<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<recommendedContent xmlns="http://api.mspoke.com">
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_325"
                     title="MRI Reveals Risk for Kidney Failure in Diabetic Patients (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.005"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Nephrology/Diabetes/tb/18195?impressionId=1265785282325"
                     
      So-called silent strokes, visible on cerebral MRI scans, predict kidney failure in patients with type 2 diabetes, Japanese researchers said.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;After an average follow-up of 7.5 years, diabetic patients with evidence of small cerebral infarctions at baseline later suffered death or kidney failure at more than twice the rate seen in patients who had not had silent strokes, reported Takashi Uzu, MD, of Shiga University of Medical Sciences in Shiga, Japan, and colleagues.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;Silent strokes are a consequence of cerebral microvascular disease and thus may logically accompany the development of similar abnormalities in renal blood vessels, ultimately leading to kidney failure, the researchers explained online in the &lt;em&gt;Journal of the American Society of Nephrology&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;It is important to identify individuals who are at risk of progression of diabetic renal disease,&quot; Uzu and colleagues wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The current standard prognostic test is the albumin-creatinine ratio, but it is not entirely adequate for the purpose, they suggested: &quot;Recent clinical studies have shown that renal insufficiency can occur in the absence of microalbuminuria in patients with type 2 diabetes.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But they acknowledged that brain MRI scans would be too expensive and inconvenient for routine prognostic testing.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;New strategies are needed to determine the presence of renal and/or extrarenal microvascular diseases,&quot; Uzu and colleagues wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Their study involved 608 patients with type 2 diabetes who had no clinical signs of cerebrovascular or cardiovascular disease or overt nephropathy. Their mean age at baseline was about 60 and the average glycated hemoglobin level was about 8.6%.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Participants underwent cerebral MRI scans at baseline, with 177 showing evidence of silent cerebral infarctions, defined as focal lesions of at least 3 mm in diameter with low signal intensity on T1-weighted images and high intensity with T2 weighting. Dilated perivascular spaces were distinguished from infarcts with proton density scans. Patients with positive findings who had a history of stroke or transient ischemic attack were excluded.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Those with silent infarctions at baseline differed significantly from other participants according to several parameters. Not surprisingly, patients with cerebral infarcts on average were somewhat older (63 versus 57), had had diabetes for a longer period of time (9.8 years versus 7.6), had higher blood pressure (146.8 mm Hg systolic versus 136.5 ), and were more likely to have a history of smoking (58% versus 46%). All differences were significant at &lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.01.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, baseline fasting plasma glucose and glycated hemoglobin levels were both significantly lower in the patients who&apos;d had silent infarctions: mean 163 mg/dL versus 176 for glucose and 8.3% versus 8.7% for HbA1c (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;#8804;0.01 for both).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Patients were followed for up to 10 years, with a mean of 7.5. The primary outcome was end-stage renal disease or death, and Uzu and colleagues chose a secondary outcome combining dialysis with doubling of serum creatinine.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Kaplan-Meier curves for the patients with and without silent infarctions at baseline indicated that the primary outcome occurred at equal rates through the first four years of follow-up, but then the curves diverged abruptly.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;At year eight, approximately 6% of the noninfarcted group had experienced the primary outcome, compared with 21% of those who&apos;d had silent strokes (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.0001), according to Uzu and colleagues.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Curves for the secondary outcome began diverging by year three. At year eight, about 6% of the noninfarct participants had gone to dialysis or had serum creatinine levels double, whereas these endpoints occurred in nearly 30% of the infarct group (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.0001).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Overall, the hazard ratio associated with baseline silent cerebral infarctions for the primary outcome during follow-up was 2.44 (95% CI 1.36 to 4.38).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The hazard ratio for death alone was somewhat smaller (1.61, 95% CI 0.71 to 3.62), indicating that most of the risk measured by the primary outcome was actually in end-stage renal disease.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For the secondary outcome, the hazard ratio was 4.79 (95% CI 2.72 to 8.46).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;All the hazard ratios reflected adjustments for age, sex, duration of diabetes, body mass index, smoking status, HbA1c, blood pressure, serum lipids, and standard lab indices of kidney function at baseline.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) during follow-up also decreased faster in patients with silent strokes. After five years, mean eGFR had fallen by 8 ml/min/m&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; in the patients without silent infarcts at baseline compared with 10.5 ml/min/m&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt; in those with cerebral microvascular disease.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The researchers noted that the study was conducted at two clinical sites, which used somewhat different MRI procedures. But they also indicated that the prevalence of silent infarctions did not differ between the sites.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Other limitations included use of an older creatinine assay, inclusion of larger silent infarcts which could reflect macrovascular disease, and more patients in the cerebral infarct group who were taking renin-angiotensin system blocking drugs, which have renal impairment as an adverse effect.&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;External funding for the study was not reported.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;No potential conflicts of interest were reported.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_315"
                     title="A Few Extra Pounds May Benefit Older People (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.005"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Geriatrics/GeneralGeriatrics/tb/18183?impressionId=1265785282325"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;A little excess weight after age 70 could do the body some good, according to results of a study involving 9,000 older patients.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Overweight participants in the cohort study had the lowest 10-year mortality. Normal-weight and obese participants ages 70 to 75 had a similar and slightly higher risk of death, Leon Flicker, PhD, of the Western Australian Center for Health and Aging in Perth, and colleagues found.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The findings add to evidence suggesting that being overweight in older age is not such a bad thing and might even be beneficial.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;These results lend further credence to claims that the body mass index [BMI] thresholds for overweight and obese are overly restrictive for older people,&quot; the researchers concluded in an article in the &lt;em&gt;Journal of the American Geriatrics Society&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The authors also found that a sedentary lifestyle doubled the mortality risk for older women but did not affect survival of older men.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The World Health Organization has established four BMI thresholds to characterize body weight: &lt;ul&gt; &lt;li&gt;&amp;lt;18.5 kg/m&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;, underweight&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;18.5 to 24.9 kg/m&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;, normal weight&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;25 to 29.9 kg/m&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;, overweight&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;&amp;#8805;30 kg/m&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;, obese&lt;/li&gt; &lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The authors noted that the thresholds were derived primarily from studies of younger and middle-age adults. Whether the cut points for overweight and obese are appropriate for older individuals has remained unclear.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Two systematic reviews and a meta-analysis showed no increased mortality risk associated with a BMI in the overweight range for older people (&lt;em&gt;Arch Intern Med&lt;/em&gt; 2001; 161: 1194-1203, &lt;em&gt;Obesity Rev&lt;/em&gt; 2007; 8: 41-59). However, methodologic differences complicated the comparison of different studies, Flicker and colleagues wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;So they sought to address some of the uncertainty by analyzing data from two large Australian cohort studies involving more than 9,000 individuals ages 70 to 75 (4,677 men, 4,563 women).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The principal objectives were to determine the BMI threshold associated with the lowest mortality in older people and to determine whether the relationship between BMI and mortality differed between men and women.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Data for the analysis came from self-reported measures of height and weight, which the authors used to calculate BMI for the study participants. Participants also provided demographic, lifestyle, and health information.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Using the WHO criteria for BMI, the authors found that 1.3% of men and 3.1% of women were underweight; 43.5% of men and 50.3% of women were normal weight; 44.3% of men and 33.5% of women were overweight; and 11% of men and 13.1% of women were obese.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;During 10 years of follow-up, overweight study participants had a 13% lower risk of death compared with normal-weight participants (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.94). Obese participants had a mortality risk similar to that of normal-weight participants (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.11).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Self-reported sedentary lifestyle doubled the mortality risk for women across all BMI categories (HR 2.08, 95% CI 1.79 to 2.41). In contrast, sedentary lifestyle increased the mortality risk for men by 28% (HR 1.28, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.44).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Separate analyses involving common causes of death, such as cardiovascular disease and cancer, showed similar relationships between BMI and mortality risk.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Even after removing the effects of early mortality, those who were overweight were still at lowest risk, a finding consistent with the observation that weight loss in older age groups is associated with greater mortality,&quot; the authors wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Overweight older people are not at greater mortality risk, and there is little evidence that dieting in this age group confers any benefit,&quot; they added.&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 authors had no relevant disclosures&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_222"
                     title="Benefits of Cutting Down on Salt Quantified (CME/CE)"
                     score="-0.002"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Cardiology/Prevention/tb/18075?impressionId=1265785282325"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;Cutting daily salt intake by 3 grams a day  --  about 30% of the current average  --  could prevent 32,000 strokes and 54,000 myocardial infarctions a year, if a computer model developed by researchers at the University of California, San Francisco accurately depicts the clinical impact of salt reduction.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The results of the analysis, which used a computer simulation of heart disease in U.S. adults ages 35 to 84, also suggest that even a 1 gram per day reduction in salt over the next decade would be a more cost-effective strategy for treating hypertension than use of even the cheapest antihypertensive, wrote Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo, MD, PhD, and colleagues in a paper published online by the &lt;em&gt;New England Journal of Medicine.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Lee Goldman, MD, MPH, of Columbia University, who co-authored the paper, told &lt;em&gt;MedPage Today&lt;/em&gt; that their study builds on what has long been known about the adverse health effects of salt on a society that believes it to be the spice of life.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For example, Goldman said that most people seeking a healthy choice will check food labels and restaurant menus for calorie counts and trans fats, but will not pay attention to salt.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This is not the first time a call for salt reduction has been issued. As recently as last November, a meta-analysis published in &lt;em&gt;BMJ &lt;/em&gt;suggested that cutting salt intake in half  --  a reduction of about 5 grams a day or roughly a teaspoonful  --  would lower the stroke rate by 23% and reduce overall cardiovascular disease by as much as 17%.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Americans, like those in many Western countries, take in an average of about 10 g of salt a day; whereas the World Health Organization recommends only 5 g per day, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture recommends daily intake be limited to 5.8 g.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Bibbins-Domingo and colleagues reported that a 3 gram per day reduction in dietary salt would &quot;save 194,00 to 392,00 quality-adjusted life-years and $10 billion to $24 billion in healthcare costs annually.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In an editorial that accompanied the study, Lawrence J. Appel, MD, MPH, and Cheryl A.M. Anderson, PhD, MPH, of Johns Hopkins University, wrote that &quot;the evidence supporting the call to reduce salt intake as a means of preventing cardiovascular disease is compelling.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They concluded with this admonition: &quot;As we deliberate healthcare reform, let us not neglect this inexpensive, yet highly effective public health intervention for the prevention of disease.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It should be noted that Appel was also first author on a position paper from the American Society of Hypertension that also called for salt reduction as public policy.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Franz H. Messerli, MD, director of the hypertension program at St. Luke&apos;s-Roosevelt Hospital and a colleague of Goldman&apos;s, said the computer model used in the study was impressive but probably underestimates the benefit of reducing dietary salt &quot;because salt reduction has been shown to have a direct (blood pressure independent) effect on the heart, the brain, the kidneys, and also reduces stomach cancer and osteoporosis  --  factors that were not considered in this analysis.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But Messerli found it difficult to lead the victory parade, noting &quot;this is a modeling study and statements such as &apos;A modest reduction of 1 gm per day would be more cost-effective than using medication to lower blood pressure in all persons with hypertension&apos; are to be taken with a good grain of salt.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Messerli&apos;s measured response was not echoed by his colleagues in the hypertension world.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For example, Henry Black, MD, president of the American Society of Hypertension, and director of hypertension research at the New York University School of Medicine said that, although the paper extended the findings of many other studies, it is &quot;more comprehensive and is especially useful by comparing the benefits of [sodium] and [salt] reduction to those of other widely accepted public health approaches that the public and governmental bodies have embraced, including drug treatment.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Clyde Yancy, MD, president of the American Heart Association, said that while the study was a computer modeling analysis that may be as good as it gets because &quot;it would be impossible to do a randomized trial in large numbers of high versus low sodium consumption, and the use of modeling with reasonable assumptions represents a solid if not ideal alternative.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Moreover, Yancy argued that &quot;the costs and effort involved in setting and/or changing policy&quot; require strong imperatives, and he thought the data reported today &quot;provide that imperative.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Three grams of salt comes to about a teaspoonful, but Goldman said it was foolish to think of sodium reduction in terms of such measurements because so much sodium comes from processed foods and from restaurant food. Achieving the needed reduction requires a concerted national effort.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Bibbins-Domingo noted that their study was limited &quot;by any uncertainty concerning the data entered into the model.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Also they noted that they did not &quot;account fully for the possible effects of salt reduction that are unrelated to control of blood pressure  --  for example, potential improvements in outcomes for the increasing numbers of patients with heart failure or prevention of other serious conditions, such as end-stage renal disease.&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 in part by a grant from the American Heart Association Western States Affiliate and a grant from the University of California, San Francisco Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The authors said they had &quot;no potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;This article was developed in collaboration with ABC News. &lt;/em&gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.medpagetoday.com/upload/2009/10/1/14357_1.jpg&quot; mce_src=&quot;http://www.medpagetoday.com/upload/2009/10/1/14357_1.jpg&quot; alt=&quot;&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_209"
                     title="Effect of Beta-Blocker Add-On Therapy Quantified (CME/CE)"
                     score="-0.003"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Cardiology/Hypertension/tb/18055?impressionId=1265785282325"
                     
      Beta-blockers achieve statistically significant, dose-dependent decreases in blood pressure when added to a diuretic or calcium-channel blocker, a systematic review of published studies showed.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;The blood pressure benefits occurred with beta-blocker doses as low as 25% of the recommended dose and reached reductions of 8/6 mm Hg with add-on doses that were twice the recommended starting dose.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;A comparison with a previous review of add-on diuretic therapy showed that beta-blockers and diuretics achieved similar reductions in systolic blood pressure, but beta-blockers had a greater effect on diastolic pressure, according to a report in the &lt;em&gt;Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;The difference in pattern of blood pressure lowering shown for beta-blockers in this review as compared to thiazide diuretics in our previous review is a new finding with important clinical implications,&quot; Jenny Chen, of the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, and colleagues wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;The important difference in the pattern is that second-line beta-blockers have little or no effect on pulse pressure, whereas second-line thiazides significantly decrease pulse pressure in a dose-dependent manner. This difference in the pattern of blood pressure lowering with beta-blockers as compared to thiazides might explain why beta-blockers appear to be less effective at reducing adverse cardiovascular outcomes than thiazide diuretics, particularly in older individuals.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For many clinicians, low-dose monotherapy remains the initial approach to treatment of hypertension. However, studies have shown that most patients require combination therapy to reach blood pressure goals. Knowing the additive blood pressure effects of different drugs is essential for clinical decision-making related to second-line antihypertensive therapy, the authors noted.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Noting an absence of large randomized clinical trials comparing combination therapy with beta-blockers versus other drugs, the authors performed a systematic review of published data with two principal objectives: &lt;ul&gt; &lt;li&gt;Quantify the additional blood pressure reduction achieved with a second-line beta-blocker versus placebo&lt;/li&gt; &lt;li&gt;Quantify the variability of blood pressure and the effect on pulse pressure, heart rate, and withdrawals due to adverse effects with add-on beta-blocker therapy&lt;/li&gt; &lt;/ul&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Investigators limited their review to randomized clinical trials that had a double-blind design, parallel design with random allocation to treatment groups, at least two-week washout period prior to randomization, and minimum treatment duration of three to 12 weeks.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Additionally, the analysis included only studies that compared a beta-blocker plus another class of antihypertensive drug versus the other drug alone.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The review yielded 20 clinical trials that met inclusion criteria. The trials involved a total of 3,744 patients who had a baseline blood pressure of 158/102 mmHg. The estimated blood pressure reduction with beta-blocker add-on therapy was determined by comparing the blood pressure reduction with and without the beta-blocker.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The trials evaluated beta-blocker add-on doses that ranged from 0.25 to eight times the recommended starting dose. The magnitude of blood pressure reduction ranged from 2.9/1.4 mm Hg at 0.25 the usual starting dose to 10.2/8.8 mmHg with an add-on dose that was eight times greater than the usual starting dose.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The blood pressure reduction with the usual beta-blocker starting dose was 5.9/4.3 mm Hg, increasing to 8.0/6.3 mmHg with an add-on dose that was double the usual starting dose.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The reduction in systolic pressure was almost identical to that observed by Chen and colleagues in a previous review of add-on therapy with thiazide diuretics (&lt;em&gt;Cochrane Database Syst Rev&lt;/em&gt; 2009; 7(4): CD007187). However, add-on therapy with a diuretic had a smaller effect on diastolic blood pressure.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Only five of the 20 trials evaluated the addition of a beta-blocker to a dihydropyridine calcium-channel blocker. However, the blood pressure-reducing effects of adding a beta-blocker were comparable to those observed when a beta-blocker was added to a diuretic, the authors reported.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;None of the trials examined the effects of beta-blocker add-on therapy on pulse pressure. The authors calculated effects on pulse pressure by subtracting the change in diastolic pressure from the change in systolic pressure in both treatment arms.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Across the range of doses studied, beta-blocker add-on therapy achieved a nonsignificant reduction in pulse pressure that averaged about 2 mmHg. Blood pressure variability also did not differ significantly between combination and monotherapy treatment arms.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Adding a beta-blocker to existing antihypertensive therapy resulted in a reduction in heart rate that averaged about 10 bpm with add-on doses of one to two times the usual starting dose.&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 authors had no disclosures.&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="-0.003"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Cardiology/PeripheralArteryDisease/tb/18051?impressionId=1265785282325"
                     
      &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>
</recommendedContent>