Pediatric, adolescent migraine treatment and prevention guidelines are updated

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 12/15/2022 - 14:41

Two new guidelines on the treatment and prevention of migraines in children and adolescents have been released by the American Academy of Neurology and the American Headache Society.

This update to the previous guidelines released by the American Academy of Neurology in 2004 reflects the expansion in pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic approaches during the last 15 years, Andrew D. Hershey, MD, PhD, director of the division of neurology at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital and a fellow of the American Academy of Neurology, said in an interview.

“There has also been an increase in the number of randomized controlled studies, which have allowed for a more robust statement on acute and preventive treatments to be made,” said Dr. Hershey, who is also a senior author for both guidelines.

The two reports focused on separate issues: One guideline outlined the options for treatment of acute migraine, and the second guideline summarized the available studies on the effectiveness of preventive medications for migraine in children and adolescents.

The guidelines recommend a physical examination and history to establish a specific headache diagnosis and afford a treatment that provides fast and complete pain relief. Treatment should be initiated as soon as a patient realizes an attack is occurring. Patients with signs of secondary headache should be evaluated by a neurologist or a headache specialist.

Studies support the use of ibuprofen and acetaminophen for pain relief in cases of acute migraine, but only some triptans (such as almotriptan, rizatriptan, sumatriptan/naproxen, and zolmitriptan nasal spray) are approved for use in adolescents. Specifically, sumatriptan/naproxen was shown to be effective when compared with placebo in studies with adolescents, whose headache symptoms resolved within 2 hours.

It may be necessary to try more than one triptan, the guidelines noted, because patients respond differently to medications. A failure to respond to one triptan does not necessarily mean that treatment with another triptan will be unsuccessful.

The guidelines also focused on patient and family education to improve medication safety and adherence. Lifestyle modification, avoidance of migraine triggers, creating good sleep habits, and staying hydrated can help reduce migraines. While no medications improved associated symptoms of migraines such as nausea or vomiting, triptans did show a benefit in reducing phonophobia and photophobia.

Evidence for pharmacologic prevention of migraines in children and adolescents is limited, according to the guidelines. In the 15 studies included in a literature review, there was not sufficient evidence to show preventive treatments, such as divalproex, onabotulinumtoxinA, amitriptyline, nimodipine, and flunarizine, were more effective than placebo at reducing the frequency of headaches. There was some evidence to show propranolol in children and topiramate and cinnarizine in children and adolescents can reduce headache frequency. Children and adolescents who received cognitive-behavioral therapy together with amitriptyline were more likely to have reduced frequency of headaches than were those who received amitriptyline with patient education.

“The consensus conclusion was that a multidisciplinary approach that combines acute treatments, preventive treatments, and healthy habits is likely to have the best outcomes,” said Dr. Hershey.

Dr. Hershey acknowledged the many gaps between what is clinically observed and what the studies in the guidelines demonstrated.

“One of the biggest questions is how to minimize the expectation response in the controlled studies,” he said. “Additionally, we are moving toward a better recognition of the mechanism by which the various treatments work in a genetic-based disease that is polygenic in nature” with up to 38 different gene polymorphisms identified to date.

The guidelines also do not address newer treatments, such as calcitonin gene–related peptide (CGRP) antibodies, CGRP antagonists, serotonin antagonists, and devices because there are as yet no studies of their effectiveness in children and adolescents.

“They have been studied in adults, so will be prone to the expectation response; but given the large number of diverse therapies, one can hope that many of the gaps can be filled,” said Dr. Hershey.

The American Academy of Neurology provided funding for development of the guidelines and reimbursed authors who served as subcommittee members for travel expenses and in-person meetings. The authors reported personal and institutional relationships in the form of advisory board memberships, investigator appointments, speakers bureau positions, research support, grants, honorariums, consultancies, and publishing royalties for pharmaceutical companies and other organizations.

SOURCES: Oskoui M et al. Neurology. 2019 Aug 14. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000008095. Oskoui M et al. Neurology. 2019 Aug 14. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000008105.

Issue
Neurology Reviews- 27(10)
Publications
Topics
Sections

Two new guidelines on the treatment and prevention of migraines in children and adolescents have been released by the American Academy of Neurology and the American Headache Society.

This update to the previous guidelines released by the American Academy of Neurology in 2004 reflects the expansion in pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic approaches during the last 15 years, Andrew D. Hershey, MD, PhD, director of the division of neurology at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital and a fellow of the American Academy of Neurology, said in an interview.

“There has also been an increase in the number of randomized controlled studies, which have allowed for a more robust statement on acute and preventive treatments to be made,” said Dr. Hershey, who is also a senior author for both guidelines.

The two reports focused on separate issues: One guideline outlined the options for treatment of acute migraine, and the second guideline summarized the available studies on the effectiveness of preventive medications for migraine in children and adolescents.

The guidelines recommend a physical examination and history to establish a specific headache diagnosis and afford a treatment that provides fast and complete pain relief. Treatment should be initiated as soon as a patient realizes an attack is occurring. Patients with signs of secondary headache should be evaluated by a neurologist or a headache specialist.

Studies support the use of ibuprofen and acetaminophen for pain relief in cases of acute migraine, but only some triptans (such as almotriptan, rizatriptan, sumatriptan/naproxen, and zolmitriptan nasal spray) are approved for use in adolescents. Specifically, sumatriptan/naproxen was shown to be effective when compared with placebo in studies with adolescents, whose headache symptoms resolved within 2 hours.

It may be necessary to try more than one triptan, the guidelines noted, because patients respond differently to medications. A failure to respond to one triptan does not necessarily mean that treatment with another triptan will be unsuccessful.

The guidelines also focused on patient and family education to improve medication safety and adherence. Lifestyle modification, avoidance of migraine triggers, creating good sleep habits, and staying hydrated can help reduce migraines. While no medications improved associated symptoms of migraines such as nausea or vomiting, triptans did show a benefit in reducing phonophobia and photophobia.

Evidence for pharmacologic prevention of migraines in children and adolescents is limited, according to the guidelines. In the 15 studies included in a literature review, there was not sufficient evidence to show preventive treatments, such as divalproex, onabotulinumtoxinA, amitriptyline, nimodipine, and flunarizine, were more effective than placebo at reducing the frequency of headaches. There was some evidence to show propranolol in children and topiramate and cinnarizine in children and adolescents can reduce headache frequency. Children and adolescents who received cognitive-behavioral therapy together with amitriptyline were more likely to have reduced frequency of headaches than were those who received amitriptyline with patient education.

“The consensus conclusion was that a multidisciplinary approach that combines acute treatments, preventive treatments, and healthy habits is likely to have the best outcomes,” said Dr. Hershey.

Dr. Hershey acknowledged the many gaps between what is clinically observed and what the studies in the guidelines demonstrated.

“One of the biggest questions is how to minimize the expectation response in the controlled studies,” he said. “Additionally, we are moving toward a better recognition of the mechanism by which the various treatments work in a genetic-based disease that is polygenic in nature” with up to 38 different gene polymorphisms identified to date.

The guidelines also do not address newer treatments, such as calcitonin gene–related peptide (CGRP) antibodies, CGRP antagonists, serotonin antagonists, and devices because there are as yet no studies of their effectiveness in children and adolescents.

“They have been studied in adults, so will be prone to the expectation response; but given the large number of diverse therapies, one can hope that many of the gaps can be filled,” said Dr. Hershey.

The American Academy of Neurology provided funding for development of the guidelines and reimbursed authors who served as subcommittee members for travel expenses and in-person meetings. The authors reported personal and institutional relationships in the form of advisory board memberships, investigator appointments, speakers bureau positions, research support, grants, honorariums, consultancies, and publishing royalties for pharmaceutical companies and other organizations.

SOURCES: Oskoui M et al. Neurology. 2019 Aug 14. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000008095. Oskoui M et al. Neurology. 2019 Aug 14. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000008105.

Two new guidelines on the treatment and prevention of migraines in children and adolescents have been released by the American Academy of Neurology and the American Headache Society.

This update to the previous guidelines released by the American Academy of Neurology in 2004 reflects the expansion in pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic approaches during the last 15 years, Andrew D. Hershey, MD, PhD, director of the division of neurology at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital and a fellow of the American Academy of Neurology, said in an interview.

“There has also been an increase in the number of randomized controlled studies, which have allowed for a more robust statement on acute and preventive treatments to be made,” said Dr. Hershey, who is also a senior author for both guidelines.

The two reports focused on separate issues: One guideline outlined the options for treatment of acute migraine, and the second guideline summarized the available studies on the effectiveness of preventive medications for migraine in children and adolescents.

The guidelines recommend a physical examination and history to establish a specific headache diagnosis and afford a treatment that provides fast and complete pain relief. Treatment should be initiated as soon as a patient realizes an attack is occurring. Patients with signs of secondary headache should be evaluated by a neurologist or a headache specialist.

Studies support the use of ibuprofen and acetaminophen for pain relief in cases of acute migraine, but only some triptans (such as almotriptan, rizatriptan, sumatriptan/naproxen, and zolmitriptan nasal spray) are approved for use in adolescents. Specifically, sumatriptan/naproxen was shown to be effective when compared with placebo in studies with adolescents, whose headache symptoms resolved within 2 hours.

It may be necessary to try more than one triptan, the guidelines noted, because patients respond differently to medications. A failure to respond to one triptan does not necessarily mean that treatment with another triptan will be unsuccessful.

The guidelines also focused on patient and family education to improve medication safety and adherence. Lifestyle modification, avoidance of migraine triggers, creating good sleep habits, and staying hydrated can help reduce migraines. While no medications improved associated symptoms of migraines such as nausea or vomiting, triptans did show a benefit in reducing phonophobia and photophobia.

Evidence for pharmacologic prevention of migraines in children and adolescents is limited, according to the guidelines. In the 15 studies included in a literature review, there was not sufficient evidence to show preventive treatments, such as divalproex, onabotulinumtoxinA, amitriptyline, nimodipine, and flunarizine, were more effective than placebo at reducing the frequency of headaches. There was some evidence to show propranolol in children and topiramate and cinnarizine in children and adolescents can reduce headache frequency. Children and adolescents who received cognitive-behavioral therapy together with amitriptyline were more likely to have reduced frequency of headaches than were those who received amitriptyline with patient education.

“The consensus conclusion was that a multidisciplinary approach that combines acute treatments, preventive treatments, and healthy habits is likely to have the best outcomes,” said Dr. Hershey.

Dr. Hershey acknowledged the many gaps between what is clinically observed and what the studies in the guidelines demonstrated.

“One of the biggest questions is how to minimize the expectation response in the controlled studies,” he said. “Additionally, we are moving toward a better recognition of the mechanism by which the various treatments work in a genetic-based disease that is polygenic in nature” with up to 38 different gene polymorphisms identified to date.

The guidelines also do not address newer treatments, such as calcitonin gene–related peptide (CGRP) antibodies, CGRP antagonists, serotonin antagonists, and devices because there are as yet no studies of their effectiveness in children and adolescents.

“They have been studied in adults, so will be prone to the expectation response; but given the large number of diverse therapies, one can hope that many of the gaps can be filled,” said Dr. Hershey.

The American Academy of Neurology provided funding for development of the guidelines and reimbursed authors who served as subcommittee members for travel expenses and in-person meetings. The authors reported personal and institutional relationships in the form of advisory board memberships, investigator appointments, speakers bureau positions, research support, grants, honorariums, consultancies, and publishing royalties for pharmaceutical companies and other organizations.

SOURCES: Oskoui M et al. Neurology. 2019 Aug 14. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000008095. Oskoui M et al. Neurology. 2019 Aug 14. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000008105.

Issue
Neurology Reviews- 27(10)
Issue
Neurology Reviews- 27(10)
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

FROM NEUROLOGY

Citation Override
Publish date: August 16, 2019
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.

PCPs play role in identifying severe, difficult-to-treat asthma

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 08/14/2019 - 09:09

 

– Clinicians at the primary care level should learn to distinguish the difference between severe and difficult-to-treat asthma to help facilitate referral to an asthma care specialist, according to a speaker at the Cardiovascular & Respiratory Summit by Global Academy for Medical Education.

Jeff Craven/MDedge News
Michelle R. Dickens

Care providers are seeing patients with severe asthma at their primary care practice, whether they realize it or not, and should therefore learn to recognize and diagnose these patients even if they are not directly treating them for asthma, said Michelle R. Dickens, MSN, RN, FNP-C, AE-C, a nurse practitioner at Ferrell-Duncan Clinic department of allergy, asthma, and immunology in Springfield, Mo., said in her presentation.

“There’s still a lot we can do to get the ball rolling,” Ms. Dickens said. “While you may not be prescribing some of these newer biologics and some of the high-level, $30,000-a-year medications for your asthmatic, you still have a role in this in identifying them and helping us to get to where they need to be.”

Ms. Dickens noted that patients may not even disclose their asthma history with their primary care provider if it is not the reason for the office visit. “Because asthma can be such an episodic disease, it’s not right on the top of their radar,” she said. “They have bigger issues they want to talk about with you, and they forget to mention the asthma part.”

Under Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) criteria, severe asthma is defined as poorly controlled asthma even after patients demonstrate adherence and good technique. However, before diagnosing a patient with severe asthma, clinicians should first rule out whether the patient has asthma that is difficult to treat, said Ms. Dickens. Difficult-to-treat asthma is characterized by inadequate dosing of medication, noncompliance with medication dose (“spreading out” the medication), poor technique when self-administering the medication, and comorbid conditions. It is also possible that difficult-to-treat asthma is not well controlled because the asthma was misdiagnosed and is actually another condition, she added.

If a patient has difficult-to-treat asthma, ensure they are adhering to the therapy, using proper technique, and that the medicine is being administered at the proper dose. Using Expert Panel Report 3 (EPR-3) and Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) guidelines, clinicians should maximize the treatment for a patient with severe asthma based on the stepwise approach outlined in the guidelines, and referring out to an asthma specialist for add-on therapy or stepping up therapy when indicated.

Researchers are beginning to explore the genotypes, phenotypes, and endotypes of asthma to learn more about severe asthma and potentially identify asthma subtypes, said Ms. Dickens. “We’re not there yet, but we are learning a little bit about why certain patients have certain types of asthma,” she said.

The Severe Asthma Research Program has found three clusters of likely severe asthma candidates: those with classic childhood asthma onset, those who have asthma with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and patients with both obesity and asthma characterized by “high impairment but mildly abnormal lung function.” Clinicians can use spirometry, complete blood count with differential, total immunoglobulin E, body mass index, allergy testing, and exhaled nitric oxide with these data and biomarkers to gain a better idea of a patient’s asthma situation.

Referrals to an asthma specialist should be considered if a patient experiences a life-threatening exacerbation, is not responding to therapy, has an unusual presentation of asthma symptoms, has comorbid conditions, or needs additional testing or additional education. Patients who are at step 2 or higher in EPR-3 guidelines and ready to move to step 3 and are under 4 years of age, and patients who are 5 years or older at step 4 of therapy or higher should be referred to an asthma specialist. “I think the younger the patient and the more severe the [symptoms], the more likely you should be referring to a specialist,” said Ms. Dickens.

Ms. Dickens reports no relevant financial disclosures. Global Academy for Medical Education and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

– Clinicians at the primary care level should learn to distinguish the difference between severe and difficult-to-treat asthma to help facilitate referral to an asthma care specialist, according to a speaker at the Cardiovascular & Respiratory Summit by Global Academy for Medical Education.

Jeff Craven/MDedge News
Michelle R. Dickens

Care providers are seeing patients with severe asthma at their primary care practice, whether they realize it or not, and should therefore learn to recognize and diagnose these patients even if they are not directly treating them for asthma, said Michelle R. Dickens, MSN, RN, FNP-C, AE-C, a nurse practitioner at Ferrell-Duncan Clinic department of allergy, asthma, and immunology in Springfield, Mo., said in her presentation.

“There’s still a lot we can do to get the ball rolling,” Ms. Dickens said. “While you may not be prescribing some of these newer biologics and some of the high-level, $30,000-a-year medications for your asthmatic, you still have a role in this in identifying them and helping us to get to where they need to be.”

Ms. Dickens noted that patients may not even disclose their asthma history with their primary care provider if it is not the reason for the office visit. “Because asthma can be such an episodic disease, it’s not right on the top of their radar,” she said. “They have bigger issues they want to talk about with you, and they forget to mention the asthma part.”

Under Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) criteria, severe asthma is defined as poorly controlled asthma even after patients demonstrate adherence and good technique. However, before diagnosing a patient with severe asthma, clinicians should first rule out whether the patient has asthma that is difficult to treat, said Ms. Dickens. Difficult-to-treat asthma is characterized by inadequate dosing of medication, noncompliance with medication dose (“spreading out” the medication), poor technique when self-administering the medication, and comorbid conditions. It is also possible that difficult-to-treat asthma is not well controlled because the asthma was misdiagnosed and is actually another condition, she added.

If a patient has difficult-to-treat asthma, ensure they are adhering to the therapy, using proper technique, and that the medicine is being administered at the proper dose. Using Expert Panel Report 3 (EPR-3) and Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) guidelines, clinicians should maximize the treatment for a patient with severe asthma based on the stepwise approach outlined in the guidelines, and referring out to an asthma specialist for add-on therapy or stepping up therapy when indicated.

Researchers are beginning to explore the genotypes, phenotypes, and endotypes of asthma to learn more about severe asthma and potentially identify asthma subtypes, said Ms. Dickens. “We’re not there yet, but we are learning a little bit about why certain patients have certain types of asthma,” she said.

The Severe Asthma Research Program has found three clusters of likely severe asthma candidates: those with classic childhood asthma onset, those who have asthma with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and patients with both obesity and asthma characterized by “high impairment but mildly abnormal lung function.” Clinicians can use spirometry, complete blood count with differential, total immunoglobulin E, body mass index, allergy testing, and exhaled nitric oxide with these data and biomarkers to gain a better idea of a patient’s asthma situation.

Referrals to an asthma specialist should be considered if a patient experiences a life-threatening exacerbation, is not responding to therapy, has an unusual presentation of asthma symptoms, has comorbid conditions, or needs additional testing or additional education. Patients who are at step 2 or higher in EPR-3 guidelines and ready to move to step 3 and are under 4 years of age, and patients who are 5 years or older at step 4 of therapy or higher should be referred to an asthma specialist. “I think the younger the patient and the more severe the [symptoms], the more likely you should be referring to a specialist,” said Ms. Dickens.

Ms. Dickens reports no relevant financial disclosures. Global Academy for Medical Education and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

 

– Clinicians at the primary care level should learn to distinguish the difference between severe and difficult-to-treat asthma to help facilitate referral to an asthma care specialist, according to a speaker at the Cardiovascular & Respiratory Summit by Global Academy for Medical Education.

Jeff Craven/MDedge News
Michelle R. Dickens

Care providers are seeing patients with severe asthma at their primary care practice, whether they realize it or not, and should therefore learn to recognize and diagnose these patients even if they are not directly treating them for asthma, said Michelle R. Dickens, MSN, RN, FNP-C, AE-C, a nurse practitioner at Ferrell-Duncan Clinic department of allergy, asthma, and immunology in Springfield, Mo., said in her presentation.

“There’s still a lot we can do to get the ball rolling,” Ms. Dickens said. “While you may not be prescribing some of these newer biologics and some of the high-level, $30,000-a-year medications for your asthmatic, you still have a role in this in identifying them and helping us to get to where they need to be.”

Ms. Dickens noted that patients may not even disclose their asthma history with their primary care provider if it is not the reason for the office visit. “Because asthma can be such an episodic disease, it’s not right on the top of their radar,” she said. “They have bigger issues they want to talk about with you, and they forget to mention the asthma part.”

Under Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) criteria, severe asthma is defined as poorly controlled asthma even after patients demonstrate adherence and good technique. However, before diagnosing a patient with severe asthma, clinicians should first rule out whether the patient has asthma that is difficult to treat, said Ms. Dickens. Difficult-to-treat asthma is characterized by inadequate dosing of medication, noncompliance with medication dose (“spreading out” the medication), poor technique when self-administering the medication, and comorbid conditions. It is also possible that difficult-to-treat asthma is not well controlled because the asthma was misdiagnosed and is actually another condition, she added.

If a patient has difficult-to-treat asthma, ensure they are adhering to the therapy, using proper technique, and that the medicine is being administered at the proper dose. Using Expert Panel Report 3 (EPR-3) and Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) guidelines, clinicians should maximize the treatment for a patient with severe asthma based on the stepwise approach outlined in the guidelines, and referring out to an asthma specialist for add-on therapy or stepping up therapy when indicated.

Researchers are beginning to explore the genotypes, phenotypes, and endotypes of asthma to learn more about severe asthma and potentially identify asthma subtypes, said Ms. Dickens. “We’re not there yet, but we are learning a little bit about why certain patients have certain types of asthma,” she said.

The Severe Asthma Research Program has found three clusters of likely severe asthma candidates: those with classic childhood asthma onset, those who have asthma with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and patients with both obesity and asthma characterized by “high impairment but mildly abnormal lung function.” Clinicians can use spirometry, complete blood count with differential, total immunoglobulin E, body mass index, allergy testing, and exhaled nitric oxide with these data and biomarkers to gain a better idea of a patient’s asthma situation.

Referrals to an asthma specialist should be considered if a patient experiences a life-threatening exacerbation, is not responding to therapy, has an unusual presentation of asthma symptoms, has comorbid conditions, or needs additional testing or additional education. Patients who are at step 2 or higher in EPR-3 guidelines and ready to move to step 3 and are under 4 years of age, and patients who are 5 years or older at step 4 of therapy or higher should be referred to an asthma specialist. “I think the younger the patient and the more severe the [symptoms], the more likely you should be referring to a specialist,” said Ms. Dickens.

Ms. Dickens reports no relevant financial disclosures. Global Academy for Medical Education and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM CARPS 2019

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.

Study: Cardiac biomarkers predicted CV events in CAP

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 08/19/2019 - 22:31

 

Cardiac biomarkers were used to predict the likelihood of cardiovascular events at day 1 and day 30 in patients with community-acquired pneumonia, in a recently conducted study.

Thomas Northcut/Thinkstock

These biomarkers were also used to predict late cardiovascular events at day 30 of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in patients who did not have a history of cardiovascular disease, according to Rosario Menéndez, MD, from the Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe and Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe in Valencia, Spain, and colleagues.

“Some patients have still high levels of inflammatory and cardiac biomarkers at 30 days, when they are usually referred to primary care without receiving any specific additional recommendations,” Dr. Menéndez and colleagues wrote in CHEST. “Our results suggest that a change in usual practice is needed to reduce current and further cardiovascular CAP complications.”

Dr. Menéndez and colleagues prospectively followed 730 patients for 1 year who were hospitalized for CAP, measuring the cardiac biomarkers proadrenomedullin (proADM), pro b-type natriuretic peptide (proBNP), proendothelin-1, and troponin T, and the inflammatory biomarkers interleukin 6 (IL-6), C-reactive protein (CRP), and procalcitonin (PCT). The researchers also collected data on age, gender, smoking status, and vaccination history, as well as whether patients had any cardiac, renal, pulmonary, neurological or diabetes-related comorbidities.

Overall, 95 patients experienced early cardiovascular events, 67 patients had long-term cardiovascular events, and 20 patients experienced both early and late events. In hospital, the mortality rate was 4.7%; the 30-day mortality rate was 5.3%, and the 1-year mortality rate was 9.9%.

With regard to biomarkers, patients who experienced both early and late cardiovascular events had significantly higher initial levels of proADM, proendothelin-1, troponin, proBNP, and IL-6. Patients who experienced later events had consistent levels of these biomarkers until day 30, except for a decrease at day 4 or day 5.

After adjustment for age, sepsis, previous cardiac disease, and a partial pressure of oxygen in the alveoli to fractional inspired oxygen ratio (PaO2/FiO2) of less than 250mm Hg, cardiac biomarkers proendothelin-1 (odds ratio, 2.25; 95% confidence interval, 1.34-3.79), proADM (OR, 2.53; 95% CI, 1.53-4.20), proBNP (OR, 2.67; 95% CI, 1.59-4.49), and troponin T (OR, 2.70; 95% CI, 1.62-4.49) significantly predicted early cardiovascular events, while proendothelin-1 (OR, 3.13; 95% CI, 1.41-7.80), proADM (2.29; 95% CI, 1.01-5.19) and proBNP (OR, 2.34; 95% CI, 1.01-5.56) significantly predicted late cardiovascular events. For day 30 results, when researchers added IL-6 levels to proendothelin-1, the odds ratio for late events increased to 3.53, and when they added IL-6 levels to proADM, the odds ratio increased to 2.80.

Researchers noted the limitations of the study included that they did not analyze cardiac biomarkers to predict specific cardiovascular events, did not identify the cause for mortality at 1 year in most patients, and did not include a control group.

This study was supported in part by funding from Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Sociedad Española de Neumología y Cirugía Torácica, and the Center for Biomedical Research Network in Respiratory Diseases. The authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.
 

SOURCE: Menéndez R et al. Chest. 2019 Aug 2. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2019.06.040.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

Cardiac biomarkers were used to predict the likelihood of cardiovascular events at day 1 and day 30 in patients with community-acquired pneumonia, in a recently conducted study.

Thomas Northcut/Thinkstock

These biomarkers were also used to predict late cardiovascular events at day 30 of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in patients who did not have a history of cardiovascular disease, according to Rosario Menéndez, MD, from the Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe and Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe in Valencia, Spain, and colleagues.

“Some patients have still high levels of inflammatory and cardiac biomarkers at 30 days, when they are usually referred to primary care without receiving any specific additional recommendations,” Dr. Menéndez and colleagues wrote in CHEST. “Our results suggest that a change in usual practice is needed to reduce current and further cardiovascular CAP complications.”

Dr. Menéndez and colleagues prospectively followed 730 patients for 1 year who were hospitalized for CAP, measuring the cardiac biomarkers proadrenomedullin (proADM), pro b-type natriuretic peptide (proBNP), proendothelin-1, and troponin T, and the inflammatory biomarkers interleukin 6 (IL-6), C-reactive protein (CRP), and procalcitonin (PCT). The researchers also collected data on age, gender, smoking status, and vaccination history, as well as whether patients had any cardiac, renal, pulmonary, neurological or diabetes-related comorbidities.

Overall, 95 patients experienced early cardiovascular events, 67 patients had long-term cardiovascular events, and 20 patients experienced both early and late events. In hospital, the mortality rate was 4.7%; the 30-day mortality rate was 5.3%, and the 1-year mortality rate was 9.9%.

With regard to biomarkers, patients who experienced both early and late cardiovascular events had significantly higher initial levels of proADM, proendothelin-1, troponin, proBNP, and IL-6. Patients who experienced later events had consistent levels of these biomarkers until day 30, except for a decrease at day 4 or day 5.

After adjustment for age, sepsis, previous cardiac disease, and a partial pressure of oxygen in the alveoli to fractional inspired oxygen ratio (PaO2/FiO2) of less than 250mm Hg, cardiac biomarkers proendothelin-1 (odds ratio, 2.25; 95% confidence interval, 1.34-3.79), proADM (OR, 2.53; 95% CI, 1.53-4.20), proBNP (OR, 2.67; 95% CI, 1.59-4.49), and troponin T (OR, 2.70; 95% CI, 1.62-4.49) significantly predicted early cardiovascular events, while proendothelin-1 (OR, 3.13; 95% CI, 1.41-7.80), proADM (2.29; 95% CI, 1.01-5.19) and proBNP (OR, 2.34; 95% CI, 1.01-5.56) significantly predicted late cardiovascular events. For day 30 results, when researchers added IL-6 levels to proendothelin-1, the odds ratio for late events increased to 3.53, and when they added IL-6 levels to proADM, the odds ratio increased to 2.80.

Researchers noted the limitations of the study included that they did not analyze cardiac biomarkers to predict specific cardiovascular events, did not identify the cause for mortality at 1 year in most patients, and did not include a control group.

This study was supported in part by funding from Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Sociedad Española de Neumología y Cirugía Torácica, and the Center for Biomedical Research Network in Respiratory Diseases. The authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.
 

SOURCE: Menéndez R et al. Chest. 2019 Aug 2. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2019.06.040.

 

Cardiac biomarkers were used to predict the likelihood of cardiovascular events at day 1 and day 30 in patients with community-acquired pneumonia, in a recently conducted study.

Thomas Northcut/Thinkstock

These biomarkers were also used to predict late cardiovascular events at day 30 of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in patients who did not have a history of cardiovascular disease, according to Rosario Menéndez, MD, from the Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe and Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe in Valencia, Spain, and colleagues.

“Some patients have still high levels of inflammatory and cardiac biomarkers at 30 days, when they are usually referred to primary care without receiving any specific additional recommendations,” Dr. Menéndez and colleagues wrote in CHEST. “Our results suggest that a change in usual practice is needed to reduce current and further cardiovascular CAP complications.”

Dr. Menéndez and colleagues prospectively followed 730 patients for 1 year who were hospitalized for CAP, measuring the cardiac biomarkers proadrenomedullin (proADM), pro b-type natriuretic peptide (proBNP), proendothelin-1, and troponin T, and the inflammatory biomarkers interleukin 6 (IL-6), C-reactive protein (CRP), and procalcitonin (PCT). The researchers also collected data on age, gender, smoking status, and vaccination history, as well as whether patients had any cardiac, renal, pulmonary, neurological or diabetes-related comorbidities.

Overall, 95 patients experienced early cardiovascular events, 67 patients had long-term cardiovascular events, and 20 patients experienced both early and late events. In hospital, the mortality rate was 4.7%; the 30-day mortality rate was 5.3%, and the 1-year mortality rate was 9.9%.

With regard to biomarkers, patients who experienced both early and late cardiovascular events had significantly higher initial levels of proADM, proendothelin-1, troponin, proBNP, and IL-6. Patients who experienced later events had consistent levels of these biomarkers until day 30, except for a decrease at day 4 or day 5.

After adjustment for age, sepsis, previous cardiac disease, and a partial pressure of oxygen in the alveoli to fractional inspired oxygen ratio (PaO2/FiO2) of less than 250mm Hg, cardiac biomarkers proendothelin-1 (odds ratio, 2.25; 95% confidence interval, 1.34-3.79), proADM (OR, 2.53; 95% CI, 1.53-4.20), proBNP (OR, 2.67; 95% CI, 1.59-4.49), and troponin T (OR, 2.70; 95% CI, 1.62-4.49) significantly predicted early cardiovascular events, while proendothelin-1 (OR, 3.13; 95% CI, 1.41-7.80), proADM (2.29; 95% CI, 1.01-5.19) and proBNP (OR, 2.34; 95% CI, 1.01-5.56) significantly predicted late cardiovascular events. For day 30 results, when researchers added IL-6 levels to proendothelin-1, the odds ratio for late events increased to 3.53, and when they added IL-6 levels to proADM, the odds ratio increased to 2.80.

Researchers noted the limitations of the study included that they did not analyze cardiac biomarkers to predict specific cardiovascular events, did not identify the cause for mortality at 1 year in most patients, and did not include a control group.

This study was supported in part by funding from Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Sociedad Española de Neumología y Cirugía Torácica, and the Center for Biomedical Research Network in Respiratory Diseases. The authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.
 

SOURCE: Menéndez R et al. Chest. 2019 Aug 2. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2019.06.040.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Click for Credit Status
Active
Sections
Article Source

FROM CHEST

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
CME ID
206378
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.

Sepsis survivors’ persistent immunosuppression raises mortality risk

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 08/13/2019 - 08:34

 

Inflammation and immunosuppression could persist for some patients up to a year after a hospitalization for sepsis, and these patients were more likely to experience worsened long-term outcomes, readmission after discharge, and mortality, according to a study published in JAMA Network Open.

141820
Sachin Yende, MD

“Individuals with persistent biomarkers of inflammation and immunosuppression had a higher risk of readmission and death due to cardiovascular disease and cancer compared with those with normal circulating biomarkers,” Sachin Yende, MD, of the VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System and the University of Pittsburgh and colleagues wrote in their study. “Our findings suggest that long-term immunomodulation strategies should be explored in patients hospitalized with sepsis.”

Dr. Yende and colleagues performed a multicenter, prospective cohort study of 483 patients who were hospitalized for sepsis at 12 different sites between January 2012 and May 2017. They measured inflammation using interleukin-6, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), and soluble programmed death-ligand 1 (sPD-L1); hemostasis using plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 and D-dimer; and endothelial dysfunction using intercellular adhesion molecule 1, vascular cell adhesion molecule 1, and E-selectin. The patients included were mean age 60.5 years, 54.9% were male, the mean Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score was 4.2, and a total of 376 patients (77.8%) had one or more chronic diseases.

Overall, there were 485 readmissions in 205 patients (42.5%). The mortality rate was 43 patients (8.9%) at 3 months, 56 patients (11.6%) at 6 months, and 85 patients (17.6%) at 12 months. At 3 months, 23 patients (25.8%) had elevated hs-CRP levels, which increased to 26 patients (30.2%) at 6 months and 40 patients (44.9%) at 12 months. sPD-L1 levels were elevated in 45 patients (46.4%) at 3 months, but the number of patients with elevated sPD-L1 did not appear to significantly increase at 6 months (40 patients; 44.9%) or 12 months (44 patients; 49.4%).

From these results, researchers developed a phenotype of hyperinflammation and immunosuppression that consisted of 326 of 477 (68.3%) patients with high hs-CRP and elevated sPD-L1 levels. Patients with this phenotype of hyperinflammation and immunosuppression had more than eight times the risk of 1-year mortality (odds ratio, 8.26; 95% confidence interval, 3.45-21.69; P less than .001) and more than five times the risk of readmission or mortality at 6 months related to cardiovascular disease (hazard ratio, 5.07; 95% CI, 1.18-21.84; P = .02) or cancer (hazard ratio, 5.15; 95% CI, 1.25-21.18; P = .02), compared with patients who had normal hs-CRP and sPD-L1 levels. This hyperinflammation and immunosuppression phenotype also was associated with greater risk of 6-month all-cause readmission or mortality (HR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.10-2.13; P = .01), compared with patients who had the normal phenotype.

“The persistence of hyperinflammation in a large number of sepsis survivors and the increased risk of cardiovascular events among these patients may explain the association between infection and cardiovascular disease in a prior study,” the authors said. “Although prior trials tested immunomodulation strategies during only the early phase of hospitalization for sepsis, immunomodulation may be needed after hospital discharge,” and suggest points of future study for patients who survive sepsis and develop long-term sequelae.

This study was funded by grants from National Institutes of Health and resources from the VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System. The authors reported personal and institutional relationships in the form of personal fees, grants, and patents for Alung Technologies, Atox Bio, Bayer AG, Beckman Coulter, BristolMyers Squibb, Ferring, NIH, Roche, Selepressin, and the University of Pittsburgh.

 

 

SOURCE: Yende S et al. JAMA Netw Open. 2019 Aug 7. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.8686.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

Inflammation and immunosuppression could persist for some patients up to a year after a hospitalization for sepsis, and these patients were more likely to experience worsened long-term outcomes, readmission after discharge, and mortality, according to a study published in JAMA Network Open.

141820
Sachin Yende, MD

“Individuals with persistent biomarkers of inflammation and immunosuppression had a higher risk of readmission and death due to cardiovascular disease and cancer compared with those with normal circulating biomarkers,” Sachin Yende, MD, of the VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System and the University of Pittsburgh and colleagues wrote in their study. “Our findings suggest that long-term immunomodulation strategies should be explored in patients hospitalized with sepsis.”

Dr. Yende and colleagues performed a multicenter, prospective cohort study of 483 patients who were hospitalized for sepsis at 12 different sites between January 2012 and May 2017. They measured inflammation using interleukin-6, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), and soluble programmed death-ligand 1 (sPD-L1); hemostasis using plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 and D-dimer; and endothelial dysfunction using intercellular adhesion molecule 1, vascular cell adhesion molecule 1, and E-selectin. The patients included were mean age 60.5 years, 54.9% were male, the mean Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score was 4.2, and a total of 376 patients (77.8%) had one or more chronic diseases.

Overall, there were 485 readmissions in 205 patients (42.5%). The mortality rate was 43 patients (8.9%) at 3 months, 56 patients (11.6%) at 6 months, and 85 patients (17.6%) at 12 months. At 3 months, 23 patients (25.8%) had elevated hs-CRP levels, which increased to 26 patients (30.2%) at 6 months and 40 patients (44.9%) at 12 months. sPD-L1 levels were elevated in 45 patients (46.4%) at 3 months, but the number of patients with elevated sPD-L1 did not appear to significantly increase at 6 months (40 patients; 44.9%) or 12 months (44 patients; 49.4%).

From these results, researchers developed a phenotype of hyperinflammation and immunosuppression that consisted of 326 of 477 (68.3%) patients with high hs-CRP and elevated sPD-L1 levels. Patients with this phenotype of hyperinflammation and immunosuppression had more than eight times the risk of 1-year mortality (odds ratio, 8.26; 95% confidence interval, 3.45-21.69; P less than .001) and more than five times the risk of readmission or mortality at 6 months related to cardiovascular disease (hazard ratio, 5.07; 95% CI, 1.18-21.84; P = .02) or cancer (hazard ratio, 5.15; 95% CI, 1.25-21.18; P = .02), compared with patients who had normal hs-CRP and sPD-L1 levels. This hyperinflammation and immunosuppression phenotype also was associated with greater risk of 6-month all-cause readmission or mortality (HR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.10-2.13; P = .01), compared with patients who had the normal phenotype.

“The persistence of hyperinflammation in a large number of sepsis survivors and the increased risk of cardiovascular events among these patients may explain the association between infection and cardiovascular disease in a prior study,” the authors said. “Although prior trials tested immunomodulation strategies during only the early phase of hospitalization for sepsis, immunomodulation may be needed after hospital discharge,” and suggest points of future study for patients who survive sepsis and develop long-term sequelae.

This study was funded by grants from National Institutes of Health and resources from the VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System. The authors reported personal and institutional relationships in the form of personal fees, grants, and patents for Alung Technologies, Atox Bio, Bayer AG, Beckman Coulter, BristolMyers Squibb, Ferring, NIH, Roche, Selepressin, and the University of Pittsburgh.

 

 

SOURCE: Yende S et al. JAMA Netw Open. 2019 Aug 7. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.8686.

 

Inflammation and immunosuppression could persist for some patients up to a year after a hospitalization for sepsis, and these patients were more likely to experience worsened long-term outcomes, readmission after discharge, and mortality, according to a study published in JAMA Network Open.

141820
Sachin Yende, MD

“Individuals with persistent biomarkers of inflammation and immunosuppression had a higher risk of readmission and death due to cardiovascular disease and cancer compared with those with normal circulating biomarkers,” Sachin Yende, MD, of the VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System and the University of Pittsburgh and colleagues wrote in their study. “Our findings suggest that long-term immunomodulation strategies should be explored in patients hospitalized with sepsis.”

Dr. Yende and colleagues performed a multicenter, prospective cohort study of 483 patients who were hospitalized for sepsis at 12 different sites between January 2012 and May 2017. They measured inflammation using interleukin-6, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), and soluble programmed death-ligand 1 (sPD-L1); hemostasis using plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 and D-dimer; and endothelial dysfunction using intercellular adhesion molecule 1, vascular cell adhesion molecule 1, and E-selectin. The patients included were mean age 60.5 years, 54.9% were male, the mean Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score was 4.2, and a total of 376 patients (77.8%) had one or more chronic diseases.

Overall, there were 485 readmissions in 205 patients (42.5%). The mortality rate was 43 patients (8.9%) at 3 months, 56 patients (11.6%) at 6 months, and 85 patients (17.6%) at 12 months. At 3 months, 23 patients (25.8%) had elevated hs-CRP levels, which increased to 26 patients (30.2%) at 6 months and 40 patients (44.9%) at 12 months. sPD-L1 levels were elevated in 45 patients (46.4%) at 3 months, but the number of patients with elevated sPD-L1 did not appear to significantly increase at 6 months (40 patients; 44.9%) or 12 months (44 patients; 49.4%).

From these results, researchers developed a phenotype of hyperinflammation and immunosuppression that consisted of 326 of 477 (68.3%) patients with high hs-CRP and elevated sPD-L1 levels. Patients with this phenotype of hyperinflammation and immunosuppression had more than eight times the risk of 1-year mortality (odds ratio, 8.26; 95% confidence interval, 3.45-21.69; P less than .001) and more than five times the risk of readmission or mortality at 6 months related to cardiovascular disease (hazard ratio, 5.07; 95% CI, 1.18-21.84; P = .02) or cancer (hazard ratio, 5.15; 95% CI, 1.25-21.18; P = .02), compared with patients who had normal hs-CRP and sPD-L1 levels. This hyperinflammation and immunosuppression phenotype also was associated with greater risk of 6-month all-cause readmission or mortality (HR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.10-2.13; P = .01), compared with patients who had the normal phenotype.

“The persistence of hyperinflammation in a large number of sepsis survivors and the increased risk of cardiovascular events among these patients may explain the association between infection and cardiovascular disease in a prior study,” the authors said. “Although prior trials tested immunomodulation strategies during only the early phase of hospitalization for sepsis, immunomodulation may be needed after hospital discharge,” and suggest points of future study for patients who survive sepsis and develop long-term sequelae.

This study was funded by grants from National Institutes of Health and resources from the VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System. The authors reported personal and institutional relationships in the form of personal fees, grants, and patents for Alung Technologies, Atox Bio, Bayer AG, Beckman Coulter, BristolMyers Squibb, Ferring, NIH, Roche, Selepressin, and the University of Pittsburgh.

 

 

SOURCE: Yende S et al. JAMA Netw Open. 2019 Aug 7. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.8686.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

FROM JAMA NETWORK OPEN

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Vitals

 

Key clinical point: Markers of inflammation and immunosuppression persist in over two-thirds of patients hospitalized for sepsis, which could explain worsened outcomes and mortality up to 1 year after hospitalization.

Major finding: Patients with signs of hyperinflammation and immunosuppression had significantly increased mortality after 1 year and were significantly more likely to be readmitted or die because of cardiovascular disease or cancer.

Study details: A prospective cohort study of 483 patients who were hospitalized because of sepsis at 12 different centers between January 2012 and May 2017.

Disclosures: This study was funded by grants from National Institutes of Health and resources from the Veterans Affairs Pittsburgh Healthcare System. The authors reported personal and institutional relationships in the form of personal fees, grants, and patents for Alung Technologies, Atox Bio, Bayer AG, Beckman Coulter, BristolMyers Squibb, Ferring, NIH, Roche, Selepressin, and the University of Pittsburgh.

Source: Yende S et al. JAMA Netw Open. 2019 Aug 7. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.8686.

Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.

Patient and family education of asthma management is critical

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 08/16/2019 - 10:38

 

Regular education of patients with asthma and their loved ones about how to manage the disease is critical to successful treatment, according to a speaker at the Cardiovascular & Respiratory Summit by Global Academy for Medical Education.

Mary Lou Hayden

“Every contact with them is a teachable moment,” Mary Lou Hayden, RN, MS, FNP-BC, AE-C, a board-certified nurse practitioner and asthma educator, said in her presentation. “You want to make sure you’re involving the important people in their lives to help them.”

Education for asthma includes teaching patients and their families the difference between long-term control and reliever medications; the proper timing and technique with the medications, as well as the importance of adherence; how to recognize and avoid triggers for asthma; how to self-monitor their asthma and control the disease; and when to seek medication care, she said.

“We review their inhaler technique every time they come in,” she added.

According to the American Lung Association, patients learn in visual, auditory, and kinesthetic styles. Teaching patients in a kinesthetic style by actually showing the patient how to take the medication through example will help the patient learn through feeling, or muscle memory. This also method works even if patients do not have the medication with them at the time, said Ms. Hayden.

“Let’s say, you don’t have [the medication], but you prescribe it,” she said. “When they come back, tell them to bring their bag of medications and make sure you go back through because if they can kinesthetically use it correctly, they’ve already mastered the visual and the auditory piece.

Written action plans are also important to successful asthma management. The plan should be tailored to the patient’s disease severity, loss of control, and include information like the peak expiratory flow and medication types, dosages, and frequencies. The action plan should also be available at home, daycare, and school. “You want them to know how to recognize their symptoms, what to do about their symptoms, and when to contact you or go to urgent care or [the emergency room],” said Ms. Hayden.

To simplify the plan, Ms. Hayden recommended zoning actions based on color, like the asthma action plan provided by the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. The AAAAI plan uses traffic colors to signify how well controlled a patient’s asthma is, with green indicating well-controlled disease, yellow denoting worsening asthma, and red indicating that the asthma needs to be treated right away.

Action plans should also address a patient’s health literacy level and culture. “Think about who’s going to be using it,” said Ms. Hayden.

The goal of asthma therapy is to prevent chronic or problematic symptoms, lower use of short-acting beta-agonists, maintain good pulmonary function, normalize activity levels at school and work, prevent exacerbations and hospitalizations, and meet the patient’s expectations, as well as those of their family. “If you’re thinking only severe patients have exacerbations that are near fatal or fatal, that’s not true,” she said. It’s “very common for somebody with a very mild and intermittent asthma to go to severe in a very short period of time.”

When properly implemented, patient education is performed at the time of diagnosis, is done according to a plan, is integrated into care, reinforces important information, improves adherence, is individualized to the patient and addresses their needs, and builds a partnership between provider and patient.

“We really are thinking of the team concept: us, the patient and the important people the patient’s lives, and other clinicians that might be involved with other diseases to care for the patient,” said Ms. Hayden.

Ms. Hayden reports no relevant conflicts of interest. Global Academy for Medical Education and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

Regular education of patients with asthma and their loved ones about how to manage the disease is critical to successful treatment, according to a speaker at the Cardiovascular & Respiratory Summit by Global Academy for Medical Education.

Mary Lou Hayden

“Every contact with them is a teachable moment,” Mary Lou Hayden, RN, MS, FNP-BC, AE-C, a board-certified nurse practitioner and asthma educator, said in her presentation. “You want to make sure you’re involving the important people in their lives to help them.”

Education for asthma includes teaching patients and their families the difference between long-term control and reliever medications; the proper timing and technique with the medications, as well as the importance of adherence; how to recognize and avoid triggers for asthma; how to self-monitor their asthma and control the disease; and when to seek medication care, she said.

“We review their inhaler technique every time they come in,” she added.

According to the American Lung Association, patients learn in visual, auditory, and kinesthetic styles. Teaching patients in a kinesthetic style by actually showing the patient how to take the medication through example will help the patient learn through feeling, or muscle memory. This also method works even if patients do not have the medication with them at the time, said Ms. Hayden.

“Let’s say, you don’t have [the medication], but you prescribe it,” she said. “When they come back, tell them to bring their bag of medications and make sure you go back through because if they can kinesthetically use it correctly, they’ve already mastered the visual and the auditory piece.

Written action plans are also important to successful asthma management. The plan should be tailored to the patient’s disease severity, loss of control, and include information like the peak expiratory flow and medication types, dosages, and frequencies. The action plan should also be available at home, daycare, and school. “You want them to know how to recognize their symptoms, what to do about their symptoms, and when to contact you or go to urgent care or [the emergency room],” said Ms. Hayden.

To simplify the plan, Ms. Hayden recommended zoning actions based on color, like the asthma action plan provided by the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. The AAAAI plan uses traffic colors to signify how well controlled a patient’s asthma is, with green indicating well-controlled disease, yellow denoting worsening asthma, and red indicating that the asthma needs to be treated right away.

Action plans should also address a patient’s health literacy level and culture. “Think about who’s going to be using it,” said Ms. Hayden.

The goal of asthma therapy is to prevent chronic or problematic symptoms, lower use of short-acting beta-agonists, maintain good pulmonary function, normalize activity levels at school and work, prevent exacerbations and hospitalizations, and meet the patient’s expectations, as well as those of their family. “If you’re thinking only severe patients have exacerbations that are near fatal or fatal, that’s not true,” she said. It’s “very common for somebody with a very mild and intermittent asthma to go to severe in a very short period of time.”

When properly implemented, patient education is performed at the time of diagnosis, is done according to a plan, is integrated into care, reinforces important information, improves adherence, is individualized to the patient and addresses their needs, and builds a partnership between provider and patient.

“We really are thinking of the team concept: us, the patient and the important people the patient’s lives, and other clinicians that might be involved with other diseases to care for the patient,” said Ms. Hayden.

Ms. Hayden reports no relevant conflicts of interest. Global Academy for Medical Education and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

 

Regular education of patients with asthma and their loved ones about how to manage the disease is critical to successful treatment, according to a speaker at the Cardiovascular & Respiratory Summit by Global Academy for Medical Education.

Mary Lou Hayden

“Every contact with them is a teachable moment,” Mary Lou Hayden, RN, MS, FNP-BC, AE-C, a board-certified nurse practitioner and asthma educator, said in her presentation. “You want to make sure you’re involving the important people in their lives to help them.”

Education for asthma includes teaching patients and their families the difference between long-term control and reliever medications; the proper timing and technique with the medications, as well as the importance of adherence; how to recognize and avoid triggers for asthma; how to self-monitor their asthma and control the disease; and when to seek medication care, she said.

“We review their inhaler technique every time they come in,” she added.

According to the American Lung Association, patients learn in visual, auditory, and kinesthetic styles. Teaching patients in a kinesthetic style by actually showing the patient how to take the medication through example will help the patient learn through feeling, or muscle memory. This also method works even if patients do not have the medication with them at the time, said Ms. Hayden.

“Let’s say, you don’t have [the medication], but you prescribe it,” she said. “When they come back, tell them to bring their bag of medications and make sure you go back through because if they can kinesthetically use it correctly, they’ve already mastered the visual and the auditory piece.

Written action plans are also important to successful asthma management. The plan should be tailored to the patient’s disease severity, loss of control, and include information like the peak expiratory flow and medication types, dosages, and frequencies. The action plan should also be available at home, daycare, and school. “You want them to know how to recognize their symptoms, what to do about their symptoms, and when to contact you or go to urgent care or [the emergency room],” said Ms. Hayden.

To simplify the plan, Ms. Hayden recommended zoning actions based on color, like the asthma action plan provided by the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. The AAAAI plan uses traffic colors to signify how well controlled a patient’s asthma is, with green indicating well-controlled disease, yellow denoting worsening asthma, and red indicating that the asthma needs to be treated right away.

Action plans should also address a patient’s health literacy level and culture. “Think about who’s going to be using it,” said Ms. Hayden.

The goal of asthma therapy is to prevent chronic or problematic symptoms, lower use of short-acting beta-agonists, maintain good pulmonary function, normalize activity levels at school and work, prevent exacerbations and hospitalizations, and meet the patient’s expectations, as well as those of their family. “If you’re thinking only severe patients have exacerbations that are near fatal or fatal, that’s not true,” she said. It’s “very common for somebody with a very mild and intermittent asthma to go to severe in a very short period of time.”

When properly implemented, patient education is performed at the time of diagnosis, is done according to a plan, is integrated into care, reinforces important information, improves adherence, is individualized to the patient and addresses their needs, and builds a partnership between provider and patient.

“We really are thinking of the team concept: us, the patient and the important people the patient’s lives, and other clinicians that might be involved with other diseases to care for the patient,” said Ms. Hayden.

Ms. Hayden reports no relevant conflicts of interest. Global Academy for Medical Education and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM CARPS 2019

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.

About half of NCI cancer center directors received industry payments in 2017

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 08/05/2019 - 11:00

 

Slightly less than half of directors at National Cancer Institute–designated cancer centers received payments from industry in 2017, according to recent analysis of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Open Payments database.

That number is lower than in 2014, but approximately one-fourth of National Cancer Institute (NCI) directors received payments of $5,000 or more that were not related to research, David Carr, MD, of the University of California in San Diego, and H. Gilbert Welch, MD, MPH, of Thetford, Vt., reported in a research letter in JAMA Internal Medicine.

Although cancer care is shaped by public funding through centers under NCI, “[c]ancer care is also shaped by industry, because developing new cancer therapeutics represents a major market opportunity,” Dr. Carr and Dr. Welch said. “Industry payments to academic physicians risk blurring the line between innovation and the evaluation of new therapies.”

In their research letter, Dr. Carr and Dr. Welch examined research- and non–research-based payments made to 53 physician cancer center directors between 2015 and 2017. In 2016, 44 of 53 directors held their current positions, while 41 of 53 directors held their position in 2015.

Analysis from 2017 showed $4.42 million in total industry payments were distributed to the directors, consisting of $1.89 million in research-based payments and $2.53 million in nonresearch payments across 22 directors. There were 27 directors (51%) who did not receive any payments from industry.

The authors found 19 directors (36%) received payments of $5,000 or more, while 12 of 53 directors (23%) received nonresearch payments of $5,000 or more. The largest payment received in 2017 for research was $863,000. Two directors received industry payments at $50,000 or higher that significantly exceeded payments other directors received, and one director received $2.27 million for “compensation for services other than consulting, including serving as faculty or a speaker at a venue other than a continuing education program.”

The NCI currently defines any remuneration above $5,000 to be of “significant financial interest.”

“Our findings raise the question of whether industry payments to the directors of publicly supported institutions, such as NCI-designated cancer centers, serve the public interest,” Dr. Carr and Dr. Welch noted. “Policy makers—and the public—should consider whether such payments should be allowed, limited (e.g., to less than $5,000 a year), or eliminated.”

The authors reported no conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Carr D, et al. JAMA Intern Med. 2019 Aug 5. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.3098.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

Slightly less than half of directors at National Cancer Institute–designated cancer centers received payments from industry in 2017, according to recent analysis of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Open Payments database.

That number is lower than in 2014, but approximately one-fourth of National Cancer Institute (NCI) directors received payments of $5,000 or more that were not related to research, David Carr, MD, of the University of California in San Diego, and H. Gilbert Welch, MD, MPH, of Thetford, Vt., reported in a research letter in JAMA Internal Medicine.

Although cancer care is shaped by public funding through centers under NCI, “[c]ancer care is also shaped by industry, because developing new cancer therapeutics represents a major market opportunity,” Dr. Carr and Dr. Welch said. “Industry payments to academic physicians risk blurring the line between innovation and the evaluation of new therapies.”

In their research letter, Dr. Carr and Dr. Welch examined research- and non–research-based payments made to 53 physician cancer center directors between 2015 and 2017. In 2016, 44 of 53 directors held their current positions, while 41 of 53 directors held their position in 2015.

Analysis from 2017 showed $4.42 million in total industry payments were distributed to the directors, consisting of $1.89 million in research-based payments and $2.53 million in nonresearch payments across 22 directors. There were 27 directors (51%) who did not receive any payments from industry.

The authors found 19 directors (36%) received payments of $5,000 or more, while 12 of 53 directors (23%) received nonresearch payments of $5,000 or more. The largest payment received in 2017 for research was $863,000. Two directors received industry payments at $50,000 or higher that significantly exceeded payments other directors received, and one director received $2.27 million for “compensation for services other than consulting, including serving as faculty or a speaker at a venue other than a continuing education program.”

The NCI currently defines any remuneration above $5,000 to be of “significant financial interest.”

“Our findings raise the question of whether industry payments to the directors of publicly supported institutions, such as NCI-designated cancer centers, serve the public interest,” Dr. Carr and Dr. Welch noted. “Policy makers—and the public—should consider whether such payments should be allowed, limited (e.g., to less than $5,000 a year), or eliminated.”

The authors reported no conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Carr D, et al. JAMA Intern Med. 2019 Aug 5. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.3098.

 

Slightly less than half of directors at National Cancer Institute–designated cancer centers received payments from industry in 2017, according to recent analysis of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Open Payments database.

That number is lower than in 2014, but approximately one-fourth of National Cancer Institute (NCI) directors received payments of $5,000 or more that were not related to research, David Carr, MD, of the University of California in San Diego, and H. Gilbert Welch, MD, MPH, of Thetford, Vt., reported in a research letter in JAMA Internal Medicine.

Although cancer care is shaped by public funding through centers under NCI, “[c]ancer care is also shaped by industry, because developing new cancer therapeutics represents a major market opportunity,” Dr. Carr and Dr. Welch said. “Industry payments to academic physicians risk blurring the line between innovation and the evaluation of new therapies.”

In their research letter, Dr. Carr and Dr. Welch examined research- and non–research-based payments made to 53 physician cancer center directors between 2015 and 2017. In 2016, 44 of 53 directors held their current positions, while 41 of 53 directors held their position in 2015.

Analysis from 2017 showed $4.42 million in total industry payments were distributed to the directors, consisting of $1.89 million in research-based payments and $2.53 million in nonresearch payments across 22 directors. There were 27 directors (51%) who did not receive any payments from industry.

The authors found 19 directors (36%) received payments of $5,000 or more, while 12 of 53 directors (23%) received nonresearch payments of $5,000 or more. The largest payment received in 2017 for research was $863,000. Two directors received industry payments at $50,000 or higher that significantly exceeded payments other directors received, and one director received $2.27 million for “compensation for services other than consulting, including serving as faculty or a speaker at a venue other than a continuing education program.”

The NCI currently defines any remuneration above $5,000 to be of “significant financial interest.”

“Our findings raise the question of whether industry payments to the directors of publicly supported institutions, such as NCI-designated cancer centers, serve the public interest,” Dr. Carr and Dr. Welch noted. “Policy makers—and the public—should consider whether such payments should be allowed, limited (e.g., to less than $5,000 a year), or eliminated.”

The authors reported no conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Carr D, et al. JAMA Intern Med. 2019 Aug 5. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.3098.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

FROM JAMA INTERNAL MEDICINE

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Vitals

 

Key clinical point: Slightly less than half of directors at National Cancer Institute (NCI)–designated cancer centers received industry payments in 2017.

Major finding: Directors were more likely to receive non–research-based industry payments (23%), and the largest payment was to one director for $2.27 million.

Study details: An analysis of industry payments to 53 NCI-designated cancer center directors in 2017 using the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Open Payments database.

Disclosures: The authors reported no conflicts of interest.

Source: Carr D et al. JAMA Intern Med. 2019 Aug 5. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.3098.

Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.

Sinusitis treatment depends on classification, duration of symptoms

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 08/02/2019 - 12:43

Sinusitis is a complicated, multifactorial disease that should be treated based on the patient’s predisposing factors, according to a speaker at the Cardiovascular & Respiratory Summit by Global Academy for Medical Education.

The major signs and symptoms of sinusitis are pressure and pain on the anterior side of the face or in a localized headache, nasal obstruction, and pus observed at exam that is clouded or colored. Patients may also present with a feeling of facial congestion or fullness, nasal discharge, and fever, noted Brian Bizik, MS, PA-C, from Asthma & Allergy of Idaho and Nevada. The condition can present as acute (up to 4 weeks), subacute (4-12 weeks, with resolution of symptoms), chronic (12 weeks or more), and recurrent acute chronic sinusitis. Most cases of sinusitis are accompanied with contiguous nasal mucosa inflammation, and therefore the term rhinosinusitis is preferred.

To diagnose sinusitis, “you want patients to tell you where they’re hurting, and where their pressure is,” Mr. Bizik said, noting that he instructs patients to “point with one finger and tell me how you feel without using the word ‘sinus.’ ” Clinicians should ask whether a patient’s pain is continuous or cyclic, if they have bad breath even after brushing their teeth, if they have a chronic cough as opposed to postnasal drip, whether they have pain when they chew or walk, and if they feel like they are always tired.

According to guidelines from the Infectious Diseases Society of America, if symptoms last longer than 10 days and patients have a fever above 39° C (102.2° F), it is more likely bacterial rather than viral. Another sign of bacterial infection is when patients get better after a few days before worsening again later, said Mr. Bizik. In patients where clinicians suspect bacterial infection, the IDSA recommends amoxicillin/clavulanate over amoxicillin alone because some acute bacterial rhinosinusitis could be Haemophilus influenzae, and up to 30% of these infections can produce beta-lactamase. Patients with an amoxicillin allergy should take doxycycline, which is the only currently recommended antibiotic for patients with acute bacterial rhinosinusitis.

In general, clinicians should treat acute bacterial rhinosinusitis based on whether the patient has the most severe disease, said Mr. Bizik. “Use those three criteria: fever, symptoms longer than 10 days, purulence, and feeling lousy. If you find these people are in the high-risk group, [the guidelines] recommend antibiotic treatment.”

In addition to antibiotics, patients can likely benefit from use of topical corticosteroids such as mometasone, fluticasone, flunisolide, and beclomethasone. “It comes down to simply what you like and what works well for you,” he said. With regard to oral steroids, patients with severe pain can benefit from medication like prednisone. Finally, decongestants and relief with sinus irrigation treatments like Neti pots can help relieve symptoms and promote healthy mucosal function.

On the other hand, sinusitis with a viral origin tends to have “light” flu symptoms that do not worsen over time and almost always resolve within 10 days. “If they fit the viral mold, we’re going to do everything the same [as bacterial sinusitis]; just skip the antibiotics,” he said.

In patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), the symptoms persist over a longer period of time. CRS has a large number of associated conditions, such as allergic rhinitis and gastroesophageal reflux, as well as environmental factors like cigarette smoke, viral illness, and rebound rhinitis. If a patient’s CRS is caused by allergies, treating the allergies aggressively will improve CRS symptoms. “If they have an allergic component, you really have to have a reason not to put them on montelukast. I would encourage you to do that,” said Mr. Bizik. “Cetirizine and montelukast at bedtime works very well. They’re cheap, effective, generic, and nonsteroidal.”

Other methods for treating symptoms of CRS include saline irrigation to increase mucociliary flow rates, high doses of mucolytics, and first- and second-generation antihistamines, which can take up to 10 days to see the full effect. “I have a 10-day reminder, and I call them on day 11,” said Mr. Bizik. “If they stick with it, they say it really did help. It’s a great way to avoid antibiotics.”

Intranasal corticosteroids are also effective first-line therapies for CRS. However, technique is important when using these medications. In his presentation, Mr. Bizik described the “opposite-hand” technique he teaches to patients to reduce some of the side effects patients experience when using intranasal corticosteroids, including nosebleeds.

“You insert it in the nose, you go in all the way until you just feel your fingers touching your nose, and you point it towards the earlobe so the left nostril goes to the left earlobe [and vice versa], and you just spray,” once or twice a day depending on indication, he said. “Using those consistently, when you do this, the flower smell is less, it doesn’t bother you, less goes down your throat, and it’s very effective.”

Dr. Bizik reports being a speaking and consultant for Grifols, Boehringer Ingelheim, Meda Pharmaceuticals, and an advisory board member for Circassia Pharmaceuticals.

Global Academy for Medical Education and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

Sinusitis is a complicated, multifactorial disease that should be treated based on the patient’s predisposing factors, according to a speaker at the Cardiovascular & Respiratory Summit by Global Academy for Medical Education.

The major signs and symptoms of sinusitis are pressure and pain on the anterior side of the face or in a localized headache, nasal obstruction, and pus observed at exam that is clouded or colored. Patients may also present with a feeling of facial congestion or fullness, nasal discharge, and fever, noted Brian Bizik, MS, PA-C, from Asthma & Allergy of Idaho and Nevada. The condition can present as acute (up to 4 weeks), subacute (4-12 weeks, with resolution of symptoms), chronic (12 weeks or more), and recurrent acute chronic sinusitis. Most cases of sinusitis are accompanied with contiguous nasal mucosa inflammation, and therefore the term rhinosinusitis is preferred.

To diagnose sinusitis, “you want patients to tell you where they’re hurting, and where their pressure is,” Mr. Bizik said, noting that he instructs patients to “point with one finger and tell me how you feel without using the word ‘sinus.’ ” Clinicians should ask whether a patient’s pain is continuous or cyclic, if they have bad breath even after brushing their teeth, if they have a chronic cough as opposed to postnasal drip, whether they have pain when they chew or walk, and if they feel like they are always tired.

According to guidelines from the Infectious Diseases Society of America, if symptoms last longer than 10 days and patients have a fever above 39° C (102.2° F), it is more likely bacterial rather than viral. Another sign of bacterial infection is when patients get better after a few days before worsening again later, said Mr. Bizik. In patients where clinicians suspect bacterial infection, the IDSA recommends amoxicillin/clavulanate over amoxicillin alone because some acute bacterial rhinosinusitis could be Haemophilus influenzae, and up to 30% of these infections can produce beta-lactamase. Patients with an amoxicillin allergy should take doxycycline, which is the only currently recommended antibiotic for patients with acute bacterial rhinosinusitis.

In general, clinicians should treat acute bacterial rhinosinusitis based on whether the patient has the most severe disease, said Mr. Bizik. “Use those three criteria: fever, symptoms longer than 10 days, purulence, and feeling lousy. If you find these people are in the high-risk group, [the guidelines] recommend antibiotic treatment.”

In addition to antibiotics, patients can likely benefit from use of topical corticosteroids such as mometasone, fluticasone, flunisolide, and beclomethasone. “It comes down to simply what you like and what works well for you,” he said. With regard to oral steroids, patients with severe pain can benefit from medication like prednisone. Finally, decongestants and relief with sinus irrigation treatments like Neti pots can help relieve symptoms and promote healthy mucosal function.

On the other hand, sinusitis with a viral origin tends to have “light” flu symptoms that do not worsen over time and almost always resolve within 10 days. “If they fit the viral mold, we’re going to do everything the same [as bacterial sinusitis]; just skip the antibiotics,” he said.

In patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), the symptoms persist over a longer period of time. CRS has a large number of associated conditions, such as allergic rhinitis and gastroesophageal reflux, as well as environmental factors like cigarette smoke, viral illness, and rebound rhinitis. If a patient’s CRS is caused by allergies, treating the allergies aggressively will improve CRS symptoms. “If they have an allergic component, you really have to have a reason not to put them on montelukast. I would encourage you to do that,” said Mr. Bizik. “Cetirizine and montelukast at bedtime works very well. They’re cheap, effective, generic, and nonsteroidal.”

Other methods for treating symptoms of CRS include saline irrigation to increase mucociliary flow rates, high doses of mucolytics, and first- and second-generation antihistamines, which can take up to 10 days to see the full effect. “I have a 10-day reminder, and I call them on day 11,” said Mr. Bizik. “If they stick with it, they say it really did help. It’s a great way to avoid antibiotics.”

Intranasal corticosteroids are also effective first-line therapies for CRS. However, technique is important when using these medications. In his presentation, Mr. Bizik described the “opposite-hand” technique he teaches to patients to reduce some of the side effects patients experience when using intranasal corticosteroids, including nosebleeds.

“You insert it in the nose, you go in all the way until you just feel your fingers touching your nose, and you point it towards the earlobe so the left nostril goes to the left earlobe [and vice versa], and you just spray,” once or twice a day depending on indication, he said. “Using those consistently, when you do this, the flower smell is less, it doesn’t bother you, less goes down your throat, and it’s very effective.”

Dr. Bizik reports being a speaking and consultant for Grifols, Boehringer Ingelheim, Meda Pharmaceuticals, and an advisory board member for Circassia Pharmaceuticals.

Global Academy for Medical Education and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

Sinusitis is a complicated, multifactorial disease that should be treated based on the patient’s predisposing factors, according to a speaker at the Cardiovascular & Respiratory Summit by Global Academy for Medical Education.

The major signs and symptoms of sinusitis are pressure and pain on the anterior side of the face or in a localized headache, nasal obstruction, and pus observed at exam that is clouded or colored. Patients may also present with a feeling of facial congestion or fullness, nasal discharge, and fever, noted Brian Bizik, MS, PA-C, from Asthma & Allergy of Idaho and Nevada. The condition can present as acute (up to 4 weeks), subacute (4-12 weeks, with resolution of symptoms), chronic (12 weeks or more), and recurrent acute chronic sinusitis. Most cases of sinusitis are accompanied with contiguous nasal mucosa inflammation, and therefore the term rhinosinusitis is preferred.

To diagnose sinusitis, “you want patients to tell you where they’re hurting, and where their pressure is,” Mr. Bizik said, noting that he instructs patients to “point with one finger and tell me how you feel without using the word ‘sinus.’ ” Clinicians should ask whether a patient’s pain is continuous or cyclic, if they have bad breath even after brushing their teeth, if they have a chronic cough as opposed to postnasal drip, whether they have pain when they chew or walk, and if they feel like they are always tired.

According to guidelines from the Infectious Diseases Society of America, if symptoms last longer than 10 days and patients have a fever above 39° C (102.2° F), it is more likely bacterial rather than viral. Another sign of bacterial infection is when patients get better after a few days before worsening again later, said Mr. Bizik. In patients where clinicians suspect bacterial infection, the IDSA recommends amoxicillin/clavulanate over amoxicillin alone because some acute bacterial rhinosinusitis could be Haemophilus influenzae, and up to 30% of these infections can produce beta-lactamase. Patients with an amoxicillin allergy should take doxycycline, which is the only currently recommended antibiotic for patients with acute bacterial rhinosinusitis.

In general, clinicians should treat acute bacterial rhinosinusitis based on whether the patient has the most severe disease, said Mr. Bizik. “Use those three criteria: fever, symptoms longer than 10 days, purulence, and feeling lousy. If you find these people are in the high-risk group, [the guidelines] recommend antibiotic treatment.”

In addition to antibiotics, patients can likely benefit from use of topical corticosteroids such as mometasone, fluticasone, flunisolide, and beclomethasone. “It comes down to simply what you like and what works well for you,” he said. With regard to oral steroids, patients with severe pain can benefit from medication like prednisone. Finally, decongestants and relief with sinus irrigation treatments like Neti pots can help relieve symptoms and promote healthy mucosal function.

On the other hand, sinusitis with a viral origin tends to have “light” flu symptoms that do not worsen over time and almost always resolve within 10 days. “If they fit the viral mold, we’re going to do everything the same [as bacterial sinusitis]; just skip the antibiotics,” he said.

In patients with chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS), the symptoms persist over a longer period of time. CRS has a large number of associated conditions, such as allergic rhinitis and gastroesophageal reflux, as well as environmental factors like cigarette smoke, viral illness, and rebound rhinitis. If a patient’s CRS is caused by allergies, treating the allergies aggressively will improve CRS symptoms. “If they have an allergic component, you really have to have a reason not to put them on montelukast. I would encourage you to do that,” said Mr. Bizik. “Cetirizine and montelukast at bedtime works very well. They’re cheap, effective, generic, and nonsteroidal.”

Other methods for treating symptoms of CRS include saline irrigation to increase mucociliary flow rates, high doses of mucolytics, and first- and second-generation antihistamines, which can take up to 10 days to see the full effect. “I have a 10-day reminder, and I call them on day 11,” said Mr. Bizik. “If they stick with it, they say it really did help. It’s a great way to avoid antibiotics.”

Intranasal corticosteroids are also effective first-line therapies for CRS. However, technique is important when using these medications. In his presentation, Mr. Bizik described the “opposite-hand” technique he teaches to patients to reduce some of the side effects patients experience when using intranasal corticosteroids, including nosebleeds.

“You insert it in the nose, you go in all the way until you just feel your fingers touching your nose, and you point it towards the earlobe so the left nostril goes to the left earlobe [and vice versa], and you just spray,” once or twice a day depending on indication, he said. “Using those consistently, when you do this, the flower smell is less, it doesn’t bother you, less goes down your throat, and it’s very effective.”

Dr. Bizik reports being a speaking and consultant for Grifols, Boehringer Ingelheim, Meda Pharmaceuticals, and an advisory board member for Circassia Pharmaceuticals.

Global Academy for Medical Education and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM CARPS 2019

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.

GLP-1 agonists, SGLT2 inhibitors offer more options in diabetes management

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 05/03/2022 - 15:13

 

– The big news in diabetes management this year is “happy cardiologists and nephrologists.”

Jeff Craven/MDEdge News
Christine Kessler

According to Christine Kessler, MN, ANP-C, CNS, BC-ADM, FAANP, founder of Metabolic Medicine Associates in King George, Va., these specialists are happy because the American College of Cardiology and the American Diabetes Association both recently updated their respective societies’ guidelines to include evidence that treating patients with type 2 diabetes with glucagonlike peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonists, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, or metformin can lower risk of cardiovascular disease and chronic kidney disease.

“Finally, the ACC is aligned with the ADA,” Ms. Kessler said in her presentation. “This is amazing, and it’s good news.”

Recent innovations in diabetes management technology, such as continuous glucose monitors, are also helping to make diabetes management easier. “If you’re not using some of this technology in your primary care practice, it’s coming to you, and it’s amazing the data it can provide to us,” said Ms. Kessler at the Cardiovascular & Respiratory Summit by Global Academy for Medical Education.

In endocrinology, diabetes is thought of in terms of macrovascular and microvascular disease, she said. Macrovascular disease is cardiovascular disease and stroke, while microvascular disease is nephropathy, neuropathy, and retinopathy. Diabetes is a cardiovascular risk factor and puts patients at higher risk for cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality, and hospitalization because of myocardial infarction or stroke, compared with patients who do not have type 2 diabetes. There is also a higher risk of kidney disease, nerve damage, blindness, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, depression, complications during pregnancy, periodontal disease, and erectile dysfunction, said Ms. Kessler, who also is a nurse practitioner and researcher.



However, the “bottom line” in diabetes management is still initiating lifestyle changes, including getting enough sleep, dietary interventions that target weight loss and blood glucose control, and increasing physical activity that has cardiopulmonary benefits. Clinicians should also treat underlying conditions that contribute to increased cardiovascular risk, such as obesity, dyslipidemia, hypertension, and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.

Addressing insulin resistance and hyperglycemia are also important, but patients must avoid hypoglycemia. “Any patient with diabetes, we don’t want to drive them there because that’s a cardiac risk,” said Ms. Kessler. The endothelial microvascular and macrovascular damage is believed to be caused by glycemic swings, she added.

For pharmacologic therapy, patients with type 2 diabetes should stay on metformin if they are already on the drug, and it can even be used in cases where patients have reduced kidney function, with a glomerular filtration rate (GFR) between 30 and 60 mL/min per 1.73 m2, with a lower dose used between 30 and 45 mL/min per 1.73 m2. To treat patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, recent evidence has shown GLP-1 agonists are beneficial and can also promote appetite satiety, prandial support, and reduce a patient’s weight, but the drug is expensive, and about 15% of patients will not see therapeutic benefit while on the medication, said Ms. Kessler. Clinicians should also watch for increased risk of pancreatitis while patients use GLP-1 agonists, and it should not be prescribed in patients with a history of thyroid medullary cancer or multiple endocrine neoplasia type 2 (MEN2).

SGLT2 inhibitors can benefit type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes patients with heart failure and diabetic kidney disease, but should be the second or third choice in therapy. The dosage of SGLT2 inhibitors should be cut in half when used with insulin and sulfonylurea, and the drug can also increase LDL cholesterol.

Ms. Kessler noted that while GLP-1 agonists and SGLT2 inhibitors prevent or reduce cardiovascular risk, they are not currently approved to treat cardiovascular disease.

Ms. Kessler reports being an advisor and speaker for Novo Nordisk on the subject of obesity. Global Academy for Medical Education and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

– The big news in diabetes management this year is “happy cardiologists and nephrologists.”

Jeff Craven/MDEdge News
Christine Kessler

According to Christine Kessler, MN, ANP-C, CNS, BC-ADM, FAANP, founder of Metabolic Medicine Associates in King George, Va., these specialists are happy because the American College of Cardiology and the American Diabetes Association both recently updated their respective societies’ guidelines to include evidence that treating patients with type 2 diabetes with glucagonlike peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonists, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, or metformin can lower risk of cardiovascular disease and chronic kidney disease.

“Finally, the ACC is aligned with the ADA,” Ms. Kessler said in her presentation. “This is amazing, and it’s good news.”

Recent innovations in diabetes management technology, such as continuous glucose monitors, are also helping to make diabetes management easier. “If you’re not using some of this technology in your primary care practice, it’s coming to you, and it’s amazing the data it can provide to us,” said Ms. Kessler at the Cardiovascular & Respiratory Summit by Global Academy for Medical Education.

In endocrinology, diabetes is thought of in terms of macrovascular and microvascular disease, she said. Macrovascular disease is cardiovascular disease and stroke, while microvascular disease is nephropathy, neuropathy, and retinopathy. Diabetes is a cardiovascular risk factor and puts patients at higher risk for cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality, and hospitalization because of myocardial infarction or stroke, compared with patients who do not have type 2 diabetes. There is also a higher risk of kidney disease, nerve damage, blindness, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, depression, complications during pregnancy, periodontal disease, and erectile dysfunction, said Ms. Kessler, who also is a nurse practitioner and researcher.



However, the “bottom line” in diabetes management is still initiating lifestyle changes, including getting enough sleep, dietary interventions that target weight loss and blood glucose control, and increasing physical activity that has cardiopulmonary benefits. Clinicians should also treat underlying conditions that contribute to increased cardiovascular risk, such as obesity, dyslipidemia, hypertension, and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.

Addressing insulin resistance and hyperglycemia are also important, but patients must avoid hypoglycemia. “Any patient with diabetes, we don’t want to drive them there because that’s a cardiac risk,” said Ms. Kessler. The endothelial microvascular and macrovascular damage is believed to be caused by glycemic swings, she added.

For pharmacologic therapy, patients with type 2 diabetes should stay on metformin if they are already on the drug, and it can even be used in cases where patients have reduced kidney function, with a glomerular filtration rate (GFR) between 30 and 60 mL/min per 1.73 m2, with a lower dose used between 30 and 45 mL/min per 1.73 m2. To treat patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, recent evidence has shown GLP-1 agonists are beneficial and can also promote appetite satiety, prandial support, and reduce a patient’s weight, but the drug is expensive, and about 15% of patients will not see therapeutic benefit while on the medication, said Ms. Kessler. Clinicians should also watch for increased risk of pancreatitis while patients use GLP-1 agonists, and it should not be prescribed in patients with a history of thyroid medullary cancer or multiple endocrine neoplasia type 2 (MEN2).

SGLT2 inhibitors can benefit type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes patients with heart failure and diabetic kidney disease, but should be the second or third choice in therapy. The dosage of SGLT2 inhibitors should be cut in half when used with insulin and sulfonylurea, and the drug can also increase LDL cholesterol.

Ms. Kessler noted that while GLP-1 agonists and SGLT2 inhibitors prevent or reduce cardiovascular risk, they are not currently approved to treat cardiovascular disease.

Ms. Kessler reports being an advisor and speaker for Novo Nordisk on the subject of obesity. Global Academy for Medical Education and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

 

– The big news in diabetes management this year is “happy cardiologists and nephrologists.”

Jeff Craven/MDEdge News
Christine Kessler

According to Christine Kessler, MN, ANP-C, CNS, BC-ADM, FAANP, founder of Metabolic Medicine Associates in King George, Va., these specialists are happy because the American College of Cardiology and the American Diabetes Association both recently updated their respective societies’ guidelines to include evidence that treating patients with type 2 diabetes with glucagonlike peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonists, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, or metformin can lower risk of cardiovascular disease and chronic kidney disease.

“Finally, the ACC is aligned with the ADA,” Ms. Kessler said in her presentation. “This is amazing, and it’s good news.”

Recent innovations in diabetes management technology, such as continuous glucose monitors, are also helping to make diabetes management easier. “If you’re not using some of this technology in your primary care practice, it’s coming to you, and it’s amazing the data it can provide to us,” said Ms. Kessler at the Cardiovascular & Respiratory Summit by Global Academy for Medical Education.

In endocrinology, diabetes is thought of in terms of macrovascular and microvascular disease, she said. Macrovascular disease is cardiovascular disease and stroke, while microvascular disease is nephropathy, neuropathy, and retinopathy. Diabetes is a cardiovascular risk factor and puts patients at higher risk for cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality, and hospitalization because of myocardial infarction or stroke, compared with patients who do not have type 2 diabetes. There is also a higher risk of kidney disease, nerve damage, blindness, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, depression, complications during pregnancy, periodontal disease, and erectile dysfunction, said Ms. Kessler, who also is a nurse practitioner and researcher.



However, the “bottom line” in diabetes management is still initiating lifestyle changes, including getting enough sleep, dietary interventions that target weight loss and blood glucose control, and increasing physical activity that has cardiopulmonary benefits. Clinicians should also treat underlying conditions that contribute to increased cardiovascular risk, such as obesity, dyslipidemia, hypertension, and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.

Addressing insulin resistance and hyperglycemia are also important, but patients must avoid hypoglycemia. “Any patient with diabetes, we don’t want to drive them there because that’s a cardiac risk,” said Ms. Kessler. The endothelial microvascular and macrovascular damage is believed to be caused by glycemic swings, she added.

For pharmacologic therapy, patients with type 2 diabetes should stay on metformin if they are already on the drug, and it can even be used in cases where patients have reduced kidney function, with a glomerular filtration rate (GFR) between 30 and 60 mL/min per 1.73 m2, with a lower dose used between 30 and 45 mL/min per 1.73 m2. To treat patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, recent evidence has shown GLP-1 agonists are beneficial and can also promote appetite satiety, prandial support, and reduce a patient’s weight, but the drug is expensive, and about 15% of patients will not see therapeutic benefit while on the medication, said Ms. Kessler. Clinicians should also watch for increased risk of pancreatitis while patients use GLP-1 agonists, and it should not be prescribed in patients with a history of thyroid medullary cancer or multiple endocrine neoplasia type 2 (MEN2).

SGLT2 inhibitors can benefit type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes patients with heart failure and diabetic kidney disease, but should be the second or third choice in therapy. The dosage of SGLT2 inhibitors should be cut in half when used with insulin and sulfonylurea, and the drug can also increase LDL cholesterol.

Ms. Kessler noted that while GLP-1 agonists and SGLT2 inhibitors prevent or reduce cardiovascular risk, they are not currently approved to treat cardiovascular disease.

Ms. Kessler reports being an advisor and speaker for Novo Nordisk on the subject of obesity. Global Academy for Medical Education and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM CARPS 2019

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.

Hypothyroidism may have more impact on cardiac health than hyperthyroidism

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 08/01/2019 - 10:20

 

– Thyroid disorders can have significant effects on the heart and the cardiovascular system, Christine Kessler, MN, ANP-C, CNS, BC-ADM, FAANP, said at the Cardiovascular & Respiratory Summit by Global Academy for Medical Education.

Jeff Craven/MDEdge News
Christine Kessler

Even subclinical hypothyroidism “can be really impactful,” said Ms. Kessler, the founder of Metabolic Medicine Associates in King George, Va.

Thyroid function should be evaluated in patients with a fast resting heart fate, new-onset atrial fibrillation (AFib), idiopathic heart failure, bradycardia, using amiodarone, resistant hypertension, pericardial effusion, and statin-resistant hyperlipidemia, said Ms. Kessler, who also is a nurse practitioner and researcher. Other patients who should be evaluated: those older than 60 years, with a family history of autoimmune disease, fertility issues, new-onset anxiety/depression, and patients with high-risk pregnancy. Hypothyroidism may have more impact on cardiac health than does hyperthyroidism.

Levels of thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH), triiodothyronine (T3), and free thyroxine (FT4) are typically used to evaluate thyroid function. High TSH levels are usually indicative of hypothyroidism if FT4 and T3 are low; hyperthyroidism is likely the diagnosis if TSH is low while FT4 and T3 are high. Subclinical hypothyroidism is characterized by high TSH and normal FT4 and T3 levels; subclinical hyperthyroidism is associated with low TSH with normal FT4 and T3 levels.*

Hypothyroidism can cause increased diastolic hypertension and systemic vascular resistance, elevated levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) and homocysteine, decreased myocardial contractility, decreased cardiac output, reduced heart rate, and liver function abnormalities. Most commonly, it is caused by the autoimmune disease Hashimoto’s hypothyroidism but also can result from radiation, thyroidectomy, nontoxic multinodular goiter, and drugs with antithyroid activity such as birth control medications that contain estrogen. Hypothyroidism also raises the risk of coronary artery disease through lipid aberrations such as increased LDL level and decreased number of LDL cholesterol receptors. Myocardial contractility from hypothyroidism also increases the risk of mortality in patients with heart disease and heart failure. Clinicians also should take special precautions with narcotics and anesthesia when caring for patients with hypothyroidism because of the risk of bradycardia, Ms. Kessler said.

In subclinical hypothyroidism, clinicians should treat with half the recommended dose of levothyroxine in patients aged 45-65 years and who have high levels of lipids and CRP. “At the age of 70, I don’t worry if you’re subclinical unless [the patient is] profoundly, profoundly symptomatic,” she said. In overt hypotension, the main concern is an increased risk of ischemic heart disease that can result from overtreatment, and these patients usually are started on a low dose of levothyroxine with escalated doses until the patient achieves a euthyroid state.

Hyperthyroidism is most commonly caused by Grave’s disease, with 85% of those affected younger than age 40 years. Other causes include toxic multinodular goiter, toxic adenoma, TSH-producing pituitary adenomas, resistance to thyroid hormone, thyroiditis, excessive ingestion of iodine, shrinking of the thyroid gland, and a human chorionic gonadotropin–producing tumor such as struma ovarii. Common cardiac complications of hyperthyroidism are increased heart rate and blood pressure, reduced systemic vascular resistance, and increased cardiovascular disease and mortality in addition to increased cardiac hypertrophy, pulmonary hypertension, and heart failure. Heart rhythm, atrial fibrillation, atrial flutter, increased sinus tachycardia, and increased angina are all possible complications of hyperthyroidism.

Treatment priorities for hyperthyroidism are the immediately relieving any symptoms, reducing thyroid hormone production, and blocking the conversion of T4 to T3. For symptomatic patients, beta-blockers will help relieve symptoms and block the T4/T3 conversion. Follow-up treatment should include antithyroid drugs such as methimazole or propylthiouracil.

Patients who have subclinical hyperthyroidism are usually asymptomatic and may not always require treatment.

“In subclinical hypothyroidism, keep your mitts off the older patients. They’re usually going to do better, and you don’t want to throw them into hyperthyroidism,” she said. “If they’re [experiencing] subclinical hyperthyroidism, you’re going to treat them, because if not, they’re going to go into AFib, cardiovascular death, [and] they’re going to have osteoporosis. It’s not a good thing.”

Ms. Kessler reports being on the speakers bureau and an adviser for Novo Nordisk on obesity, and an adviser for them on type 2 diabetes, as well. She also reports being the study chairperson for the Florajen Patient Trial Program. The Cardiovascular & Respiratory Summit is part of Global Academy for Medical Education. Global Academy for Medical Education and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

Correction, 7/31/19: An earlier version of this article misstated the definition of subclinical hypothyroidism.

Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

– Thyroid disorders can have significant effects on the heart and the cardiovascular system, Christine Kessler, MN, ANP-C, CNS, BC-ADM, FAANP, said at the Cardiovascular & Respiratory Summit by Global Academy for Medical Education.

Jeff Craven/MDEdge News
Christine Kessler

Even subclinical hypothyroidism “can be really impactful,” said Ms. Kessler, the founder of Metabolic Medicine Associates in King George, Va.

Thyroid function should be evaluated in patients with a fast resting heart fate, new-onset atrial fibrillation (AFib), idiopathic heart failure, bradycardia, using amiodarone, resistant hypertension, pericardial effusion, and statin-resistant hyperlipidemia, said Ms. Kessler, who also is a nurse practitioner and researcher. Other patients who should be evaluated: those older than 60 years, with a family history of autoimmune disease, fertility issues, new-onset anxiety/depression, and patients with high-risk pregnancy. Hypothyroidism may have more impact on cardiac health than does hyperthyroidism.

Levels of thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH), triiodothyronine (T3), and free thyroxine (FT4) are typically used to evaluate thyroid function. High TSH levels are usually indicative of hypothyroidism if FT4 and T3 are low; hyperthyroidism is likely the diagnosis if TSH is low while FT4 and T3 are high. Subclinical hypothyroidism is characterized by high TSH and normal FT4 and T3 levels; subclinical hyperthyroidism is associated with low TSH with normal FT4 and T3 levels.*

Hypothyroidism can cause increased diastolic hypertension and systemic vascular resistance, elevated levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) and homocysteine, decreased myocardial contractility, decreased cardiac output, reduced heart rate, and liver function abnormalities. Most commonly, it is caused by the autoimmune disease Hashimoto’s hypothyroidism but also can result from radiation, thyroidectomy, nontoxic multinodular goiter, and drugs with antithyroid activity such as birth control medications that contain estrogen. Hypothyroidism also raises the risk of coronary artery disease through lipid aberrations such as increased LDL level and decreased number of LDL cholesterol receptors. Myocardial contractility from hypothyroidism also increases the risk of mortality in patients with heart disease and heart failure. Clinicians also should take special precautions with narcotics and anesthesia when caring for patients with hypothyroidism because of the risk of bradycardia, Ms. Kessler said.

In subclinical hypothyroidism, clinicians should treat with half the recommended dose of levothyroxine in patients aged 45-65 years and who have high levels of lipids and CRP. “At the age of 70, I don’t worry if you’re subclinical unless [the patient is] profoundly, profoundly symptomatic,” she said. In overt hypotension, the main concern is an increased risk of ischemic heart disease that can result from overtreatment, and these patients usually are started on a low dose of levothyroxine with escalated doses until the patient achieves a euthyroid state.

Hyperthyroidism is most commonly caused by Grave’s disease, with 85% of those affected younger than age 40 years. Other causes include toxic multinodular goiter, toxic adenoma, TSH-producing pituitary adenomas, resistance to thyroid hormone, thyroiditis, excessive ingestion of iodine, shrinking of the thyroid gland, and a human chorionic gonadotropin–producing tumor such as struma ovarii. Common cardiac complications of hyperthyroidism are increased heart rate and blood pressure, reduced systemic vascular resistance, and increased cardiovascular disease and mortality in addition to increased cardiac hypertrophy, pulmonary hypertension, and heart failure. Heart rhythm, atrial fibrillation, atrial flutter, increased sinus tachycardia, and increased angina are all possible complications of hyperthyroidism.

Treatment priorities for hyperthyroidism are the immediately relieving any symptoms, reducing thyroid hormone production, and blocking the conversion of T4 to T3. For symptomatic patients, beta-blockers will help relieve symptoms and block the T4/T3 conversion. Follow-up treatment should include antithyroid drugs such as methimazole or propylthiouracil.

Patients who have subclinical hyperthyroidism are usually asymptomatic and may not always require treatment.

“In subclinical hypothyroidism, keep your mitts off the older patients. They’re usually going to do better, and you don’t want to throw them into hyperthyroidism,” she said. “If they’re [experiencing] subclinical hyperthyroidism, you’re going to treat them, because if not, they’re going to go into AFib, cardiovascular death, [and] they’re going to have osteoporosis. It’s not a good thing.”

Ms. Kessler reports being on the speakers bureau and an adviser for Novo Nordisk on obesity, and an adviser for them on type 2 diabetes, as well. She also reports being the study chairperson for the Florajen Patient Trial Program. The Cardiovascular & Respiratory Summit is part of Global Academy for Medical Education. Global Academy for Medical Education and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

Correction, 7/31/19: An earlier version of this article misstated the definition of subclinical hypothyroidism.

 

– Thyroid disorders can have significant effects on the heart and the cardiovascular system, Christine Kessler, MN, ANP-C, CNS, BC-ADM, FAANP, said at the Cardiovascular & Respiratory Summit by Global Academy for Medical Education.

Jeff Craven/MDEdge News
Christine Kessler

Even subclinical hypothyroidism “can be really impactful,” said Ms. Kessler, the founder of Metabolic Medicine Associates in King George, Va.

Thyroid function should be evaluated in patients with a fast resting heart fate, new-onset atrial fibrillation (AFib), idiopathic heart failure, bradycardia, using amiodarone, resistant hypertension, pericardial effusion, and statin-resistant hyperlipidemia, said Ms. Kessler, who also is a nurse practitioner and researcher. Other patients who should be evaluated: those older than 60 years, with a family history of autoimmune disease, fertility issues, new-onset anxiety/depression, and patients with high-risk pregnancy. Hypothyroidism may have more impact on cardiac health than does hyperthyroidism.

Levels of thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH), triiodothyronine (T3), and free thyroxine (FT4) are typically used to evaluate thyroid function. High TSH levels are usually indicative of hypothyroidism if FT4 and T3 are low; hyperthyroidism is likely the diagnosis if TSH is low while FT4 and T3 are high. Subclinical hypothyroidism is characterized by high TSH and normal FT4 and T3 levels; subclinical hyperthyroidism is associated with low TSH with normal FT4 and T3 levels.*

Hypothyroidism can cause increased diastolic hypertension and systemic vascular resistance, elevated levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) and homocysteine, decreased myocardial contractility, decreased cardiac output, reduced heart rate, and liver function abnormalities. Most commonly, it is caused by the autoimmune disease Hashimoto’s hypothyroidism but also can result from radiation, thyroidectomy, nontoxic multinodular goiter, and drugs with antithyroid activity such as birth control medications that contain estrogen. Hypothyroidism also raises the risk of coronary artery disease through lipid aberrations such as increased LDL level and decreased number of LDL cholesterol receptors. Myocardial contractility from hypothyroidism also increases the risk of mortality in patients with heart disease and heart failure. Clinicians also should take special precautions with narcotics and anesthesia when caring for patients with hypothyroidism because of the risk of bradycardia, Ms. Kessler said.

In subclinical hypothyroidism, clinicians should treat with half the recommended dose of levothyroxine in patients aged 45-65 years and who have high levels of lipids and CRP. “At the age of 70, I don’t worry if you’re subclinical unless [the patient is] profoundly, profoundly symptomatic,” she said. In overt hypotension, the main concern is an increased risk of ischemic heart disease that can result from overtreatment, and these patients usually are started on a low dose of levothyroxine with escalated doses until the patient achieves a euthyroid state.

Hyperthyroidism is most commonly caused by Grave’s disease, with 85% of those affected younger than age 40 years. Other causes include toxic multinodular goiter, toxic adenoma, TSH-producing pituitary adenomas, resistance to thyroid hormone, thyroiditis, excessive ingestion of iodine, shrinking of the thyroid gland, and a human chorionic gonadotropin–producing tumor such as struma ovarii. Common cardiac complications of hyperthyroidism are increased heart rate and blood pressure, reduced systemic vascular resistance, and increased cardiovascular disease and mortality in addition to increased cardiac hypertrophy, pulmonary hypertension, and heart failure. Heart rhythm, atrial fibrillation, atrial flutter, increased sinus tachycardia, and increased angina are all possible complications of hyperthyroidism.

Treatment priorities for hyperthyroidism are the immediately relieving any symptoms, reducing thyroid hormone production, and blocking the conversion of T4 to T3. For symptomatic patients, beta-blockers will help relieve symptoms and block the T4/T3 conversion. Follow-up treatment should include antithyroid drugs such as methimazole or propylthiouracil.

Patients who have subclinical hyperthyroidism are usually asymptomatic and may not always require treatment.

“In subclinical hypothyroidism, keep your mitts off the older patients. They’re usually going to do better, and you don’t want to throw them into hyperthyroidism,” she said. “If they’re [experiencing] subclinical hyperthyroidism, you’re going to treat them, because if not, they’re going to go into AFib, cardiovascular death, [and] they’re going to have osteoporosis. It’s not a good thing.”

Ms. Kessler reports being on the speakers bureau and an adviser for Novo Nordisk on obesity, and an adviser for them on type 2 diabetes, as well. She also reports being the study chairperson for the Florajen Patient Trial Program. The Cardiovascular & Respiratory Summit is part of Global Academy for Medical Education. Global Academy for Medical Education and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

Correction, 7/31/19: An earlier version of this article misstated the definition of subclinical hypothyroidism.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM CARPS 2019

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.

Most patients with new hypertension under revised BP guidelines won’t need pharmacotherapy

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 07/30/2019 - 11:49

 

– An additional 14% of Americans have been reclassified as having hypertension – an increase from 32% to 46% of adults – under the latest guidelines on management of high blood pressure released by the American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association in 2017. However, this does not mean these patients are mandated for pharmacologic therapy, since most of them have been reclassified as having stage 1 hypertension, said Leslie L. Davis, PhD, RN, ANP-BC, FPCNA, FAANP, FAHA, associate professor of nursing at the University of North Carolina, Greensboro.

Dr. Leslie Davis

According to the new guidelines, normal BP is classified as less than 120 mm Hg systolic and less than 80 mm Hg diastolic. Elevated BP is 120-129 mm Hg systolic and under 80 mm Hg diastolic, while patients are classified as having stage 1 hypertension if their systolic BP is 130-139 mm Hg or diastolic BP is 80-90 mm Hg. Patients now have stage 2 hypertension if their systolic BP is higher than 140 mm Hg or diastolic BP is above 90 mm Hg.

This raises the importance of getting an accurate BP measurement from patients. At least two readings over two or more visits should be used before categorizing a patient. To take an ideal reading, patients should be sitting at rest with their back supported, feet positioned on a flat surface (no crossing legs), and their arm at heart level for at least 5 minutes. Patients should also refrain from tobacco or caffeine use 30 minutes before the reading. “These numbers need to be correct, because we’ve got new [BP] categories, and also for managing blood pressure, you’re making decisions based on these numbers,” said Dr. Davis at the Cardiovascular & Respiratory Summit by Global Academy for Medical Education.

When taking a patient’s BP, neither the patient nor the provider should talk, and constricting clothes on the upper extremity should be removed instead of pushed up. Using a incorrectly sized cuff can artificially raise or lower a patient’s BP level, so clinicians should use one that is 80% of the length and 40% of the width of the patient’s arm circumference. If the BP reading is elevated, confirm the reading in the other arm and use the arm with the higher reading for future measurements. BP measurements taken in different settings, such as ambulatory BP monitoring or home BP monitoring, can help give context to the in-office reading and whether the patient has white-coat hypertension or masked hypertension.

After a patient has their accurate BP reading, they can calculate their atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk using the ACC’s ASCVD Risk Estimator, said Dr. Davis. If a patient has confirmed cardiovascular disease or has a 10% or greater 10-year ASCVD risk, the target to lower BP is 130 based on high-quality evidence, but expert opinion recommends targeting 130/80 for patients with confirmed hypertension as well.

In terms of nonpharmacologic therapies for these patients, the largest benefit is in getting patients to lose weight. “If somebody is overweight or obese, 10 pounds is 10 points,” said Dr. Davis. “Even if you don’t get them to the appropriate body mass index over 3 months’ time, that’s as much as a low or medium dose of antihypertensive therapy. For you to be able to get double-digit reduction, that’s what a med does.”



Other nonpharmacologic interventions for these patients include a heart-healthy diet such as the DASH diet, lowering sodium and increasing potassium, structuring exercise and physical activity, lowering use of or avoiding alcohol, and smoking cessation. The goal of nonpharmacologic therapy is not only to lower BP, but make the medication work better, said Dr. Davis.

Pharmacologic therapy should be initiated when patients exceed or are above the cutoff values for the new BP categories and if a patient has already had a cardiovascular event. “Basically, if you’re above that line in the sand of your goal, that’s when to start medications,” she said.

For stage 1 hypertension, first-line therapy is lifestyle change plus thiazides, calcium-channel blockers, or ACE inhibitors, with stage 1 hypertension therapy consisting of a combination of two first-line therapy therapies to reduce systolic BP by about 20 mm Hg and diastolic BP by 10 mm Hg. Beta-blockers are not first-line antihypertension therapy, but can be considered in patients with coronary artery disease and heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction.

With regard to follow-up, patients with low ASCVD risk and stage 1 hypertension can be monitored in 3-6 months after lifestyle changes, while patients with high ASCVD risk and stage 1 hypertension should be followed up in 1 month. Patients with stage 2 hypertension should follow up with their primary care provider 1 month after beginning their therapy, and those with very high BP should promptly be started on drug treatment with lifestyle changes, with upward dose adjustments as needed.

In adults aged 65 years or older, the ACC/AHA guidelines also focused on how to prevent cognitive decline and dementia, said Dr. Davis. The goal for ambulatory, community-dwelling adults is still to have a systolic BP of less than 130 mm Hg, but clinical judgment should prevail because of comorbid conditions and limited life expectancy in these patients. Patient preference should also be considered, and clinicians should use a team-based approach with shared decision making to determine goals for each patient.

Dr. Davis reported no relevant financial disclosures. Global Academy for Medical Education and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

– An additional 14% of Americans have been reclassified as having hypertension – an increase from 32% to 46% of adults – under the latest guidelines on management of high blood pressure released by the American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association in 2017. However, this does not mean these patients are mandated for pharmacologic therapy, since most of them have been reclassified as having stage 1 hypertension, said Leslie L. Davis, PhD, RN, ANP-BC, FPCNA, FAANP, FAHA, associate professor of nursing at the University of North Carolina, Greensboro.

Dr. Leslie Davis

According to the new guidelines, normal BP is classified as less than 120 mm Hg systolic and less than 80 mm Hg diastolic. Elevated BP is 120-129 mm Hg systolic and under 80 mm Hg diastolic, while patients are classified as having stage 1 hypertension if their systolic BP is 130-139 mm Hg or diastolic BP is 80-90 mm Hg. Patients now have stage 2 hypertension if their systolic BP is higher than 140 mm Hg or diastolic BP is above 90 mm Hg.

This raises the importance of getting an accurate BP measurement from patients. At least two readings over two or more visits should be used before categorizing a patient. To take an ideal reading, patients should be sitting at rest with their back supported, feet positioned on a flat surface (no crossing legs), and their arm at heart level for at least 5 minutes. Patients should also refrain from tobacco or caffeine use 30 minutes before the reading. “These numbers need to be correct, because we’ve got new [BP] categories, and also for managing blood pressure, you’re making decisions based on these numbers,” said Dr. Davis at the Cardiovascular & Respiratory Summit by Global Academy for Medical Education.

When taking a patient’s BP, neither the patient nor the provider should talk, and constricting clothes on the upper extremity should be removed instead of pushed up. Using a incorrectly sized cuff can artificially raise or lower a patient’s BP level, so clinicians should use one that is 80% of the length and 40% of the width of the patient’s arm circumference. If the BP reading is elevated, confirm the reading in the other arm and use the arm with the higher reading for future measurements. BP measurements taken in different settings, such as ambulatory BP monitoring or home BP monitoring, can help give context to the in-office reading and whether the patient has white-coat hypertension or masked hypertension.

After a patient has their accurate BP reading, they can calculate their atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk using the ACC’s ASCVD Risk Estimator, said Dr. Davis. If a patient has confirmed cardiovascular disease or has a 10% or greater 10-year ASCVD risk, the target to lower BP is 130 based on high-quality evidence, but expert opinion recommends targeting 130/80 for patients with confirmed hypertension as well.

In terms of nonpharmacologic therapies for these patients, the largest benefit is in getting patients to lose weight. “If somebody is overweight or obese, 10 pounds is 10 points,” said Dr. Davis. “Even if you don’t get them to the appropriate body mass index over 3 months’ time, that’s as much as a low or medium dose of antihypertensive therapy. For you to be able to get double-digit reduction, that’s what a med does.”



Other nonpharmacologic interventions for these patients include a heart-healthy diet such as the DASH diet, lowering sodium and increasing potassium, structuring exercise and physical activity, lowering use of or avoiding alcohol, and smoking cessation. The goal of nonpharmacologic therapy is not only to lower BP, but make the medication work better, said Dr. Davis.

Pharmacologic therapy should be initiated when patients exceed or are above the cutoff values for the new BP categories and if a patient has already had a cardiovascular event. “Basically, if you’re above that line in the sand of your goal, that’s when to start medications,” she said.

For stage 1 hypertension, first-line therapy is lifestyle change plus thiazides, calcium-channel blockers, or ACE inhibitors, with stage 1 hypertension therapy consisting of a combination of two first-line therapy therapies to reduce systolic BP by about 20 mm Hg and diastolic BP by 10 mm Hg. Beta-blockers are not first-line antihypertension therapy, but can be considered in patients with coronary artery disease and heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction.

With regard to follow-up, patients with low ASCVD risk and stage 1 hypertension can be monitored in 3-6 months after lifestyle changes, while patients with high ASCVD risk and stage 1 hypertension should be followed up in 1 month. Patients with stage 2 hypertension should follow up with their primary care provider 1 month after beginning their therapy, and those with very high BP should promptly be started on drug treatment with lifestyle changes, with upward dose adjustments as needed.

In adults aged 65 years or older, the ACC/AHA guidelines also focused on how to prevent cognitive decline and dementia, said Dr. Davis. The goal for ambulatory, community-dwelling adults is still to have a systolic BP of less than 130 mm Hg, but clinical judgment should prevail because of comorbid conditions and limited life expectancy in these patients. Patient preference should also be considered, and clinicians should use a team-based approach with shared decision making to determine goals for each patient.

Dr. Davis reported no relevant financial disclosures. Global Academy for Medical Education and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

 

– An additional 14% of Americans have been reclassified as having hypertension – an increase from 32% to 46% of adults – under the latest guidelines on management of high blood pressure released by the American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association in 2017. However, this does not mean these patients are mandated for pharmacologic therapy, since most of them have been reclassified as having stage 1 hypertension, said Leslie L. Davis, PhD, RN, ANP-BC, FPCNA, FAANP, FAHA, associate professor of nursing at the University of North Carolina, Greensboro.

Dr. Leslie Davis

According to the new guidelines, normal BP is classified as less than 120 mm Hg systolic and less than 80 mm Hg diastolic. Elevated BP is 120-129 mm Hg systolic and under 80 mm Hg diastolic, while patients are classified as having stage 1 hypertension if their systolic BP is 130-139 mm Hg or diastolic BP is 80-90 mm Hg. Patients now have stage 2 hypertension if their systolic BP is higher than 140 mm Hg or diastolic BP is above 90 mm Hg.

This raises the importance of getting an accurate BP measurement from patients. At least two readings over two or more visits should be used before categorizing a patient. To take an ideal reading, patients should be sitting at rest with their back supported, feet positioned on a flat surface (no crossing legs), and their arm at heart level for at least 5 minutes. Patients should also refrain from tobacco or caffeine use 30 minutes before the reading. “These numbers need to be correct, because we’ve got new [BP] categories, and also for managing blood pressure, you’re making decisions based on these numbers,” said Dr. Davis at the Cardiovascular & Respiratory Summit by Global Academy for Medical Education.

When taking a patient’s BP, neither the patient nor the provider should talk, and constricting clothes on the upper extremity should be removed instead of pushed up. Using a incorrectly sized cuff can artificially raise or lower a patient’s BP level, so clinicians should use one that is 80% of the length and 40% of the width of the patient’s arm circumference. If the BP reading is elevated, confirm the reading in the other arm and use the arm with the higher reading for future measurements. BP measurements taken in different settings, such as ambulatory BP monitoring or home BP monitoring, can help give context to the in-office reading and whether the patient has white-coat hypertension or masked hypertension.

After a patient has their accurate BP reading, they can calculate their atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk using the ACC’s ASCVD Risk Estimator, said Dr. Davis. If a patient has confirmed cardiovascular disease or has a 10% or greater 10-year ASCVD risk, the target to lower BP is 130 based on high-quality evidence, but expert opinion recommends targeting 130/80 for patients with confirmed hypertension as well.

In terms of nonpharmacologic therapies for these patients, the largest benefit is in getting patients to lose weight. “If somebody is overweight or obese, 10 pounds is 10 points,” said Dr. Davis. “Even if you don’t get them to the appropriate body mass index over 3 months’ time, that’s as much as a low or medium dose of antihypertensive therapy. For you to be able to get double-digit reduction, that’s what a med does.”



Other nonpharmacologic interventions for these patients include a heart-healthy diet such as the DASH diet, lowering sodium and increasing potassium, structuring exercise and physical activity, lowering use of or avoiding alcohol, and smoking cessation. The goal of nonpharmacologic therapy is not only to lower BP, but make the medication work better, said Dr. Davis.

Pharmacologic therapy should be initiated when patients exceed or are above the cutoff values for the new BP categories and if a patient has already had a cardiovascular event. “Basically, if you’re above that line in the sand of your goal, that’s when to start medications,” she said.

For stage 1 hypertension, first-line therapy is lifestyle change plus thiazides, calcium-channel blockers, or ACE inhibitors, with stage 1 hypertension therapy consisting of a combination of two first-line therapy therapies to reduce systolic BP by about 20 mm Hg and diastolic BP by 10 mm Hg. Beta-blockers are not first-line antihypertension therapy, but can be considered in patients with coronary artery disease and heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction.

With regard to follow-up, patients with low ASCVD risk and stage 1 hypertension can be monitored in 3-6 months after lifestyle changes, while patients with high ASCVD risk and stage 1 hypertension should be followed up in 1 month. Patients with stage 2 hypertension should follow up with their primary care provider 1 month after beginning their therapy, and those with very high BP should promptly be started on drug treatment with lifestyle changes, with upward dose adjustments as needed.

In adults aged 65 years or older, the ACC/AHA guidelines also focused on how to prevent cognitive decline and dementia, said Dr. Davis. The goal for ambulatory, community-dwelling adults is still to have a systolic BP of less than 130 mm Hg, but clinical judgment should prevail because of comorbid conditions and limited life expectancy in these patients. Patient preference should also be considered, and clinicians should use a team-based approach with shared decision making to determine goals for each patient.

Dr. Davis reported no relevant financial disclosures. Global Academy for Medical Education and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM CARPS 2019

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.