Denver VA Medical Center

AUTORES: Daniel J Klionsky1745,1749*, Kotb Abdelmohsen840, Akihisa Abe1237, Md Joynal Abedin1762, Hagai Abeliovich425,
\nAbraham Acevedo Arozena789, Hiroaki Adachi1800, Christopher M Adams1669, Peter D Adams57, Khosrow Adeli1981,
\nPeter J Adhihetty1625, Sharon G Adler700, Galila Agam67, Rajesh Agarwal1587, Manish K Aghi1537, Maria Agnello1826,
\nPatrizia Agostinis664, Patricia V Aguilar1960, Julio Aguirre-Ghiso784,786, Edoardo M Airoldi89,422, Slimane Ait-Si-Ali1376,
\nTakahiko Akematsu2010, Emmanuel T Akporiaye1097, Mohamed Al-Rubeai1394, Guillermo M Albaiceta1294,
\nChris Albanese363, Diego Albani561, Matthew L Albert517, Jesus Aldudo128, Hana Alg€ul1164, Mehrdad Alirezaei1198,
\nIraide Alloza642,888, Alexandru Almasan206, Maylin Almonte-Beceril524, Emad S Alnemri1212, Covadonga Alonso544,
\nNihal Altan-Bonnet848, Dario C Altieri1205, Silvia Alvarez1497, Lydia Alvarez-Erviti1395, Sandro Alves107,
\nGiuseppina Amadoro860, Atsuo Amano930, Consuelo Amantini1554, Santiago Ambrosio1458, Ivano Amelio756,
\nAmal O Amer918, Mohamed Amessou2089, Angelika Amon726, Zhenyi An1538, Frank A Anania291, Stig U Andersen6,
\nUsha P Andley2079, Catherine K Andreadi1690, Nathalie Andrieu-Abadie502, Alberto Anel2027, David K Ann58,
\nShailendra Anoopkumar-Dukie388, Manuela Antonioli832,858, Hiroshi Aoki1791, Nadezda Apostolova2007,
\nSaveria Aquila1500, Katia Aquilano1876, Koichi Araki292, Eli Arama2098, Agustin Aranda456, Jun Araya591,
\nAlexandre Arcaro1472, Esperanza Arias26, Hirokazu Arimoto1225, Aileen R Ariosa1749, Jane L Armstrong1930,
\nThierry Arnould1773, Ivica Arsov2120, Katsuhiko Asanuma675, Valerie Askanas1924, Eric Asselin1867, Ryuichiro Atarashi794,
\nSally S Atherton369, Julie D Atkin713, Laura D Attardi1131, Patrick Auberger1787, Georg Auburger379, Laure Aurelian1727,
\nRiccardo Autelli1992, Laura Avagliano1029,1755, Maria Laura Avantaggiati364, Limor Avrahami1166, Suresh Awale1986,
\nNeelam Azad404, Tiziana Bachetti568, Jonathan M Backer28, Dong-Hun Bae1933, Jae-sung Bae677, Ok-Nam Bae409,
\nSoo Han Bae2117, Eric H Baehrecke1729, Seung-Hoon Baek17, Stephen Baghdiguian1368,
\nAgnieszka Bagniewska-Zadworna2, Hua Bai90, Jie Bai667, Xue-Yuan Bai1133, Yannick Bailly884,
\nKithiganahalli Narayanaswamy Balaji473, Walter Balduini2002, Andrea Ballabio316, Rena Balzan1711, Rajkumar Banerjee239,
\nG abor B anhegyi1052, Haijun Bao2109, Benoit Barbeau1363, Maria D Barrachina2007, Esther Barreiro467, Bonnie Bartel997,
\nAlberto Bartolom e222, Diane C Bassham550, Maria Teresa Bassi1046, Robert C Bast Jr1273, Alakananda Basu1798,
\nMaria Teresa Batista1578, Henri Batoko1336, Maurizio Battino970, Kyle Bauckman2085, Bradley L Baumgarner1909,
\nK Ulrich Bayer1594, Rupert Beale1553, Jean-Fran¸cois Beaulieu1360, George R. Beck Jr48,294, Christoph Becker336,
\nJ David Beckham1595, Pierre-Andr e B edard749, Patrick J Bednarski301, Thomas J Begley1135, Christian Behl1419,
\nChristian Behrends757, Georg MN Behrens406, Kevin E Behrns1627, Eloy Bejarano26, Amine Belaid490,
\nFrancesca Belleudi1041, Giovanni B enard497, Guy Berchem706, Daniele Bergamaschi983, Matteo Bergami1401,
\nBen Berkhout1441, Laura Berliocchi714, Am elie Bernard1749, Monique Bernard1354, Francesca Bernassola1880,
\nAnne Bertolotti791, Amanda S Bess272, S ebastien Besteiro1351, Saverio Bettuzzi1828, Savita Bhalla913,
\nShalmoli Bhattacharyya973, Sujit K Bhutia838, Caroline Biagosch1159, Michele Wolfe Bianchi520,1378,1381,
\nMartine Biard-Piechaczyk210, Viktor Billes298, Claudia Bincoletto1314, Baris Bingol350, Sara W Bird1128, Marc Bitoun1112,
\nIvana Bjedov1258, Craig Blackstone843, Lionel Blanc1183, Guillermo A Blanco1496, Heidi Kiil Blomhoff1812,
\nEmilio Boada-Romero1297, Stefan B€ockler1464, Marianne Boes1423, Kathleen Boesze-Battaglia1835, Lawrence H Boise286,287,
\nAlessandra Bolino2063, Andrea Boman693, Paolo Bonaldo1823, Matteo Bordi897, J€urgen Bosch608, Luis M Botana1308,
\nJoelle Botti1375, German Bou1405, Marina Bouch e1038, Marion Bouchecareilh1331, Marie-Jos ee Boucher1901,
\nMichael E Boulton481, Sebastien G Bouret1926, Patricia Boya133, Micha€el Boyer-Guittaut1345, Peter V Bozhkov1141,
\nNathan Brady374, Vania MM Braga469, Claudio Brancolini1997, Gerhard H Braus353, Jos e M Bravo-San Pedro299,393,508,1374,
\nLisa A Brennan322, Emery H Bresnick2022, Patrick Brest490, Dave Bridges1939, Marie-Agn es Bringer124, Marisa Brini1822,
\nGlauber C Brito1311, Bertha Brodin631, Paul S Brookes1872, Eric J Brown352, Karen Brown1690, Hal E Broxmeyer480,
\nAlain Bruhat486,1339, Patricia Chakur Brum1893, John H Brumell446, Nicola Brunetti-Pierri315,1171,
\nRobert J Bryson-Richardson781, Shilpa Buch1777, Alastair M Buchan1819, Hikmet Budak1022, Dmitry V Bulavin118,505,1789,
\nScott J Bultman1792, Geert Bultynck665, Vladimir Bumbasirevic1470, Yan Burelle1356, Robert E Burke216,217,
\nMargit Burmeister1750, Peter B€utikofer1473, Laura Caberlotto1987, Ken Cadwell896, Monika Cahova112, Dongsheng Cai24,
\nJingjing Cai2099, Qian Cai1018, Sara Calatayud2007, Nadine Camougrand1343, Michelangelo Campanella1700,
\nGrant R Campbell1525, Matthew Campbell1249, Silvia Campello556,1876, Robin Candau1769, Isabella Caniggia1983,
\nLavinia Cantoni560, Lizhi Cao116, Allan B Caplan1656, Michele Caraglia1051, Claudio Cardinali1043, Sandra Morais Cardoso1579, Jennifer S Carew208, Laura A Carleton874, Cathleen R Carlin101, Silvia Carloni2002,
\nSven R Carlsson1267, Didac Carmona-Gutierrez1643, Leticia AM Carneiro312, Oliana Carnevali971, Serena Carra1318,
\nAlice Carrier120, Bernadette Carroll900, Caty Casas1324, Josefina Casas1116, Giuliana Cassinelli324, Perrine Castets1462,
\nSusana Castro-Obregon214, Gabriella Cavallini1841, Isabella Ceccherini568, Francesco Cecconi253,555,1884,
\nArthur I Cederbaum459, Valent ın Ce~na199,1281, Simone Cenci1323,2064, Claudia Cerella444, Davide Cervia1996,
\nSilvia Cetrullo1478, Hassan Chaachouay2028, Han-Jung Chae187, Andrei S Chagin634, Chee-Yin Chai626,628,
\nGopal Chakrabarti1502, Georgios Chamilos1601, Edmond YW Chan1142, Matthew TV Chan181, Dhyan Chandra1003,
\nPallavi Chandra548, Chih-Peng Chang818, Raymond Chuen-Chung Chang1653, Ta Yuan Chang345, John C Chatham1434,
\nSaurabh Chatterjee1910, Santosh Chauhan527, Yongsheng Che62, Michael E Cheetham1263, Rajkumar Cheluvappa1783,
\nChun-Jung Chen1153, Gang Chen598,1676, Guang-Chao Chen9, Guoqiang Chen1078, Hongzhuan Chen1077, Jeff W Chen1514,
\nJian-Kang Chen370,371, Min Chen249, Mingzhou Chen2104, Peiwen Chen1823, Qi Chen1674, Quan Chen172,
\nShang-Der Chen138, Si Chen325, Steve S-L Chen10, Wei Chen2125, Wei-Jung Chen829, Wen Qiang Chen979, Wenli Chen1113,
\nXiangmei Chen1133, Yau-Hung Chen1157, Ye-Guang Chen1250, Yin Chen1447, Yingyu Chen953,955, Yongshun Chen2135,
\nYu-Jen Chen712, Yue-Qin Chen1145, Yujie Chen1208, Zhen Chen339, Zhong Chen2123, Alan Cheng1702,
\nChristopher HK Cheng184, Hua Cheng1728, Heesun Cheong814, Sara Cherry1836, Jason Chesney1703,
\nChun Hei Antonio Cheung817, Eric Chevet1359, Hsiang Cheng Chi140, Sung-Gil Chi656, Fulvio Chiacchiera308,
\nHui-Ling Chiang958, Roberto Chiarelli1826, Mario Chiariello235,567,577, Marcello Chieppa835, Lih-Shen Chin290,
\nMario Chiong1285, Gigi NC Chiu878, Dong-Hyung Cho676, Ssang-Goo Cho650, William C Cho982, Yong-Yeon Cho105,
\nYoung-Seok Cho1064, Augustine MK Choi2095, Eui-Ju Choi656, Eun-Kyoung Choi387,400,685, Jayoung Choi1563,
\nMary E Choi2093, Seung-Il Choi2116, Tsui-Fen Chou412, Salem Chouaib395, Divaker Choubey1574, Vinay Choubey1936,
\nKuan-Chih Chow822, Kamal Chowdhury730, Charleen T Chu1856, Tsung-Hsien Chuang827, Taehoon Chun657,
\nHyewon Chung652, Taijoon Chung978, Yuen-Li Chung1194, Yong-Joon Chwae18, Valentina Cianfanelli254,
\nRoberto Ciarcia1775, Iwona A Ciechomska886, Maria Rosa Ciriolo1876, Mara Cirone1042, Sofie Claerhout1694,
\nMichael J Clague1698, Joan Cl aria1457, Peter GH Clarke1687, Robert Clarke361, Emilio Clementi1045,1398, C edric Cleyrat1781,
\nMiriam Cnop1366, Eliana M Coccia574, Tiziana Cocco1459, Patrice Codogno1375, J€orn Coers271, Ezra EW Cohen1533,
\nDavid Colecchia235,567,577, Luisa Coletto25, N uria S Coll123, Emma Colucci-Guyon516, Sergio Comincini1829,
\nMaria Condello578, Katherine L Cook2073, Graham H Coombs1929, Cynthia D Cooper2076, J Mark Cooper1395,
\nIsabelle Coppens601, Maria Tiziana Corasaniti1387, Marco Corazzari485,1884, Ramon Corbalan1566,
\nElisabeth Corcelle-Termeau251, Mario D Cordero1899, Cristina Corral-Ramos1289, Olga Corti507,1109, Andrea Cossarizza1767,
\nPaola Costelli1993, Safia Costes1518, Susan L Cotman721, Ana Coto-Montes946, Sandra Cottet566,1688, Eduardo Couve1301,
\nLori R Covey1015, L Ashley Cowart762, Jeffery S Cox1536, Fraser P Coxon1427, Carolyn B Coyne1846, Mark S Cragg1919,
\nRolf J Craven1679, Tiziana Crepaldi1995, Jose L Crespo1300, Alfredo Criollo1285, Valeria Crippa558, Maria Teresa Cruz1576,
\nAna Maria Cuervo26, Jose M Cuezva1277, Taixing Cui1907, Pedro R Cutillas987, Mark J Czaja27, Maria F Czyzyk-Krzeska1572,
\nRuben K Dagda2068, Uta Dahmen1404, Chunsun Dai800, Wenjie Dai1187, Yun Dai2059, Kevin N Dalby1940,
\nLuisa Dalla Valle1822, Guillaume Dalmasso1340, Marcello D’Amelio557, Markus Damme188, Arlette Darfeuille-Michaud1340,
\nCatherine Dargemont950, Victor M Darley-Usmar1433, Srinivasan Dasarathy205, Biplab Dasgupta202, Srikanta Dash1254,
\nCrispin R Dass242, Hazel Marie Davey8, Lester M Davids1560, David D avila227, Roger J Davis1731, Ted M Dawson604,
\nValina L Dawson606, Paula Daza1898, Jackie de Belleroche470, Paul de Figueiredo1180,1182,
\nRegina Celia Bressan Queiroz de Figueiredo135, Jos e de la Fuente1023, Luisa De Martino1775,
\nAntonella De Matteis1171, Guido RY De Meyer1443, Angelo De Milito631, Mauro De Santi2002,

CONTEXT: Patients experience the highest rate of death and recurrent ischemic events during the early period after an acute coronary syndrome, but it is not known whether early initiation of treatment with a statin can reduce the occurrence of these early events. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether treatment with atorvastatin, 80 mg/d, initiated 24 to 96 hours after an acute coronary syndrome, reduces death and nonfatal ischemic events. DESIGN AND SETTING: A randomized, double-blind trial conducted from May 1997 to September 1999, with follow-up through 16 weeks at 122 clinical centers in Europe, North America, South Africa, and Australasia. PATIENTS: A total of 3086 adults aged 18 years or older with unstable angina or non-Q-wave acute myocardial infarction. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were stratified by center and randomly assigned to receive treatment with atorvastatin (80 mg/d) or matching placebo between 24 and 96 hours after hospital admission. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary end point event defined as death, nonfatal acute myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest with resuscitation, or recurrent symptomatic myocardial ischemia with objective evidence and requiring emergency rehospitalization. RESULTS: A primary end point event occurred in 228 patients (14.8%) in the atorvastatin group and 269 patients (17.4%) in the placebo group (relative risk [RR], 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70-1.00; P =.048). There were no significant differences in risk of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or cardiac arrest between the atorvastatin group and the placebo group, although the atorvastatin group had a lower risk of symptomatic ischemia with objective evidence and requiring emergency rehospitalization (6.2% vs 8.4%; RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.57-0.95; P =.02). Likewise, there were no significant differences between the atorvastatin group and the placebo group in the incidence of secondary outcomes of coronary revascularization procedures, worsening heart failure, or worsening angina, although there were fewer strokes in the atorvastatin group than in the placebo group (12 vs 24 events; P =.045). In the atorvastatin group, mean low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level declined from 124 mg/dL (3.2 mmol/L) to 72 mg/dL (1.9 mmol/L). Abnormal liver transaminases (>3 times upper limit of normal) were more common in the atorvastatin group than in the placebo group (2.5% vs 0.6%; P<.001). CONCLUSION: For patients with acute coronary syndrome, lipid-lowering therapy with atorvastatin, 80 mg/d, reduces recurrent ischemic events in the first 16 weeks, mostly recurrent symptomatic ischemia requiring rehospitalization.

BACKGROUND: In observational analyses, higher levels of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol have been associated with a lower risk of coronary heart disease events. However, whether raising HDL cholesterol levels therapeutically reduces cardiovascular risk remains uncertain. Inhibition of cholesteryl ester transfer protein (CETP) raises HDL cholesterol levels and might therefore improve cardiovascular outcomes. METHODS: We randomly assigned 15,871 patients who had had a recent acute coronary syndrome to receive the CETP inhibitor dalcetrapib, at a dose of 600 mg daily, or placebo, in addition to the best available evidence-based care. The primary efficacy end point was a composite of death from coronary heart disease, nonfatal myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, unstable angina, or cardiac arrest with resuscitation. RESULTS: At the time of randomization, the mean HDL cholesterol level was 42 mg per deciliter (1.1 mmol per liter), and the mean low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol level was 76 mg per deciliter (2.0 mmol per liter). Over the course of the trial, HDL cholesterol levels increased from baseline by 4 to 11% in the placebo group and by 31 to 40% in the dalcetrapib group. Dalcetrapib had a minimal effect on LDL cholesterol levels. Patients were followed for a median of 31 months. At a prespecified interim analysis that included 1135 primary end-point events (71% of the projected total number), the independent data and safety monitoring board recommended termination of the trial for futility. As compared with placebo, dalcetrapib did not alter the risk of the primary end point (cumulative event rate, 8.0% and 8.3%, respectively; hazard ratio with dalcetrapib, 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 0.93 to 1.16; P=0.52) and did not have a significant effect on any component of the primary end point or total mortality. The median C-reactive protein level was 0.2 mg per liter higher and the mean systolic blood pressure was 0.6 mm Hg higher with dalcetrapib as compared with placebo (P<0.001 for both comparisons). CONCLUSIONS: In patients who had had a recent acute coronary syndrome, dalcetrapib increased HDL cholesterol levels but did not reduce the risk of recurrent cardiovascular events. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche; dal-OUTCOMES ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00658515.).

OBJECTIVE: To provide reliable risk-adjusted morbidity and mortality rates after major surgery to the 123 Veterans Affairs Medical Centers (VAMCs) performing major surgery, and to use risk-adjusted outcomes in the monitoring and improvement of the quality of surgical care to all veterans. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Outcome-based comparative measures of the quality of surgical care among surgical services and surgical subspecialties have been elusive. METHODS: This study included prospective assessment of presurgical risk factors, process of care during surgery, and outcomes 30 days after surgery on veterans undergoing major surgery in 123 medical centers; development of multivariable risk-adjustment models; identification of high and low outlier facilities by observed-to-expected outcome ratios; and generation of annual reports of comparative outcomes to all surgical services in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). RESULTS: The National VA Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) data base includes 417,944 major surgical procedures performed between October 1, 1991, and September 30, 1997. In FY97, 11 VAMCs were low outliers for risk-adjusted observed-to-expected mortality ratios; 13 VAMCs were high outliers for risk-adjusted observed-to-expected mortality ratios. Identification of high and low outliers by unadjusted mortality rates would have ascribed an outlier status incorrectly to 25 of 39 hospitals, an error rate of 64%. Since 1994, the 30-day mortality and morbidity rates for major surgery have fallen 9% and 30%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Reliable, valid information on patient presurgical risk factors, process of care during surgery, and 30-day morbidity and mortality rates is available for all major surgical procedures in the 123 VAMCs performing surgery in the VHA. With this information, the VHA has established the first prospective outcome-based program for comparative assessment and enhancement of the quality of surgical care among multiple institutions for several surgical subspecialties. Key features to the success of the NSQIP are the support of the surgeons who practice in the VHA, consistent clinical definitions and data collection by dedicated nurses, a uniform nationwide informatics system, and the support of VHA administration and managerial staff.

Medication adherence usually refers to whether patients take their medications as prescribed (eg, twice daily), as well as whether they continue to take a prescribed medication. Medication nonadherence is a growing concern to clinicians, healthcare systems, and other stakeholders (eg, payers) because of mounting evidence that it is prevalent and associated with adverse outcomes and higher costs of care. To date, measurement of patient medication adherence and use of interventions to improve adherence are rare in routine clinical practice. The goals of the present report are to address (1) different methods of measuring adherence, (2) the prevalence of medication nonadherence, (3) the association between nonadherence and outcomes, (4) the reasons for nonadherence, and finally, (5) interventions to improve medication adherence.

BACKGROUND: The benefit of coronary-artery revascularization before elective major vascular surgery is unclear. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients at increased risk for perioperative cardiac complications and clinically significant coronary artery disease to undergo either revascularization or no revascularization before elective major vascular surgery. The primary end point was long-term mortality. RESULTS: Of 5859 patients scheduled for vascular operations at 18 Veterans Affairs medical centers, 510 (9 percent) were eligible for the study and were randomly assigned to either coronary-artery revascularization before surgery or no revascularization before surgery. The indications for a vascular operation were an expanding abdominal aortic aneurysm (33 percent) or arterial occlusive disease of the legs (67 percent). Among the patients assigned to preoperative coronary-artery revascularization, percutaneous coronary intervention was performed in 59 percent, and bypass surgery was performed in 41 percent. The median time from randomization to vascular surgery was 54 days in the revascularization group and 18 days in the group not undergoing revascularization (P<0.001). At 2.7 years after randomization, mortality in the revascularization group was 22 percent and in the no-revascularization group 23 percent (relative risk, 0.98; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.70 to 1.37; P=0.92). Within 30 days after the vascular operation, a postoperative myocardial infarction, defined by elevated troponin levels, occurred in 12 percent of the revascularization group and 14 percent of the no-revascularization group (P=0.37). CONCLUSIONS: Coronary-artery revascularization before elective vascular surgery does not significantly alter the long-term outcome. On the basis of these data, a strategy of coronary-artery revascularization before elective vascular surgery among patients with stable cardiac symptoms cannot be recommended.

BACKGROUND: Patients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) are at increased risk for future cardiovascular events despite current preventive therapies. The identification of insulin resistance as a risk factor for stroke and myocardial infarction raised the possibility that pioglitazone, which improves insulin sensitivity, might benefit patients with cerebrovascular disease. METHODS: In this multicenter, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 3876 patients who had had a recent ischemic stroke or TIA to receive either pioglitazone (target dose, 45 mg daily) or placebo. Eligible patients did not have diabetes but were found to have insulin resistance on the basis of a score of more than 3.0 on the homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) index. The primary outcome was fatal or nonfatal stroke or myocardial infarction. RESULTS: By 4.8 years, a primary outcome had occurred in 175 of 1939 patients (9.0%) in the pioglitazone group and in 228 of 1937 (11.8%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio in the pioglitazone group, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.62 to 0.93; P=0.007). Diabetes developed in 73 patients (3.8%) and 149 patients (7.7%), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.69; P<0.001). There was no significant between-group difference in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.17; P=0.52). Pioglitazone was associated with a greater frequency of weight gain exceeding 4.5 kg than was placebo (52.2% vs. 33.7%, P<0.001), edema (35.6% vs. 24.9%, P<0.001), and bone fracture requiring surgery or hospitalization (5.1% vs. 3.2%, P=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: In this trial involving patients without diabetes who had insulin resistance along with a recent history of ischemic stroke or TIA, the risk of stroke or myocardial infarction was lower among patients who received pioglitazone than among those who received placebo. Pioglitazone was also associated with a lower risk of diabetes but with higher risks of weight gain, edema, and fracture. (Funded by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00091949.).

Serrated lesions of the colorectum are the precursors of perhaps one-third of colorectal cancers (CRCs). Cancers arising in serrated lesions are usually in the proximal colon, and account for a disproportionate fraction of cancer identified after colonoscopy. We sought to provide guidance for the clinical management of serrated colorectal lesions based on current evidence and expert opinion regarding definitions, classification, and significance of serrated lesions. A consensus conference was held over 2 days reviewing the topic of serrated lesions from the perspectives of histology, molecular biology, epidemiology, clinical aspects, and serrated polyposis. Serrated lesions should be classified pathologically according to the World Health Organization criteria as hyperplastic polyp, sessile serrated adenoma/polyp (SSA/P) with or without cytological dysplasia, or traditional serrated adenoma (TSA). SSA/P and TSA are premalignant lesions, but SSA/P is the principal serrated precursor of CRCs. Serrated lesions have a distinct endoscopic appearance, and several lines of evidence suggest that on average they are more difficult to detect than conventional adenomatous polyps. Effective colonoscopy requires an endoscopist trained in the endoscopic appearance of serrated lesions. We recommend that all serrated lesions proximal to the sigmoid colon and all serrated lesions in the rectosigmoid > 5 mm in size, be completely removed. Recommendations are made for post-polypectomy surveillance of serrated lesions and for surveillance of serrated polyposis patients and their relatives.

OBJECTIVES: We conducted two studies to examine the dimensions, internal consistency reliability estimates, and potential correlates of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales-21 (DASS-21; Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995). METHOD: Participants in Study 1 included 887 undergraduate students (363 men and 524 women, aged 18 to 35 years; mean [M] age = 19.46, standard deviation [SD] = 2.17) recruited from two public universities to assess the specificity of the individual DASS-21 items and to evaluate estimates of internal consistency reliability. Participants in a follow-up study (Study 2) included 410 students (168 men and 242 women, aged 18 to 47 years; M age = 19.65, SD = 2.88) recruited from the same universities to further assess factorial validity and to evaluate potential correlates of the original DASS-21 total and scale scores. RESULTS: Item bifactor and confirmatory factor analyses revealed that a general factor accounted for the greatest proportion of common variance in the DASS-21 item scores (Study 1). In Study 2, the fit statistics showed good fit for the bifactor model. In addition, the DASS-21 total scale score correlated more highly with scores on a measure of mixed depression and anxiety than with scores on the proposed specific scales of depression or anxiety. Coefficient omega estimates for the DASS-21 scale scores were good. CONCLUSIONS: Further investigations of the bifactor structure and psychometric properties of the DASS-21, specifically its incremental and discriminant validity, using known clinical groups are needed.

CONTEXT: Prior mechanistic studies reported that omeprazole decreases the platelet inhibitory effects of clopidogrel, yet the clinical significance of these findings is not clear. OBJECTIVE: To assess outcomes of patients taking clopidogrel with or without a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) after hospitalization for acute coronary syndrome (ACS). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Retrospective cohort study of 8205 patients with ACS taking clopidogrel after discharge from 127 Veterans Affairs hospitals between October 1, 2003, and January 31, 2006. Vital status information was available for all patients through September 30, 2006. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: All-cause mortality or rehospitalization for ACS. RESULTS: Of 8205 patients taking clopidogrel after discharge, 63.9% (n = 5244) were prescribed PPI at discharge, during follow-up, or both and 36.1% (n = 2961) were not prescribed PPI. Death or rehospitalization for ACS occurred in 20.8% (n = 615) of patients taking clopidogrel without PPI and 29.8% (n = 1561) of patients taking clopidogrel plus PPI. In multivariable analyses, use of clopidogrel plus PPI was associated with an increased risk of death or rehospitalization for ACS compared with use of clopidogrel without PPI (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11-1.41). Among patients taking clopidogrel after hospital discharge and prescribed PPI at any point during follow-up (n = 5244), periods of use of clopidogrel plus PPI (compared with periods of use of clopidogrel without PPI) were associated with a higher risk of death or rehospitalization for ACS (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.10-1.46). In analyses of secondary outcomes, patients taking clopidogrel plus PPI had a higher risk of hospitalizations for recurrent ACS compared with patients taking clopidogrel without PPI (14.6% vs 6.9%; AOR, 1.86 [95% CI, 1.57-2.20]) and revascularization procedures (15.5% vs 11.9%; AOR, 1.49 [95% CI, 1.30-1.71]), but not for all-cause mortality (19.9% vs 16.6%; AOR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.80-1.05]). The association between use of clopidogrel plus PPI and increased risk of adverse outcomes also was consistent using a nested case-control study design (AOR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.14-1.54). In addition, use of PPI without clopidogrel was not associated with death or rehospitalization for ACS among patients not taking clopidogrel after hospital discharge (n = 6450) (AOR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.85-1.13). CONCLUSION: Concomitant use of clopidogrel and PPI after hospital discharge for ACS was associated with an increased risk of adverse outcomes than use of clopidogrel without PPI, suggesting that use of PPI may be associated with attenuation of benefits of clopidogrel after ACS.

It is now 10 years since the last technical review on preventative foot care was published (1), which was followed by an American Diabetes Association (ADA) position statement on preventive foot care in diabetes (2). Many studies have been published proposing a range of tests that might usefully identify patients at risk of foot ulceration, creating confusion among practitioners as to which screening tests should be adopted in clinical practice. A task force was therefore assembled by the ADA to address and concisely summarize recent literature in this area and then recommend what should be included in the comprehensive foot exam for adult patients with diabetes. The committee was cochaired by the immediate past and current chairs of the ADA Foot Care Interest Group (A.J.M.B. and D.G.A.), with other panel members representing primary care, orthopedic and vascular surgery, physical therapy, podiatric medicine and surgery, and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists. The lifetime risk of a person with diabetes developing a foot ulcer may be as high as 25%, whereas the annual incidence of foot ulcers is ∼2% (3–7). Up to 50% of older patients with type 2 diabetes have one or more risk factors for foot ulceration (3,6). A number of component causes, most importantly peripheral neuropathy, interact to complete the causal pathway to foot ulceration (1,3–5). A list of the principal contributory factors that might result in foot ulcer development is provided in Table 1. View this table: Table 1— Risk factors for foot ulcers The most common triad of causes that interact and ultimately result in ulceration has been identified as neuropathy, deformity, and trauma (5). As identification of those patients at risk of foot problems is the first step in preventing such complications, this report will focus on key components of the …

BACKGROUND: Despite a recent American Heart Association (AHA) consensus statement emphasizing the importance of resistant hypertension, the incidence and prognosis of this condition are largely unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: This retrospective cohort study in 2 integrated health plans included patients with incident hypertension in whom treatment was begun between 2002 and 2006. Patients were followed up for the development of resistant hypertension based on AHA criteria of uncontrolled blood pressure despite use of ≥3 antihypertensive medications, with data collected on prescription filling information and blood pressure measurement. We determined incident cardiovascular events (death or incident myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, or chronic kidney disease) in patients with and without resistant hypertension with adjustment for patient and clinical characteristics. Among 205 750 patients with incident hypertension, 1.9% developed resistant hypertension within a median of 1.5 years from initial treatment (0.7 cases per 100 person-years of follow-up). These patients were more often men, were older, and had higher rates of diabetes mellitus than nonresistant patients. Over 3.8 years of median follow-up, cardiovascular event rates were significantly higher in those with resistant hypertension (unadjusted 18.0% versus 13.5%, P<0.001). After adjustment for patient and clinical characteristics, resistant hypertension was associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular events (hazard ratio, 1.47; 95% confidence interval, 1.33-1.62). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with incident hypertension in whom treatment was begun, 1 in 50 patients developed resistant hypertension. Patients with resistant hypertension had an increased risk of cardiovascular events, which supports the need for greater efforts toward improving hypertension outcomes in this population.

BACKGROUND: Although drug-eluting stents (DES) significantly reduce restenosis, they require 3 to 6 months of thienopyridine therapy to prevent stent thrombosis. The rate and consequences of prematurely discontinuing thienopyridine therapy after DES placement for acute myocardial infarction (MI) are unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: We used prospectively collected data from a 19-center study of MI patients to examine the prevalence and predictors of thienopyridine discontinuation 30 days after DES treatment. We then compared the mortality and cardiac hospitalization rates for the next 11 months between those who stopped and those who continued thienopyridine therapy. Among 500 DES-treated MI patients who were discharged on thienopyridine therapy, 68 (13.6%) stopped therapy within 30 days. Those who stopped were older, less likely to have completed high school or be married, more likely to avoid health care because of cost, and more likely to have had preexisting cardiovascular disease or anemia at presentation. They were also less likely to have received discharge instructions about their medications or a cardiac rehabilitation referral. Patients who stopped thienopyridine therapy by 30 days were more likely to die during the next 11 months (7.5% versus 0.7%, P<0.0001; adjusted hazard ratio=9.0; 95% confidence interval=1.3 to 60.6) and to be rehospitalized (23% versus 14%, P=0.08; adjusted hazard ratio=1.5; 95% confidence interval=0.78 to 3.0). CONCLUSIONS: Almost 1 in 7 MI patients who received a DES were no longer taking thienopyridines by 30 days. Prematurely stopping thienopyridine therapy was strongly associated with subsequent mortality. Strategies to improve the use of thienopyridines are needed to optimize the outcomes of MI patients treated with DES.

BACKGROUND: After cardiac surgery, acute renal failure (ARF) requiring dialysis develops in 1% to 5% of patients and is strongly associated with perioperative morbidity and mortality. Prior studies have attempted to identify predictors of ARF but have had insufficient power to perform multivariable analyses or to develop risk stratification algorithms. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a prospective cohort study of 43 642 patients who underwent coronary artery bypass or valvular heart surgery in 43 Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers between April 1987 and March 1994. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify independent predictors of ARF requiring dialysis. A risk stratification algorithm derived from recursive partitioning was constructed and was validated on an independent sample of 3795 patients operated on between April and December 1994. The overall risk of ARF requiring dialysis was 1.1%. Thirty-day mortality in patients with ARF was 63.7%, compared with 4.3% in patients without ARF. Ten clinical variables related to baseline cardiovascular disease and renal function were independently associated with the risk of ARF. A risk stratification algorithm partitioned patients into low-risk (0.4%), medium-risk (0.9% to 2.8%), and high-risk (> or = 5.0%) groups on the basis of several of these factors and their interactions. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of ARF after cardiac surgery can be accurately quantified on the basis of readily available preoperative data. These findings may be used by physicians and surgeons to provide patients with improved risk estimates and to target high-risk subgroups for interventions aimed at reducing the risk and ameliorating the consequences of this serious complication.

Gamma-aminobutyric acid A (GABAA) receptors are the principal mediators of synaptic inhibition, and yet when intensely activated, dendritic GABAA receptors excite rather than inhibit neurons. The membrane depolarization mediated by GABAA receptors is a result of the differential, activity-dependent collapse of the opposing concentration gradients of chloride and bicarbonate, the anions that permeate the GABAA ionophore. Because this depolarization diminishes the voltage-dependent block of the N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor by magnesium, the activity-dependent depolarization mediated by GABA is sufficient to account for frequency modulation of synaptic NMDA receptor activation. Anionic gradient shifts may represent a mechanism whereby the rate and coherence of synaptic activity determine whether dendritic GABAA receptor activation is excitatory or inhibitory.

OBJECTIVE: Although the systematic measurement of disease activity facilitates clinical decision making in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), no recommendations currently exist on which measures should be applied in clinical practice in the US. The American College of Rheumatology (ACR) convened a Working Group (WG) to comprehensively evaluate the validity, feasibility, and acceptability of available RA disease activity measures and derive recommendations for their use in clinical practice. METHODS: The Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinical Disease Activity Measures Working Group conducted a systematic review of the literature to identify RA disease activity measures. Using exclusion criteria, input from an Expert Advisory Panel (EAP), and psychometric analysis, a list of potential measures was created. A survey was administered to rheumatologists soliciting input. The WG used these survey results in conjunction with the psychometric analyses to derive final recommendations. RESULTS: Systematic review of the literature resulted in identification of 63 RA disease activity measures. Application of exclusion criteria and ratings by the EAP narrowed the list to 14 measures for further evaluation. Practicing rheumatologists rated 9 of these 14 measures as most useful and feasible. From these 9 measures, the WG selected 6 with the best psychometric properties for inclusion in the final set of ACR-recommended RA disease activity measures. CONCLUSION: We recommend the Clinical Disease Activity Index, Disease Activity Score with 28-joint counts (erythrocyte sedimentation rate or C-reactive protein), Patient Activity Scale (PAS), PAS-II, Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data with 3 measures, and Simplified Disease Activity Index because they are accurate reflections of disease activity; are sensitive to change; discriminate well between low, moderate, and high disease activity states; have remission criteria; and are feasible to perform in clinical settings.

Although lactoferrin has antimicrobial activity, its mechanism of action is not full defined. Recently we have shown that the protein alters the Gram-negative outer membrane. As this membrane protects Gram-negative cells from lysozyme, we have studied whether lactoferrin's membrane effect could enhance the antibacterial activity of lysozyme. We have found that while each protein alone is bacteriostatic, together they can be bactericidal for strains of V. cholerae, S. typhimurium, and E. coli. The bactericidal effect is dose dependent, blocked by iron saturation of lactoferrin, and inhibited by high calcium levels, although lactoferrin does not chelate calcium. Using differing media, the effect of lactoferrin and lysozyme can be partially or completely inhibited; the degree of inhibition correlating with media osmolarity. Transmission electron microscopy shows that E. coli cells exposed to lactoferrin and lysozyme at 40 mOsm become enlarged and hypodense, suggesting killing through osmotic damage. Dialysis chamber studies indicate that bacterial killing requires direct contact with lactoferrin, and work with purified LPS suggests that this relates to direct LPS-binding by the protein. As lactoferrin and lysozyme are present together in high levels in mucosal secretions and neutrophil granules, it is probable that their interaction contributes to host defense.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines for the treatment of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction recommend a door-to-balloon time of 90 minutes or less for patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Door-to-balloon time has become a performance measure and is the focus of regional and national quality-improvement initiatives. However, it is not known whether national improvements in door-to-balloon times have been accompanied by a decline in mortality. METHODS: We analyzed annual trends in door-to-balloon times and in-hospital mortality using data from 96,738 admissions for patients undergoing primary PCI for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction from July 2005 through June 2009 at 515 hospitals participating in the CathPCI Registry. In a subgroup analysis using a linked Medicare data set, we assessed 30-day mortality. RESULTS: Median door-to-balloon times declined significantly, from 83 minutes in the 12 months from July 2005 through June 2006 to 67 minutes in the 12 months from July 2008 through June 2009 (P<0.001). Similarly, the percentage of patients for whom the door-to-balloon time was 90 minutes or less increased from 59.7% in the first year to 83.1% in the last year (P<0.001). Despite improvements in door-to-balloon times, there was no significant overall change in unadjusted in-hospital mortality (4.8% in 2005-2006 and 4.7% in 2008-2009, P=0.43 for trend) or in risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality (5.0% in 2005-2006 and 4.7% in 2008-2009, P=0.34), nor was a significant difference observed in unadjusted 30-day mortality (P=0.64). CONCLUSIONS: Although national door-to-balloon times have improved significantly for patients undergoing primary PCI for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, in-hospital mortality has remained virtually unchanged. These data suggest that additional strategies are needed to reduce in-hospital mortality in this population. (Funded by the National Cardiovascular Data Registry of the American College of Cardiology Foundation.).

Individual protein kinase C (PKC) isozymes have been implicated in many cellular responses important in lung health and disease, including permeability, contraction, migration, hypertrophy, proliferation, apoptosis, and secretion. New ideas on mechanisms that regulate PKC activity, including the identification of a novel PKC kinase, 3-phosphoinositide-dependent kinase-1 (PDK-1), that regulates phosphorylation of PKC, have been advanced. The importance of targeted translocation of PKC and isozyme-specific binding proteins (like receptors for activated C-kinase and caveolins) is well established. Phosphorylation state and localization are now thought to be key determinants of isozyme activity and specificity. New concepts on the role of individual PKC isozymes in proliferation and apoptosis are emerging. Opposing roles for selected isozymes in the same cell system have been defined. Coupling to the Wnt signaling pathway has been described. Phenotypes for PKC knockout mice have recently been reported. More specific approaches for studying PKC isozymes and their role in cell responses have been developed. Strengths and weaknesses of different experimental strategies are reviewed. Future directions for investigation are identified.

This paper examines the state of the art in mobile clinical and health-related apps. A 2012 estimate puts the number of health-related apps at no fewer than 40,000, as healthcare professionals and consumers continue to express concerns about the quality of many apps, calling for some form of app regulatory control or certification to be put in place. We describe the range of apps on offer as of 2013, and then present a brief survey of evaluation studies of medical and health-related apps that have been conducted to date, covering a range of clinical disciplines and topics. Our survey includes studies that highlighted risks, negative issues and worrying deficiencies in existing apps. We discuss the concept of 'apps as a medical device' and the relevant regulatory controls that apply in USA and Europe, offering examples of apps that have been formally approved using these mechanisms. We describe the online Health Apps Library run by the National Health Service in England and the calls for a vetted medical and health app store. We discuss the ingredients for successful apps beyond the rather narrow definition of 'apps as a medical device'. These ingredients cover app content quality, usability, the need to match apps to consumers' general and health literacy levels, device connectivity standards (for apps that connect to glucometers, blood pressure monitors, etc.), as well as app security and user privacy. 'Happtique Health App Certification Program' (HACP), a voluntary app certification scheme, successfully captures most of these desiderata, but is solely focused on apps targeting the US market. HACP, while very welcome, is in ways reminiscent of the early days of the Web, when many "similar" quality benchmarking tools and codes of conduct for information publishers were proposed to appraise and rate online medical and health information. It is probably impossible to rate and police every app on offer today, much like in those early days of the Web, when people quickly realised the same regarding informational Web pages. The best first line of defence was, is, and will always be to educate consumers regarding the potentially harmful content of (some) apps.