitors; Azoospermia; Humans; Male; Oligospermia; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 27244767
DOI: 10.5935/1518-0557.20160019 -
The International Journal of... Sep 2016This meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials aimed to examine the advantages of long-acting injectable antipsychotics over placebo or oral medications regarding...
BACKGROUND
This meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials aimed to examine the advantages of long-acting injectable antipsychotics over placebo or oral medications regarding efficacy and safety for patients with bipolar disorder.
METHODS
Two categorical meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials were performed to compare study-defined relapse rate (primary), discontinuation rates, and individual adverse events: (1) risperidone-long-acting injectable vs placebo, and (2) long-acting injectable antipsychotics vs oral medications.
RESULTS
We identified 7 randomized controlled trials (n=1016; long-acting injectable antipsychotics [flupenthixol (1 randomized controlled trial) and risperidone (6 randomized controlled trials)=449]; oral medications [mood stabilizers, antidepressants, antipsychotic, or any combination of these agents=283]; and placebo=284). Risperidone-long-acting injectable antipsychotic was superior to placebo for study-defined relapse rate (risk ratio=0.63, P<.0001), relapse of manic symptoms (risk ratio=0.42, P<.00001), and all-cause discontinuation (risk ratio=0.75, P=.007). Risperidone-long-acting injectable was associated with higher incidence of prolactin-related adverse events (risk ratio=4.82, P=.001) and weight gain (risk ratio=3.80, P<.0001) than placebo. The pooled long-acting injectable antipsychotics did not outperform oral medications regarding primary outcome but with significant heterogeneity (I=74%). Sensitivity analysis, including only studies with rapid cycling or high frequency of relapse patients, revealed that long-acting injectable antipsychotics were superior compared to oral medications (I=0%, RR=0.58, P=.0004). However, the comparators in this sensitivity analysis did not include second-generation antipsychotic monotherapy. In sensitivity analysis, including only studies with second-generation antipsychotic monotherapy as the comparator, long-acting injectable antipsychotics did not outperform second-generation antipsychotic monotherapy. Risperidone-long-acting injectable was also associated with higher incidence of prolactin-related adverse events than oral medications (RR=2.66, P=.03).
CONCLUSIONS
Long-acting injectable antipsychotics appear beneficial for relapse prevention in patients with rapid cycling. Furthermore, randomized controlled trials comparing long-acting injectable antipsychotics and oral second-generation antipsychotic using larger samples of rapid cycling patients are warranted.
PubMed: 27207910
DOI: 10.1093/ijnp/pyw038 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2016Risperidone is the first new generation antipsychotic drug made available in a long-acting injection formulation. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Risperidone is the first new generation antipsychotic drug made available in a long-acting injection formulation.
OBJECTIVES
To examine the effects of depot risperidone for treatment of schizophrenia or related psychoses in comparison with placebo, no treatment or other antipsychotic medication.To critically appraise and summarise current evidence on the resource use, cost and cost-effectiveness of risperidone (depot) for schizophrenia.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register (December 2002, 2012, and October 28, 2015). We also checked the references of all included studies, and contacted industry and authors of included studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised clinical trials comparing depot risperidone with other treatments for people with schizophrenia and/or schizophrenia-like psychoses.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed trial quality and extracted data. For dichotomous data, we calculated the risk ratio (RR), with 95% confidence interval (CI). For continuous data, we calculated mean differences (MD). We assessed risk of bias for included studies and created 'Summary of findings' tables using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
Twelve studies, with a total of 5723 participants were randomised to the following comparison treatments: Risperidone depot versus placebo Outcomes of relapse and improvement in mental state were neither measured or reported. In terms of other primary outcomes, more people receiving placebo left the study early by 12 weeks (1 RCT, n=400, RR 0.74 95% CI 0.63 to 0.88, very low quality evidence), experienced severe adverse events in short term (1 RCT, n=400, RR 0.59 95% CI 0.38 to 0.93, very low quality evidence). There was however, no difference in levels of weight gain between groups (1 RCT, n=400, RR 2.11 95% CI 0.48 to 9.18, very low quality evidence). Risperidone depot versus general oral antipsychotics The outcome of improvement in mental state was not presented due to high levels of attrition, nor were levels of severe adverse events explicitly reported. Most primary outcomes of interest showed no difference between treatment groups. However, more people receiving depot risperidone experienced nervous system disorders (long-term:1 RCT, n=369, RR 1.34 95% CI 1.13 to 1.58, very-low quality evidence). Risperidone depot versus oral risperidoneData for relapse and severe adverse events were not reported. All outcomes of interest were rated as moderate quality evidence. Main results showed no differences between treatment groups with equivocal data for change in mental state, numbers leaving the study early, any extrapyramidal symptoms, weight increase and prolactin-related adverse events. Risperidone depot versus oral quetiapine Relapse rates and improvement in mental state were not reported. Fewer people receiving risperidone depot left the study early (long-term: 1 RCT, n=666, RR 0.84 95% CI 0.74 to 0.95, moderate quality evidence). Experience of serious adverse events was similar between groups (low quality evidence), but more people receiving depot risperidone experienced EPS (1 RCT, n=666, RR 1.83 95% CI 1.07 to 3.15, low quality evidence), had greater weight gain (1 RCT, n=666, RR 1.25 95% CI 0.25 to 2.25, low quality evidence) and more prolactin-related adverse events (1 RCT, n=666, RR 3.07 95% CI 1.13 to 8.36, very low quality evidence). Risperidone depot versus oral aripiprazoleRelapse rates, mental state using PANSS, leaving the study early, serious adverse events and weight increase were similar between groups. However more people receiving depot risperidone experienced prolactin-related adverse events compared to those receiving oral aripiprazole (2 RCTs, n=729, RR 9.91 95% CI 2.78 to 35.29, very low quality of evidence). Risperidone depot versus oral olanzapineRelapse rates were not reported in any of the included studies for this comparison. Improvement in mental state using PANSS and instances of severe adverse events were similar between groups. More people receiving depot risperidone left the study early than those receiving oral olanzapine (1 RCT, n=618, RR 1.32 95% CI 1.10 to 1.58, low quality evidence) with those receiving risperidone depot also experiencing more extrapyramidal symptoms (1 RCT, n=547, RR 1.67 95% CI 1.19 to 2.36, low quality evidence). However, more people receiving oral olanzapine experienced weight increase (1 RCT, n=547, RR 0.56 95% CI 0.42 to 0.75, low quality evidence). Risperidone depot versus atypical depot antipsychotics (specifically paliperidone palmitate)Relapse rates were not reported and rates of response using PANSS, weight increase, prolactin-related adverse events and glucose-related adverse events were similar between groups. Fewer people left the study early due to lack of efficacy from the risperidone depot group (long term: 1 RCT, n=749, RR 0.60 95% CI 0.45 to 0.81, low quality evidence), but more people receiving depot risperidone required use of EPS-medication (2 RCTs, n=1666, RR 1.46 95% CI 1.18 to 1.8, moderate quality evidence). Risperidone depot versus typical depot antipsychoticsOutcomes of relapse, severe adverse events or movement disorders were not reported. Outcomes relating to improvement in mental state demonstrated no difference between groups (low quality evidence). However, more people receiving depot risperidone compared to other typical depots left the study early (long-term:1 RCT, n=62, RR 3.05 95% CI 1.12 to 8.31, low quality evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Depot risperidone may be more acceptable than placebo injection but it is hard to know if it is any more effective in controlling the symptoms of schizophrenia. The active drug, especially higher doses, may be associated with more movement disorders than placebo. People already stabilised on oral risperidone may continue to maintain benefit if treated with depot risperidone and avoid the need to take tablets, at least in the short term. In people who are happy to take oral medication the depot risperidone is approximately equal to oral risperidone. It is possible that the depot formulation, however, can bring a second-generation antipsychotic to people who do not reliably adhere to treatment. People with schizophrenia who have difficulty adhering to treatment, however, are unlikely to volunteer for a clinical trial. Such people may gain benefit from the depot risperidone with no increased risk of extrapyramidal side effects.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Antipsychotic Agents; Aripiprazole; Benzodiazepines; Delayed-Action Preparations; Humans; Olanzapine; Patient Dropouts; Quetiapine Fumarate; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risperidone; Schizophrenia
PubMed: 27078222
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004161.pub2 -
Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience 2016Oligodendrogenesis and oligodendrocyte precursor maturation are essential processes during the course of central nervous system development, and lead to the myelination... (Review)
Review
Oligodendrogenesis and oligodendrocyte precursor maturation are essential processes during the course of central nervous system development, and lead to the myelination of axons. Cells of the oligodendrocyte lineage are generated in the germinal zone from migratory bipolar oligodendrocyte precursor cells (OPCs), and acquire cell surface markers as they mature and respond specifically to factors which regulate proliferation, migration, differentiation, and survival. Loss of myelin underlies a wide range of neurological disorders, some of an autoimmune nature-multiple sclerosis probably being the most prominent. Current therapies are based on the use of immunomodulatory agents which are likely to promote myelin repair (remyelination) indirectly by subverting the inflammatory response, aspects of which impair the differentiation of OPCs. Cells of the oligodendrocyte lineage express and are capable of responding to a diverse array of ligand-receptor pairs, including neurotransmitters and nuclear receptors such as γ-aminobutyric acid, glutamate, adenosine triphosphate, serotonin, acetylcholine, nitric oxide, opioids, prostaglandins, prolactin, and cannabinoids. The intent of this review is to provide the reader with a synopsis of our present state of knowledge concerning the pharmacological properties of the oligodendrocyte lineage, with particular attention to these receptor-ligand (i.e., neurotransmitters and nuclear receptor) interactions that can influence oligodendrocyte migration, proliferation, differentiation, and myelination, and an appraisal of their therapeutic potential. For example, many promising mediators work through Ca(2+) signaling, and the balance between Ca(2+) influx and efflux can determine the temporal and spatial properties of oligodendrocytes (OLs). Moreover, Ca(2+) signaling in OPCs can influence not only differentiation and myelination, but also process extension and migration, as well as cell death in mature mouse OLs. There is also evidence that oligodendroglia exhibit Ca(2+) transients in response to electrical activity of axons for activity-dependent myelination. Cholinergic antagonists, as well as endocannabinoid-related lipid-signaling molecules target OLs. An understanding of such pharmacological pathways may thus lay the foundation to allow its leverage for therapeutic benefit in diseases of demyelination.
PubMed: 26903812
DOI: 10.3389/fncel.2016.00027 -
Frontiers in Endocrinology 2016PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection databases were systematically searched for studies reporting synchronous double or multiple pituitary adenomas (MPA),... (Review)
Review
PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection databases were systematically searched for studies reporting synchronous double or multiple pituitary adenomas (MPA), a rare clinical condition, with a vague pathogenesis. Multiple adenomas of the pituitary gland are referred to as morphologically and/or immunocytochemically distinct tumors that are frequently small-sized and hormonally non-functional, to account for the low detection rate. There is no general agreement on how to classify MPA, various criteria, such as tumor contiguity, immunoreactivity, and clonality analysis are being used. Among the component tumors, prolactin (PRL)-immunopositive adenomas are highly prevalent, albeit mute in the majority of cases. The most frequent clinical presentation of MPA is Cushing's syndrome, given the fact that in more than 50% of reported cases at least one lesion stains for adrenocorticotrophic hormone (ACTH). Plurihormonal hyperactivity may be diagnosed in a patient with MPA when more than one tumor is clinically active (e.g., ACTH and PRL) or in cases with at least one composite tumor (e.g., GH and PRL), to complicate the clinical scenario. Specific challenges associated with MPA include high surgical failure rates, enforcing second-look surgery in certain cases, and difficult preoperative neuroradiological imaging evaluation, with an overall sensitivity of only 25% for magnetic resonance imaging to detect distinct multiple tumors. Alternatively, minor pituitary imaging abnormalities may raise suspicion, as these are not uncommon. Postoperative immunohistochemistry is mandatory and in conjunction to electron microscopy scanning and testing for transcription factors (i.e., Pit-1, T-pit, and SF-1) accurately define and classify the distinct cytodifferentiation of MPA.
PubMed: 26869991
DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2016.00001 -
Seizure Feb 2016Video electroencephalography (vEEG) is the gold-standard method for diagnosing psychogenic nonepileptic seizures (PNES), but such assessment is expensive, unavailable in... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Video electroencephalography (vEEG) is the gold-standard method for diagnosing psychogenic nonepileptic seizures (PNES), but such assessment is expensive, unavailable in many centers, requires prolonged hospitalization, and many times is unable to capture an actual seizure episode. This paper systematically reviews other non-vEEG candidate biomarkers that may facilitate both diagnosis and study of PNES as differentiated from epileptic seizures (ES).
METHODS
PubMed database was searched to identify articles between 1980 and 2015 (inclusion: adult PNES population with or without controls, English language; exclusion: review articles, meta-analyses, single case reports).
RESULTS
A total of 49 studies were examined, including neuroimaging, autonomic nervous system, prolactin, other (non-prolactin) hormonal, enzyme, and miscellaneous marker studies. Functional MRI studies have shown PNES is hyperlinked with dissociation and emotional dysregulation centers in the brain, although conflicting findings are seen across studies and none used psychiatric comparators. Heart rate variability suggests increased vagal tone in PNES when compared to ES. Prolactin is elevated in ES but not PNES, although shows low diagnostic sensitivity. Postictal cortisol and creatine kinase are nonspecific. Other miscellaneous biomarkers (neuron specific enolase, brain derived neurotropic factor, ghrelin, leptin, leukocytosis) showed no conclusive evidence of utility. Many studies are limited by lack of psychiatric comparators, size, and other methodological issues.
CONCLUSION
No single biomarker successfully differentiates PNES from ES; in fact, PNES is only diagnosed via the negation of ES. Clinical assessment and rigorous investigation of psychosocial variables specific to PNES remain critical, and subtyping of PNES is warranted. Future investigational and clinical imperatives are discussed.
Topics: Biomarkers; Conversion Disorder; Electroencephalography; Humans; Psychophysiologic Disorders; Seizures; Video Recording
PubMed: 26774202
DOI: 10.1016/j.seizure.2015.12.011 -
BMC Psychiatry Nov 2015Psychotropic medications are frequently used to treat challenging behaviour in children with intellectual disabilities, despite a lack of evidence for their efficacy.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Psychotropic medications are frequently used to treat challenging behaviour in children with intellectual disabilities, despite a lack of evidence for their efficacy. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the safety and efficacy of pharmacological interventions for challenging behaviour among children with intellectual disabilities.
METHODS
Electronic databases were searched and supplemented with a hand search of reference lists and trial registries. Randomised controlled trials of pharmacological interventions for challenging behaviour among children with intellectual disabilities were included. Data were analysed using meta-analysis or described narratively if meta-analysis was not possible. For quality assessment, the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach were used.
RESULTS
Fourteen studies including 912 participants met inclusion criteria. Antipsychotic medication reduced challenging behaviour among children with intellectual disabilities in the short-term (SMD = -1.09, p < 0.001 for risperidone; SMD = -0.64, p <0.001 for aripiprazole). However, there were significant side-effects including elevated prolactin levels (SMD = 3.22, p < 0.001) and weight gain (SMD = 0.82, p < 0.001). Evidence was inconclusive regarding the effectiveness of anticonvulsants and antioxidants for reducing challenging behaviour. The quality of all evidence was low and there were no long term follow up studies.
CONCLUSIONS
Antipsychotic medications appear to be effective for reducing challenging behaviour in the short-term among children with intellectual disabilities, but they carry a risk of significant side effects. Findings from this review must be interpreted with caution as studies were typically of low quality and most outcomes were based on a small number of studies. Further long-term, high-quality research is needed to determine the effectiveness and safety of psychotropic medication for reducing challenging behaviour.
Topics: Adaptation, Psychological; Adolescent; Anticonvulsants; Antioxidants; Antipsychotic Agents; Child; Child Behavior Disorders; Female; Humans; Intellectual Disability; Male; Patient Safety; Patient Satisfaction; Prolactin; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Weight Gain; gamma-Aminobutyric Acid
PubMed: 26611280
DOI: 10.1186/s12888-015-0688-2