A versão utilizada do Internet Explorer está desactualizada, não permitindo que este website seja apresentado correctamente. Clique no botão para atualizar o Internet Explorer para a versão mais recente (será remetido para a página de actualização da Microsoft).
Management of hyperglycemia in hospitalized patients in non-critical care setting - an endocrine society clinical practice guideline
Hyperglycemia is a common, serious, and costly health care problem in hospitalized patients. Observational and randomized controlled studies indicate that improvement in glycemic control results in lower rates of hospital complications in general medicine and surgery patients. Implementing a standardized sc insulin order set promoting the use of scheduled basal and nutritional insulin therapy is a key intervention in the inpatient management of diabetes. We provide recommendations for practical, achievable, and safe glycemic targets and describe protocols, procedures, and system improvements required to facilitate the achievement of glycemic goals in patients with hyperglycemia and diabetes admitted in non-critical care settings.
European Society of Endocrinology Clinical Practice Guideline for long-term follow-up of patients operated on for a phaeochromocytoma or a paraganglioma
Phaeochromocytomas and paragangliomas (PPGLs) are rare neuroendocrine tumours. Standard treatment is surgical resection. Following complete resection of the primary tumour, patients with PPGL are at risk of developing new tumoural events. The present guideline aims to propose standardised clinical care of long-term follow-up in patients operated on for a PPGL. The guideline has been developed by The European Society of Endocrinology and based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) principles. We performed a systematic review of the literature and analysed the European Network for the Study of Adrenal Tumours (ENS@T) database. The risk of new events persisted in the long term and was higher for patients with genetic or syndromic diseases. Follow-up in the published cohorts and in the ENS@T database was neither standardised nor exhaustive, resulting in a risk of follow-up bias and in low statistical power beyond 10 years after complete surgery. To inform patients and care providers in this context of low-quality evidence, the GuidelineWorking Group therefore prepared recommendations on the basis of expert consensus. Key recommendations are the following: we recommend that all patients with PPGL be considered for genetic testing; we recommend assaying plasma or urinary metanephrines every year to screen for local or metastatic recurrences or new tumours; and we suggest follow-up for at least 10 years in all patients operated on for a PPGL. High-risk patients (young patients and those with a genetic disease, a large tumour and/or a paraganglioma) should be offered lifelong annual follow-up.
Intensive glycemic control and the prevention of cardiovascular events - implications of the ACCORD, ADVANCE, and VA diabetes trials
Diabetes is defined by its association with hyperglycemia-specific microvascular complications; however, it also imparts a two- to fourfold risk of cardiovascular disease. Although microvascular complications can lead to significant morbidity and premature mortality, by far the greatest cause of death in people with diabetes is CVD.
Because of ongoing uncertainty regarding whether intensive glycemic control can reduce the increased risk of CVD in people with type 2 diabetes, several large long-term trials were launched in the past decade to compare the effects of intensive versus standard glycemic control on CVD outcomes in relatively high-risk participants with established type 2 diabetes. In 2008, two of these trials, ADVANCE and VADT, were completed and showed no significant reduction in cardiovascular outcomes with intensive glycemic control. A third trial, ACCORD, terminated its glycemic control study early due to the finding of increased mortality in participants randomized to a strategy of very intensive glycemic control with a target A1C of <6%. The findings of these three major trials led the ADA, with representatives of the American Heart Association (AHA) and the American College of Cardiology (ACC), to reexamine the recommendations for glycemic targets in patients with diabetes, the majority of whom have type 2 diabetes.
Interdisciplinary European Guidelines on Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery
In 2012, an outstanding expert panel derived from IFSO-EC (International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity – European Chapter) and EASO (European Association for the Study of Obesity), composed by key representatives of both Societies including past and present pres- idents together with EASO’s OMTF (Obesity Management Task Force) chair, agreed to devote the joint Medico-Surgical Workshop of both institutions to the topic of metabolic surgery as a pre-satellite of the 2013 European Congress on Obesity (ECO) to be held in Liverpool given the extraordinarily advancement made specifically in this field during the past years. It was further agreed to revise and update the 2008 Interdisciplinary European Guidelines on Sur- gery of Severe Obesity produced in cooperation of both Societies by focusing in particular on the evidence gathered in relation to the effects on diabetes during this lustrum and the sub- sequent changes that have taken place in patient eligibility criteria. The expert panel compo- sition allowed the coverage of key disciplines in the comprehensive management of obesity and obesity-associated diseases, aimed specifically at updating the clinical guidelines to re- flect current knowledge, expertise and evidence-based data on metabolic and bariatric surgery.
Management of Obesity in Adults: European Clinical Practice Guidelines
The development of consensus guidelines for obesity is complex. It involves recommending both treatment interventions and interventions related to screening and prevention. With so many publications and claims, and with the awareness that success for the individual is short-lived, many find it difficult to know what action is appropriate in the management of obesity. Furthermore, the significant variation in existing service provision both within countries as well as across the regions of Europe makes a standardised approach, even if evidence-based, difficult to implement. In formulating these guidelines, we have attempted to use an evidence-based approach while allowing flexibility for the practicing clinician in domains where evidence is currently lacking and ensuring that in treatment there is recognition of clinical judgment and of regional diversity as well as the necessity of an agreed approach by the individual and family. We conclude that i) physicians have a responsibility to recognise obesity as a disease and help obese patients with appropriate prevention and treatment, ii) treatment should be based on good clinical care and evidence-based interventions and iii) obesity treatment should focus on realistic goals and lifelong management.