<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<recommendedContent xmlns="http://api.mspoke.com">
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_442"
                     title="Most Mountaineers Can Enjoy the View (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.014"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Ophthalmology/GeneralOphthalmology/tb/18359?impressionId=1265790320549"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;Although the vistas from some of the world&apos;s highest peaks are literally &quot;eye-popping,&quot; most climbers don&apos;t have to worry about their high-altitude vision.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Corneal thickness did swell significantly among mountaineers at elevations up to 6,300 meters (about 21,000 feet), but they had no loss in visual acuity, Martina Monika Bosch, MD, of University Hospital Zurich in Switzerland, and colleagues reported in the February &lt;em&gt;Archives of Ophthalmology&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;It seems that visual acuity in healthy corneas is not adversely affected despite the presence of edema at altitudes up to 6,300 meters,&quot; the researchers wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Yet they warned that altitudes above 8,000 meters, or 26,000 feet, &quot;may result in profuse edema leading to dangerous visual loss.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Mt. Everest is just over 29,000 feet high.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Research has shown that hypobaric atmospheric conditions are linked to acute mountain sickness, as well as to the more unusual cerebral edema.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;High altitudes have also been associated with decreases in visual acuity, as was the case for Dr. Beck Weathers, a Mount Everest climber who had lasik surgery prior to his climb and experienced severe vision loss before reaching the summit.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;So, to investigate the effects of very high altitudes on corneal thickness, the researchers conducted a study of 28 healthy mountaineers ages 26 to 62, who were on a medical research expedition to Mount Muztagh Ata in China, an elevation of 24,757 feet.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The climbers were randomly assigned to two groups: one had a shorter time to acclimate to altitude conditions prior to reaching a camp at 21,736 feet.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The researchers measured corneal thickness via ultrasound pachymetry.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They found that corneal thickness increased in both groups at higher altitudes, with shorter acclimatization times leading to greater differences (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.048). For this group, mean corneal thickness increased from 537 mcm to 572 mcm.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Corneal thickness in the group that had more time to acclimate rose from 534 mcm to 563 mcm.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Visual acuity didn&apos;t significantly decrease during the course of the expedition. However, the researchers warned that higher altitudes induce more endothelial pump function failure and may result in profuse edema, leading to vision loss.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;While the cause of corneal swelling in hypoxic conditions is still controversial, the researchers suggested that a higher concentration of lactate may reduce activity of the eye&apos;s endothelial pump function, resulting in corneal swelling.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;There were no differences in mountain sickness between the groups, but oxygen saturation during the expedition was significantly lower than at baseline in both.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Changes in oxygen saturation paralleled those of corneal thickness, the researchers said, indicating that slower acclimatization resulted in less corneal edema.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Also, climbers with more acute mountain sickness had thicker corneas, possibly due to their higher overall susceptibility to hypoxia.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;These findings further support our hypothesis that blood oxygen saturation becomes more important for the endothelial pump function when environmental oxygen pressure and, thus, tear film oxygen saturation, is reduced to a critical level,&quot; they wrote. &quot;Our results thus highlight the importance of aqueous humor oxygen delivery.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The study was limited by the inability to measure corneal thickness daily due to adverse weather conditions.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study was supported by grants from the Swiss National Research Science Foundation, the Swiss Society of Mountain Medicine, and Pfizer.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The researchers reported no conflicts of interest.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_413"
                     title="ICAO: In Obesity, Fat Legs Better than Fat Middles (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.011"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/PrimaryCare/Obesity/tb/18322?impressionId=1265790320549"
                     
      Having less abdominal fat but more leg fat may play a role in maintaining metabolic health in obese women, but not in heavy men, researchers found.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;Metabolically healthy obese women had significantly more leg fat compared with metabolically unfit women, and smaller waist circumference (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.05), Sarah Appleton, a postgraduate student at the University of Adelaide in Australia, and colleagues reported at the International Congress on Abdominal Obesity in Hong Kong.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;When there&apos;s no significant differences in total body fat, the high levels of leg fat but low levels of central fat &quot;makes you think this is a protective factor against developing metabolic complications of their obesity, including diabetes,&quot; Appleton told &lt;em&gt;MedPage Today&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Smaller studies have shown that metabolically healthy obese patients have less visceral fat compared with insulin-resistant obese patients, suggesting these may be protective factors that limit the development of metabolic disease.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, normal-weight patients with cardiometabolic risk factors, who are labeled as &quot;metabolically obese,&quot; have higher abdominal adiposity compared with metabolically healthy normal-weight patients. They&apos;re also at increased risk for diabetes and heart disease.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;To examine the relationship, the researchers conducted dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scans of body composition in 1,604 patients who were over age 50 and participated in the North West Adelaide Health Study. They were stratified in four categories: metabolically obese normal-weight, metabolically healthy normal weight, metabolically healthy obese, and metabolically unfit obese.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Metabolic obesity was defined by having two or more metabolic risk factors including high triglycerides, low HDL cholesterol, high blood pressure, high fasting plasma glucose, or diabetes.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The researchers also measured waist circumference.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They found that among normal-weight women, the metabolically obese had significantly more total fat and more trunk fat compared with those who were metabolically healthy (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.05). There were no differences in waist circumference or lean mass.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Among obese women, the metabolically healthy had no significant differences in total body fat, compared with the metabolically unfit. But they had significantly more leg fat, a smaller waist circumference, and the same amounts of lean mass.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;We would have expected to see that metabolically healthy obese ladies would have more leg fat, but also more lean mass and less central fat, since this combination is protective against developing diabetes,&quot; Appleton said, &quot;but we didn&apos;t see that related to lean mass, which was surprising.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Normal-weight men who had metabolic problems had significantly more total fat and trunk (chest and abdominal) fat than metabolically healthy ones, but no differences in lean mass.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;And for obese men, there were no significant differences between the metabolically fit and unfit, which &quot;was a surprise,&quot; Appleton said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Men generally have much less fat and more lean mass,&quot; she added. &quot;Women are the other way around, so maybe it&apos;s not so surprising to see these effects specifically in women.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The researchers did find that among all overweight patients, both male and female, metabolic health was associated with significantly lower waist circumference.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;We know specifically that fat around the abdomen is dangerous because it can drain into your blood very easily and have direct effects on organs including the liver and pancreas,&quot; Appleton said. &quot;The theory is that distribution of fat and maybe an alternative inflammatory profile protects obese ladies from developing the metabolic consequences you&apos;d expect to see in people who are obese.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Appleton said the study may have implications for clinical practice, adding that physicians should assess both BMI and waist circumference to determine disease risk. Moreover, physicians &quot;need to focus on healthy weight loss in a way that protects lean mass but also reduces dangerous fat deposits including central adiposity.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It also goes to show that &quot;just because somebody looks thin,&quot; Appleton added, &quot;doesn&apos;t mean they&apos;re healthy.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The researchers reported no conflicts of interest.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_354"
                     title="AMD Drugs Equally Effective (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.008"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Ophthalmology/GeneralOphthalmology/tb/18238?impressionId=1265790320549"
                     
      Visual acuity showed similar improvements with two vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors used to treat age-related macular degeneration (AMD), data from a retrospective study showed.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;About a fourth of patients treated with bevacizumab (Avastin) or ranibizumab (Lucentis) had &amp;#8805;20/40 vision at 12 months.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;The frequency of adverse events did not differ between treatment groups, but bevacizumab patients received fewer injections over the course of a year, investigators at Kaiser Permanente Southern California in Pasadena reported in the February issue of &lt;em&gt;Ophthalmology&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;&quot;What this article principally does is that it reassures patients and ophthalmologists that bevacizumab appears to be just as effective as ranibizumab,&quot; said first author Donald Fong, MD. &quot;It provides more reassurance than changing practice.&quot;&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;The results likely will not end discussion about the relative safety and efficacy of the two drugs for treatment of AMD.&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Ranibizumab was developed specifically for treatment of neovascular (wet) AMD, while bevacizumab was developed for oncology but is widely used off-label for treatment of AMD.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Much of the debate over the drugs involves cost, as ranibizumab costs about $2,000 per injection compared with about $50 for bevacizumab.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The two drugs are being compared in an NIH-sponsored multicenter clinical trial, but results are not expected before 2011.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In an indirect comparison of the two drugs, Fong and co-authors retrospectively reviewed records of 452 patients treated for exudative AMD with bevacizumab or ranibizumab, both of which inhibit angiogenesis via vascular endothelial growth factor.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The study population comprised 324 patients treated with bevacizumab and 128 treated with ranibizumab.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The bevacizumab patients were younger (78 versus 82 on average), and 83% of the ranibizumab patients were 75 or older compared with 70% of the bevacizumab group.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;A higher proportion of bevacizumab patients had baseline visual acuity &amp;#8804;20/200 (40.1% versus 33.6%), but a similar proportion in each group had visual acuity &amp;lt;20/40 (86.4% versus 88.3%).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The primary outcome of the analysis was visual acuity at 12 months. The authors reported that 22.9% of bevacizumab patients and 25.0% of ranibizumab patients attained visual acuity &amp;#8805;20/40 after a year of treatment.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Additionally, 27.3% of bevacizumab patients and 20.2% of the ranibizumab group exhibited some degree of improvement at 12 months. Neither difference was statistically significant.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Eight (2%) bevacizumab patients and four (3%) ranibizumab patients died before 12 months. Two patients in each group developed endophthalmitis.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Bevacizumab patients received an average of 4.4 injections during 12 months, compared with 6.2 for the ranibizumab group. The authors speculated that the difference might reflect physicians&apos; belief that bevacizumab is a larger molecule with a longer intraocular half-life.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In summarizing the results, the authors acknowledged the observational, nonrandomized nature of the study, as well as the lack of a standardized protocol for injecting the drugs.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Moreover, some patients initially on bevacizumab switched to ranibizumab when the newer drug became available and that switch &quot;most likely accounted for some of the changes observed in the bevacizumab group.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The authors also addressed differences between their findings and those from two Genentech-sponsored clinical trials.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The trials showed that 94% of patients treated with ranibizumab did not have doubling of their visual angle versus 85% in the Kaiser chart review. The authors attributed the difference to the older age of their patients, the exclusion of patients with visual &amp;lt;20/320 in the Genentech studies, and the fewer ranibizumab injections (6.2 versus &amp;gt;11 in the Genentech studies).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Despite the differences and limitations, the authors concluded that &quot;both treatments seem to be effective in stabilizing visual acuity loss.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In a prepared statement, Genentech officials said they still believe ranibizumab &quot;is the most appropriate medicine for people with wet age-related macular degeneration because it was specifically designed, formally studied, manufactured for intraocular delivery, and is approved by the FDA.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;At the same time, Genentech does not interfere with doctors&apos; prescribing choices and believes that they should be able to prescribe the treatment they believe is most appropriate for their patients.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In addition to limitations acknowledged by the authors, the statement also pointed out that the method for measuring visual acuity differed from the method used in most phase III clinical trials and that methods used to collect safety data differed from those typically used in prospective, randomized clinical trials.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Genentech also questioned the lack of explanation for the higher proportion of patients who switched from bevacizumab to ranibizumab compared with ranibizumab to bevacizumab (23% versus 3%).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;A clinical spokesperson for the American Academy of Ophthalmology told &lt;em&gt;MedPage Today&lt;/em&gt; that the results of the Kaiser study tend to support ophthalmologists&apos; views about use of the two drugs to treat AMD.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;It looks like all the debate about the superiority or inferiority of one medicine over the other medicine is becoming essentially nullified,&quot; said Abdhish Bhavsar, MD, director of clinical research at the Retina Center of Minnesota in Minneapolis.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;I think that these medicines both do a good job at treating, and I don&apos;t think that distinction in clinical practice is relevant anymore.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study was supported by the Southern California Permanente Medical Group.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Co-author Peter Custis disclosed a relationship with Med E Direct.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_207"
                     title="ISET: Women Fare Better in Small Leg Vessel Procedures (CME/CE)"
                     score="-0.004"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Cardiology/PeripheralArteryDisease/tb/18051?impressionId=1265790320549"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;HOLLYWOOD, Fla.  --  Contrary to expectations, women who undergo last-ditch, minimally-invasive procedures to open small blood vessels in the leg  --  and forestall amputation  --  generally have better outcomes than men, researchers reported here.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Overall, 87.5% of women who underwent the infragenicular endoscopic angioplasty avoided amputation for at least two years, compared with 82.9% of the men who were similarly treated (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.041), according to Tejas Shah, MD, of Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York City.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;This study is the first to compare the outcomes of men and women being treated for blocked lower-leg arteries with endovascular therapy,&quot; Shah said at the International Symposium on Endovascular Therapy (ISET). &quot;The results suggest endovascular therapy should be strongly considered in women with blocked arteries below the knee.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In many endovascular procedures, women tend to do worse then men, generally because they tend to have smaller blood vessels. But in this study, involving the smallest leg blood vessels, the opposite occurred. &quot;We really don&apos;t have any good reason why there should be this gender difference,&quot; Shah said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;What made this difference significant,&quot; Shah told &lt;em&gt;MedPage Today&lt;/em&gt;, &quot;was that the women in the study, overall, were at significantly greater risk of amputation than the male patients.&quot; He said that about 22.3% of men underwent treatment for claudication, compared with 12.3% of the women, but 77.7% of men were being treated for limb-threatening conditions compared with 87.7% of women.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The retrospective study involved review of angioplasties, stenting, and atherectomies performed on 152 men and 125 women at Mount Sinai between July 1999 and November 2009.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;When adjusted for comorbidities, women treated for tibial lesions with concurrent proximal disease had higher 24-month primary patency rates compared with men.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Some 46% of treated leg arteries in women remained open, compared with 30% (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.016) in men. Shah said that a subanalysis of isolated tibial lesions indicated that 50% of women achieved 24-month primary patency rates, compared with 28.8% of men (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt; =0.002).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;On the downside, women experienced higher rates of blood clots forming at the access site of the treatment (9% versus 0.6%, &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;.0001). Clotting, typically treated with blood thinners, may require a longer stay in the hospital (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.0001).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;In both men and women it is hard to keep these smaller leg blood vessels open,&quot; said Constantino Pe&amp;#241;a, MD, medical director of vascular imaging at Baptist Cardiac &amp;amp; Vascular Institute, Miami.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;It might be possible that women do better because of their hormone status. But we need to do prospective clinical trials to see if we can determine what factor is involved in making the procedure work better for women.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;Shah listed no relevant disclosures.  Pe&amp;#241;a reported financial relationships with Bard and Medtronic.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20090101_4_256"
                     title="ARVO: Children with &apos;Lazy Eye&apos; View Themselves Poorly"
                     score="-0.005"
                     href="