scholarly journals Adverse effects on insulin secretion of replacing saturated fat with refined carbohydrate but not with monounsaturated fat: A randomized controlled trial in centrally obese subjects

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 1431-1441.e1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lin F. Chang ◽  
Shireene R. Vethakkan ◽  
Kalanithi Nesaretnam ◽  
Thomas A.B. Sanders ◽  
Kim-Tiu Teng
Diabetes ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 54 (8) ◽  
pp. 2390-2395 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Wynne ◽  
A. J. Park ◽  
C. J. Small ◽  
M. Patterson ◽  
S. M. Ellis ◽  
...  

2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 634-640 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eleanor M. Walker ◽  
Alba I. Rodriguez ◽  
Beth Kohn ◽  
Ronald M. Ball ◽  
Jan Pegg ◽  
...  

Purpose Vasomotor symptoms are common adverse effects of antiestrogen hormone treatment in conventional breast cancer care. Hormone replacement therapy is contraindicated in patients with breast cancer. Venlafaxine (Effexor), the therapy of choice for these symptoms, has numerous adverse effects. Recent studies suggest acupuncture may be effective in reducing vasomotor symptoms in menopausal women. This randomized controlled trial tested whether acupuncture reduces vasomotor symptoms and produces fewer adverse effects than venlafaxine. Patients and Methods Fifty patients were randomly assigned to receive 12 weeks of acupuncture (n = 25) or venlafaxine (n = 25) treatment. Health outcomes were measured for up to 1 year post-treatment. Results Both groups exhibited significant decreases in hot flashes, depressive symptoms, and other quality-of-life symptoms, including significant improvements in mental health from pre- to post-treatment. These changes were similar in both groups, indicating that acupuncture was as effective as venlafaxine. By 2 weeks post-treatment, the venlafaxine group experienced significant increases in hot flashes, whereas hot flashes in the acupuncture group remained at low levels. The venlafaxine group experienced 18 incidences of adverse effects (eg, nausea, dry mouth, dizziness, anxiety), whereas the acupuncture group experienced no negative adverse effects. Acupuncture had the additional benefit of increased sex drive in some women, and most reported an improvement in their energy, clarity of thought, and sense of well-being. Conclusion Acupuncture appears to be equivalent to drug therapy in these patients. It is a safe, effective and durable treatment for vasomotor symptoms secondary to long-term antiestrogen hormone use in patients with breast cancer.


Author(s):  
Tanmoy Kanti Goswami ◽  
Pradip Kumar Ghoshal ◽  
Avijit Hazra ◽  
Asish Biswas

Background: Osteoarthritis (OA) is a chronic, degenerative joint disorder responsible for considerable morbidity, particularly in old age. Flupirtine, a new centrally acting analgesic, is devoid of the adverse effects of NSAIDs and opioid analgesics. In this study author compared the effectiveness and safety of flupirtine with tramadol in knee OA.Methods: An open label, randomized, controlled trial was done with patients of primary knee OA of both sexes, age >50 years. Patients were recruited from Rheumatology OPD of SSKM Hospital. A minimum WOMAC score of 35 was essential for recruitment. Patients with serious comorbidities were excluded. They were treated orally with either flupirtine (100mg thrice daily) or tramadol (50mg thrice daily) for 12 weeks.Results: Ninety patients were recruited and data of 42 on flupirtine and 41 on tramadol were analysed. There was significant improvement in pain, stiffness and physical function compared to baseline in both the groups. However, there was no significant difference between groups at 4, 8 and 12 weeks. Responder rate (50% reduction in pain score from baseline) was 66.67% with flupirtine and 48.78% with tramadol (p = 0.122). Flupirtine caused 4 adverse events compared to 16 with tramadol. However, both the drugs were well-tolerated.Conclusions: The effectiveness of flupirtine in knee OA is comparable to tramadol, while causing minimal adverse effects. Long-term benefits need to be explored.


2018 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 67-72
Author(s):  
Abu Faisal Md Pervez ◽  
Md Fakhrul Amin Badal ◽  
SM Nurun Nabi ◽  
Mohammad Kamrul Hassan Shabuj ◽  
Sanjoy Kumer Dey ◽  
...  

Background: Seizure occurs more frequently in neonatal period and incidence of seizure is 50%-68% in perinatal asphyxia. At present phenobarbital is the drug of choice for treating neonatal seizure, which has some adverse effects on neurodevelopment status. Levetiracetam is a novel antiepileptic agent well-tolerated and effective in focal, generalized and neonatal seizure as well and lacks the adverse effects like phenobarbital. The present study was undertaken to compare the safety and efficacy of levetiracetam to phenobarbital in the treatment of neonatal seizure due to perinatal asphyxia.Methodology: This interventional study (Randomized Controlled Trial) was conducted in Department of Neonatology, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University (BSMMU), Dhaka and Dhaka Medical College Hospital, Dhaka, Bangladesh from 1st January’ 2014 to 30th June’ 2015. Intravenous levetiracetam injection, 50 mg/kg loading followed by 10 mg/kg 8 hourly maintenance was used and phenobarbital intravenous 20-40 mg/kg loading and 2.5 mg/kg/dose 12 hourly maintenance was given as per institutional protocol.Results: Sixty-nine term asphyxiated neonates (intention to treat population) provided analyzable data. Seizure control was found significantly higher (p = 0.011) higher in levetiracetam group in comparison to phenobarbital group (71% vs 40%). Need for more than one drug was significantly lower in levetiracetan group (p=0.011). Adverse effects were found significantly (p=0.001) lower in levetiracetam group (9% vs 43%). No serious adverse effect was observed in any group and most common adverse effect was somnolence in both group followed by irritability. Restlessness, sedation and shallow breathing were found only in phenobarbital group.Conclusion: Levetiracetam is more effective and safe in comparison to phenobarbital in the treatment of neonatal seizure due to perinatal asphyxia.Bangladesh J Child Health 2018; VOL 42 (2) :67-72


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document