Toronto Western Hospital

To develop criteria for the classification of fibromyalgia, we studied 558 consecutive patients: 293 patients with fibromyalgia and 265 control patients. Interviews and examinations were performed by trained, blinded assessors. Control patients for the group with primary fibromyalgia were matched for age and sex, and limited to patients with disorders that could be confused with primary fibromyalgia. Control patients for the group with secondary-concomitant fibromyalgia were matched for age, sex, and concomitant rheumatic disorders. Widespread pain (axial plus upper and lower segment plus left- and right-sided pain) was found in 97.6% of all patients with fibromyalgia and in 69.1% of all control patients. The combination of widespread pain and mild or greater tenderness in greater than or equal to 11 of 18 tender point sites yielded a sensitivity of 88.4% and a specificity of 81.1%. Primary fibromyalgia patients and secondary-concomitant fibromyalgia patients did not differ statistically in any major study variable, and the criteria performed equally well in patients with and those without concomitant rheumatic conditions. The newly proposed criteria for the classification of fibromyalgia are 1) widespread pain in combination with 2) tenderness at 11 or more of the 18 specific tender point sites. No exclusions are made for the presence of concomitant radiographic or laboratory abnormalities. At the diagnostic or classification level, the distinction between primary fibromyalgia and secondary-concomitant fibromyalgia (as defined in the text) is abandoned.

This document presents the Movement Disorder Society Clinical Diagnostic Criteria for Parkinson's disease (PD). The Movement Disorder Society PD Criteria are intended for use in clinical research but also may be used to guide clinical diagnosis. The benchmark for these criteria is expert clinical diagnosis; the criteria aim to systematize the diagnostic process, to make it reproducible across centers and applicable by clinicians with less expertise in PD diagnosis. Although motor abnormalities remain central, increasing recognition has been given to nonmotor manifestations; these are incorporated into both the current criteria and particularly into separate criteria for prodromal PD. Similar to previous criteria, the Movement Disorder Society PD Criteria retain motor parkinsonism as the core feature of the disease, defined as bradykinesia plus rest tremor or rigidity. Explicit instructions for defining these cardinal features are included. After documentation of parkinsonism, determination of PD as the cause of parkinsonism relies on three categories of diagnostic features: absolute exclusion criteria (which rule out PD), red flags (which must be counterbalanced by additional supportive criteria to allow diagnosis of PD), and supportive criteria (positive features that increase confidence of the PD diagnosis). Two levels of certainty are delineated: clinically established PD (maximizing specificity at the expense of reduced sensitivity) and probable PD (which balances sensitivity and specificity). The Movement Disorder Society criteria retain elements proven valuable in previous criteria and omit aspects that are no longer justified, thereby encapsulating diagnosis according to current knowledge. As understanding of PD expands, the Movement Disorder Society criteria will need continuous revision to accommodate these advances.

BACKGROUND: Among patients with a proximal vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation, 60 to 80% of patients die within 90 days after stroke onset or do not regain functional independence despite alteplase treatment. We evaluated rapid endovascular treatment in addition to standard care in patients with acute ischemic stroke with a small infarct core, a proximal intracranial arterial occlusion, and moderate-to-good collateral circulation. METHODS: We randomly assigned participants to receive standard care (control group) or standard care plus endovascular treatment with the use of available thrombectomy devices (intervention group). Patients with a proximal intracranial occlusion in the anterior circulation were included up to 12 hours after symptom onset. Patients with a large infarct core or poor collateral circulation on computed tomography (CT) and CT angiography were excluded. Workflow times were measured against predetermined targets. The primary outcome was the score on the modified Rankin scale (range, 0 [no symptoms] to 6 [death]) at 90 days. A proportional odds model was used to calculate the common odds ratio as a measure of the likelihood that the intervention would lead to lower scores on the modified Rankin scale than would control care (shift analysis). RESULTS: The trial was stopped early because of efficacy. At 22 centers worldwide, 316 participants were enrolled, of whom 238 received intravenous alteplase (120 in the intervention group and 118 in the control group). In the intervention group, the median time from study CT of the head to first reperfusion was 84 minutes. The rate of functional independence (90-day modified Rankin score of 0 to 2) was increased with the intervention (53.0%, vs. 29.3% in the control group; P<0.001). The primary outcome favored the intervention (common odds ratio, 2.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.7 to 3.8; P<0.001), and the intervention was associated with reduced mortality (10.4%, vs. 19.0% in the control group; P=0.04). Symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage occurred in 3.6% of participants in intervention group and 2.7% of participants in control group (P=0.75). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with acute ischemic stroke with a proximal vessel occlusion, a small infarct core, and moderate-to-good collateral circulation, rapid endovascular treatment improved functional outcomes and reduced mortality. (Funded by Covidien and others; ESCAPE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01778335.).

BACKGROUND: The effect of endovascular thrombectomy that is performed more than 6 hours after the onset of ischemic stroke is uncertain. Patients with a clinical deficit that is disproportionately severe relative to the infarct volume may benefit from late thrombectomy. METHODS: We enrolled patients with occlusion of the intracranial internal carotid artery or proximal middle cerebral artery who had last been known to be well 6 to 24 hours earlier and who had a mismatch between the severity of the clinical deficit and the infarct volume, with mismatch criteria defined according to age (<80 years or ≥80 years). Patients were randomly assigned to thrombectomy plus standard care (the thrombectomy group) or to standard care alone (the control group). The coprimary end points were the mean score for disability on the utility-weighted modified Rankin scale (which ranges from 0 [death] to 10 [no symptoms or disability]) and the rate of functional independence (a score of 0, 1, or 2 on the modified Rankin scale, which ranges from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating more severe disability) at 90 days. RESULTS: A total of 206 patients were enrolled; 107 were assigned to the thrombectomy group and 99 to the control group. At 31 months, enrollment in the trial was stopped because of the results of a prespecified interim analysis. The mean score on the utility-weighted modified Rankin scale at 90 days was 5.5 in the thrombectomy group as compared with 3.4 in the control group (adjusted difference [Bayesian analysis], 2.0 points; 95% credible interval, 1.1 to 3.0; posterior probability of superiority, >0.999), and the rate of functional independence at 90 days was 49% in the thrombectomy group as compared with 13% in the control group (adjusted difference, 33 percentage points; 95% credible interval, 24 to 44; posterior probability of superiority, >0.999). The rate of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage did not differ significantly between the two groups (6% in the thrombectomy group and 3% in the control group, P=0.50), nor did 90-day mortality (19% and 18%, respectively; P=1.00). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with acute stroke who had last been known to be well 6 to 24 hours earlier and who had a mismatch between clinical deficit and infarct, outcomes for disability at 90 days were better with thrombectomy plus standard care than with standard care alone. (Funded by Stryker Neurovascular; DAWN ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02142283 .).

OBJECTIVE: The Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) group revised and validated the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) classification criteria in order to improve clinical relevance, meet stringent methodology requirements, and incorporate new knowledge regarding the immunology of SLE. METHODS: The classification criteria were derived from a set of 702 expert-rated patient scenarios. Recursive partitioning was used to derive an initial rule that was simplified and refined based on SLICC physician consensus. The SLICC group validated the classification criteria in a new validation sample of 690 new expert-rated patient scenarios. RESULTS: Seventeen criteria were identified. In the derivation set, the SLICC classification criteria resulted in fewer misclassifications compared with the current ACR classification criteria (49 versus 70; P = 0.0082) and had greater sensitivity (94% versus 86%; P < 0.0001) and equal specificity (92% versus 93%; P = 0.39). In the validation set, the SLICC classification criteria resulted in fewer misclassifications compared with the current ACR classification criteria (62 versus 74; P = 0.24) and had greater sensitivity (97% versus 83%; P < 0.0001) but lower specificity (84% versus 96%; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The new SLICC classification criteria performed well in a large set of patient scenarios rated by experts. According to the SLICC rule for the classification of SLE, the patient must satisfy at least 4 criteria, including at least one clinical criterion and one immunologic criterion OR the patient must have biopsy-proven lupus nephritis in the presence of antinuclear antibodies or anti-double-stranded DNA antibodies.

BACKGROUND: Among patients with acute ischemic stroke due to occlusions in the proximal anterior intracranial circulation, less than 40% regain functional independence when treated with intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (t-PA) alone. Thrombectomy with the use of a stent retriever, in addition to intravenous t-PA, increases reperfusion rates and may improve long-term functional outcome. METHODS: We randomly assigned eligible patients with stroke who were receiving or had received intravenous t-PA to continue with t-PA alone (control group) or to undergo endovascular thrombectomy with the use of a stent retriever within 6 hours after symptom onset (intervention group). Patients had confirmed occlusions in the proximal anterior intracranial circulation and an absence of large ischemic-core lesions. The primary outcome was the severity of global disability at 90 days, as assessed by means of the modified Rankin scale (with scores ranging from 0 [no symptoms] to 6 [death]). RESULTS: The study was stopped early because of efficacy. At 39 centers, 196 patients underwent randomization (98 patients in each group). In the intervention group, the median time from qualifying imaging to groin puncture was 57 minutes, and the rate of substantial reperfusion at the end of the procedure was 88%. Thrombectomy with the stent retriever plus intravenous t-PA reduced disability at 90 days over the entire range of scores on the modified Rankin scale (P<0.001). The rate of functional independence (modified Rankin scale score, 0 to 2) was higher in the intervention group than in the control group (60% vs. 35%, P<0.001). There were no significant between-group differences in 90-day mortality (9% vs. 12%, P=0.50) or symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (0% vs. 3%, P=0.12). CONCLUSIONS: In patients receiving intravenous t-PA for acute ischemic stroke due to occlusions in the proximal anterior intracranial circulation, thrombectomy with a stent retriever within 6 hours after onset improved functional outcomes at 90 days. (Funded by Covidien; SWIFT PRIME ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01657461.).

This paper describes the development of an evaluative outcome measure for patients with upper extremity musculoskeletal conditions. The goal is to produce a brief, self-administered measure of symptoms and functional status, with a focus on physical function, to be used by clinicians in daily practice and as a research tool. This is a joint initiative of the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons (AAOS), the Council of Musculoskeletal Specialty Societies (COMSS), and the Institute for Work and Health (Toronto, Ontario). Our approach is consistent with previously described strategies for scale development. In Stage 1, Item Generation, a group of methodologists and clinical experts reviewed 13 outcome measurement scales currently in use and generated a list of 821 items. In Stage 2a, Initial Item Reduction, these 821 items were reduced to 78 items using various strategies including removal of items which were generic, repetitive, not reflective of disability, or not relevant to the upper extremity or to one of the targeted concepts of symptoms and functional status. Items not highly endorsed in a survey of content experts were also eliminated. Stage 2b, Further Item Reduction, will be based on results of field testing in which patients complete the 78-item questionnaire. This field testing, which is currently underway in 20 centers in the United States, Canada, and Australia, will generate the final format and content of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire. Future work includes plans for validity and reliability testing.

OBJECTIVE: The 1980 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) classification criteria for systemic sclerosis (SSc) lack sensitivity for early SSc and limited cutaneous SSc. The present work, by a joint committee of the ACR and the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR), was undertaken for the purpose of developing new classification criteria for SSc. METHODS: Using consensus methods, 23 candidate items were arranged in a multicriteria additive point system with a threshold to classify cases as SSc. The classification system was reduced by clustering items and simplifying weights. The system was tested by 1) determining specificity and sensitivity in SSc cases and controls with scleroderma-like disorders, and 2) validating against the combined view of a group of experts on a set of cases with or without SSc. RESULTS: It was determined that skin thickening of the fingers extending proximal to the metacarpophalangeal joints is sufficient for the patient to be classified as having SSc; if that is not present, 7 additive items apply, with varying weights for each: skin thickening of the fingers, fingertip lesions, telangiectasia, abnormal nailfold capillaries, interstitial lung disease or pulmonary arterial hypertension, Raynaud's phenomenon, and SSc-related autoantibodies. Sensitivity and specificity in the validation sample were, respectively, 0.91 and 0.92 for the new classification criteria and 0.75 and 0.72 for the 1980 ACR classification criteria. All selected cases were classified in accordance with consensus-based expert opinion. All cases classified as SSc according to the 1980 ACR criteria were classified as SSc with the new criteria, and several additional cases were now considered to be SSc. CONCLUSION: The ACR/EULAR classification criteria for SSc performed better than the 1980 ACR criteria for SSc and should allow for more patients to be classified correctly as having the disease.

The 2017 Concussion in Sport Group (CISG) consensus statement is designed to build on the principles outlined in the previous statements This document is developed for physicians and healthcare providers who are involved in athlete care, whether at a recreational, elite or professional level. While agreement exists on the principal messages conveyed by this document, the authors acknowledge that the science of SRC is evolving and therefore individual management and return-to-play decisions remain in the realm of clinical judgement.

CONTEXT: Intravenous tissue-type plasminogen activator can be beneficial to some patients when given within 3 hours of stroke onset, but many patients present later after stroke onset and alternative treatments are needed. OBJECTIVE: To determine the clinical efficacy and safety of intra-arterial (IA) recombinant prourokinase (r-proUK) in patients with acute stroke of less than 6 hours' duration caused by middle cerebral artery (MCA) occlusion. DESIGN: PROACT II (Prolyse in Acute Cerebral Thromboembolism II), a randomized, controlled, multicenter, open-label clinical trial with blinded follow-up conducted between February 1996 and August 1998. SETTING: Fifty-four centers in the United States and Canada. PATIENTS: A total of 180 patients with acute ischemic stroke of less than 6 hours' duration caused by angiographically proven occlusion of the MCA and without hemorrhage or major early infarction signs on computed tomographic scan. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomized to receive 9 mg of IA r-proUK plus heparin (n = 121) or heparin only (n = 59). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome, analyzed by intention-to-treat, was based on the proportion of patients with slight or no neurological disability at 90 days as defined by a modified Rankin score of 2 or less. Secondary outcomes included MCA recanalization, the frequency of intracranial hemorrhage with neurological deterioration, and mortality. RESULTS: For the primary analysis, 40% of r-proUK patients and 25% of control patients had a modified Rankin score of 2 or less (P = .04). Mortality was 25% for the r-proUK group and 27% for the control group. The recanalization rate was 66% for the r-proUK group and 18% for the control group (P<.001). Intracranial hemorrhage with neurological deterioration within 24 hours occurred in 10% of r-proUK patients and 2% of control patients (P = .06). CONCLUSION: Despite an increased frequency of early symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, treatment with IA r-proUK within 6 hours of the onset of acute ischemic stroke caused by MCA occlusion significantly improved clinical outcome at 90 days.

These guidelines provide an up-date of previous IFCN report on "Non-invasive electrical and magnetic stimulation of the brain, spinal cord and roots: basic principles and procedures for routine clinical application" (Rossini et al., 1994). A new Committee, composed of international experts, some of whom were in the panel of the 1994 "Report", was selected to produce a current state-of-the-art review of non-invasive stimulation both for clinical application and research in neuroscience. Since 1994, the international scientific community has seen a rapid increase in non-invasive brain stimulation in studying cognition, brain-behavior relationship and pathophysiology of various neurologic and psychiatric disorders. New paradigms of stimulation and new techniques have been developed. Furthermore, a large number of studies and clinical trials have demonstrated potential therapeutic applications of non-invasive brain stimulation, especially for TMS. Recent guidelines can be found in the literature covering specific aspects of non-invasive brain stimulation, such as safety (Rossi et al., 2009), methodology (Groppa et al., 2012) and therapeutic applications (Lefaucheur et al., 2014). This up-dated review covers theoretical, physiological and practical aspects of non-invasive stimulation of brain, spinal cord, nerve roots and peripheral nerves in the light of more updated knowledge, and include some recent extensions and developments.

This paper is a revision and update of the recommendations developed following the 1st (Vienna 2001), 2nd (Prague 2004) and 3rd (Zurich 2008) International Consensus Conferences on Concussion in Sport and is based on the deliberations at the 4th International Conference on Concussion in Sport held in Zurich, November 2012.1–3&#13;\n&#13;\nThe new 2012 Zurich Consensus statement is designed to build on the principles outlined in the previous documents and to develop further conceptual understanding of this problem using a formal consensus-based approach. A detailed description of the consensus process is outlined at the end of this document under the Background section. This document is developed primarily for use by physicians and healthcare professionals who are involved in the care of injured athletes, whether at the recreational, elite or professional level.

OBJECTIVE: To develop new classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) jointly supported by the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) and the American College of Rheumatology (ACR). METHODS: This international initiative had four phases. 1) Evaluation of antinuclear antibody (ANA) as an entry criterion through systematic review and meta-regression of the literature and criteria generation through an international Delphi exercise, an early patient cohort, and a patient survey. 2) Criteria reduction by Delphi and nominal group technique exercises. 3) Criteria definition and weighting based on criterion performance and on results of a multi-criteria decision analysis. 4) Refinement of weights and threshold scores in a new derivation cohort of 1,001 subjects and validation compared with previous criteria in a new validation cohort of 1,270 subjects. RESULTS: The 2019 EULAR/ACR classification criteria for SLE include positive ANA at least once as obligatory entry criterion; followed by additive weighted criteria grouped in 7 clinical (constitutional, hematologic, neuropsychiatric, mucocutaneous, serosal, musculoskeletal, renal) and 3 immunologic (antiphospholipid antibodies, complement proteins, SLE-specific antibodies) domains, and weighted from 2 to 10. Patients accumulating ≥10 points are classified. In the validation cohort, the new criteria had a sensitivity of 96.1% and specificity of 93.4%, compared with 82.8% sensitivity and 93.4% specificity of the ACR 1997 and 96.7% sensitivity and 83.7% specificity of the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics 2012 criteria. CONCLUSION: These new classification criteria were developed using rigorous methodology with multidisciplinary and international input, and have excellent sensitivity and specificity. Use of ANA entry criterion, hierarchically clustered, and weighted criteria reflects current thinking about SLE and provides an improved foundation for SLE research.

BACKGROUND: PSP is a neuropathologically defined disease entity. Clinical diagnostic criteria, published in 1996 by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke/Society for PSP, have excellent specificity, but their sensitivity is limited for variant PSP syndromes with presentations other than Richardson's syndrome. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to provide an evidence- and consensus-based revision of the clinical diagnostic criteria for PSP. METHODS: We searched the PubMed, Cochrane, Medline, and PSYCInfo databases for articles published in English since 1996, using postmortem diagnosis or highly specific clinical criteria as the diagnostic standard. Second, we generated retrospective standardized clinical data from patients with autopsy-confirmed PSP and control diseases. On this basis, diagnostic criteria were drafted, optimized in two modified Delphi evaluations, submitted to structured discussions with consensus procedures during a 2-day meeting, and refined in three further Delphi rounds. RESULTS: Defined clinical, imaging, laboratory, and genetic findings serve as mandatory basic features, mandatory exclusion criteria, or context-dependent exclusion criteria. We identified four functional domains (ocular motor dysfunction, postural instability, akinesia, and cognitive dysfunction) as clinical predictors of PSP. Within each of these domains, we propose three clinical features that contribute different levels of diagnostic certainty. Specific combinations of these features define the diagnostic criteria, stratified by three degrees of diagnostic certainty (probable PSP, possible PSP, and suggestive of PSP). Clinical clues and imaging findings represent supportive features. CONCLUSIONS: Here, we present new criteria aimed to optimize early, sensitive, and specific clinical diagnosis of PSP on the basis of currently available evidence. © 2017 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

This report describes the consensus outcome of an international panel consisting of investigators with years of experience in this field that reviewed the definition and classification of dystonia. Agreement was obtained based on a consensus development methodology during 3 in-person meetings and manuscript review by mail. Dystonia is defined as a movement disorder characterized by sustained or intermittent muscle contractions causing abnormal, often repetitive, movements, postures, or both. Dystonic movements are typically patterned and twisting, and may be tremulous. Dystonia is often initiated or worsened by voluntary action and associated with overflow muscle activation. Dystonia is classified along 2 axes: clinical characteristics, including age at onset, body distribution, temporal pattern and associated features (additional movement disorders or neurological features); and etiology, which includes nervous system pathology and inheritance. The clinical characteristics fall into several specific dystonia syndromes that help to guide diagnosis and treatment. We provide here a new general definition of dystonia and propose a new classification. We encourage clinicians and researchers to use these innovative definition and classification and test them in the clinical setting on a variety of patients with dystonia. © 2013 Movement Disorder Society.

BACKGROUND: Vasopressin is commonly used as an adjunct to catecholamines to support blood pressure in refractory septic shock, but its effect on mortality is unknown. We hypothesized that low-dose vasopressin as compared with norepinephrine would decrease mortality among patients with septic shock who were being treated with conventional (catecholamine) vasopressors. METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial, we assigned patients who had septic shock and were receiving a minimum of 5 microg of norepinephrine per minute to receive either low-dose vasopressin (0.01 to 0.03 U per minute) or norepinephrine (5 to 15 microg per minute) in addition to open-label vasopressors. All vasopressor infusions were titrated and tapered according to protocols to maintain a target blood pressure. The primary end point was the mortality rate 28 days after the start of infusions. RESULTS: A total of 778 patients underwent randomization, were infused with the study drug (396 patients received vasopressin, and 382 norepinephrine), and were included in the analysis. There was no significant difference between the vasopressin and norepinephrine groups in the 28-day mortality rate (35.4% and 39.3%, respectively; P=0.26) or in 90-day mortality (43.9% and 49.6%, respectively; P=0.11). There were no significant differences in the overall rates of serious adverse events (10.3% and 10.5%, respectively; P=1.00). In the prospectively defined stratum of less severe septic shock, the mortality rate was lower in the vasopressin group than in the norepinephrine group at 28 days (26.5% vs. 35.7%, P=0.05); in the stratum of more severe septic shock, there was no significant difference in 28-day mortality (44.0% and 42.5%, respectively; P=0.76). A test for heterogeneity between these two study strata was not significant (P=0.10). CONCLUSIONS: Low-dose vasopressin did not reduce mortality rates as compared with norepinephrine among patients with septic shock who were treated with catecholamine vasopressors. (Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN94845869 [controlled-trials.com].).

In patients with spinal cord injury, the primary or mechanical trauma seldom causes total transection, even though the functional loss may be complete. In addition, biochemical and pathological changes in the cord may worsen after injury. To explain these phenomena, the concept of the secondary injury has evolved for which numerous pathophysiological mechanisms have been postulated. This paper reviews the concept of secondary injury with special emphasis on vascular mechanisms. Evidence is presented to support the theory of secondary injury and the hypothesis that a key mechanism is posttraumatic ischemia with resultant infarction of the spinal cord. Evidence for the role of vascular mechanisms has been obtained from a variety of models of acute spinal cord injury in several species. Many different angiographic methods have been used for assessing microcirculation of the cord and for measuring spinal cord blood flow after trauma. With these techniques, the major systemic and local vascular effects of acute spinal cord injury have been identified and implicated in the etiology of secondary injury. The systemic effects of acute spinal cord injury include hypotension and reduced cardiac output. The local effects include loss of autoregulation in the injured segment of the spinal cord and a marked reduction of the microcirculation in both gray and white matter, especially in hemorrhagic regions and in adjacent zones. The microcirculatory loss extends for a considerable distance proximal and distal to the site of injury. Many studies have shown a dose-dependent reduction of spinal cord blood flow varying with the severity of injury, and a reduction of spinal cord blood flow which worsens with time after injury. The functional deficits due to acute spinal cord injury have been measured electrophysiologically with techniques such as motor and somatosensory evoked potentials and have been found proportional to the degree of posttraumatic ischemia. The histological effects include early hemorrhagic necrosis leading to major infarction at the injury site. These posttraumatic vascular effects can be treated. Systemic normotension can be restored with volume expansion or vasopressors, and spinal cord blood flow can be improved with dopamine, steroids, nimodipine, or volume expansion. The combination of nimodipine and volume expansion improves posttraumatic spinal cord blood flow and spinal cord function measured by evoked potentials. These results provide strong evidence that posttraumatic ischemia is an important secondary mechanism of injury, and that it can be counteracted.

BACKGROUND: There is debate about whether the initial treatment for patients with Parkinson's disease should be levodopa or a dopamine agonist. METHODS: In this prospective, randomized, double-blind study, we compared the safety and efficacy of the dopamine D2-receptor agonist ropinirole with that of levodopa over a period of five years in 268 patients with early Parkinson's disease. If symptoms were not adequately controlled by the assigned study medication, patients could receive supplementary levodopa, administered in an open-label fashion. The primary outcome measure was the occurrence of dyskinesia. RESULTS: Eighty-five of the 179 patients in the ropinirole group (47 percent) and 45 of the 89 patients in the levodopa group (51 percent) completed all five years of the study. In the ropinirole group 29 of the 85 patients (34 percent) received no levodopa supplementation. The analysis of the time to dyskinesia showed a significant difference in favor of ropinirole (hazard ratio for remaining free of dyskinesia, 2.82; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.78 to 4.44; P<0.001). At five years, the cumulative incidence of dyskinesia (excluding the three patients who had dyskinesia at base line), regardless of levodopa supplementation, was 20 percent (36 of 177 patients) in the ropinirole group and 45 percent (40 of 88 patients) in the levodopa group. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the mean change in scores for activities of daily living among those who completed the study. Adverse events led to the early withdrawal from the study of 48 of 179 patients in the ropinirole group (27 percent) and 29 of 89 patients in the levodopa group (33 percent). The mean (+/-SD) daily doses given by the end of the study were 16.5+/-6.6 mg of ropinirole (plus 427+/-221 mg of levodopa in patients who received supplementation) and 753+/-398 mg of levodopa (including supplements). CONCLUSIONS: Early Parkinson's disease can be managed successfully for up to five years with a reduced risk of dyskinesia by initiating treatment with ropinirole alone and supplementing it with levodopa if necessary.

The present guidelines are the most recent data on postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and an update on the 2 previous sets of guidelines published in 2003 and 2007. These guidelines were compiled by a multidisciplinary international panel of individuals with interest and expertise in PONV under the auspices of the Society for Ambulatory Anesthesia. The panel members critically and systematically evaluated the current medical literature on PONV to provide an evidence-based reference tool for the management of adults and children who are undergoing surgery and are at increased risk for PONV. These guidelines identify patients at risk for PONV in adults and children; recommend approaches for reducing baseline risks for PONV; identify the most effective antiemetic single therapy and combination therapy regimens for PONV prophylaxis, including nonpharmacologic approaches; recommend strategies for treatment of PONV when it occurs; provide an algorithm for the management of individuals at increased risk for PONV as well as steps to ensure PONV prevention and treatment are implemented in the clinical setting.

IMPORTANCE: Parkinson disease is the second most common neurodegenerative disease worldwide. Although no available therapies alter the underlying neurodegenerative process, symptomatic therapies can improve patient quality of life. OBJECTIVE: To provide an evidence-based review of the initial pharmacological management of the classic motor symptoms of Parkinson disease; describe management of medication-related motor complications (such as motor fluctuations and dyskinesia), and other medication adverse effects (nausea, psychosis, and impulse control disorders and related behaviors); and discuss the management of selected nonmotor symptoms of Parkinson disease, including rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder, cognitive impairment, depression, orthostatic hypotension, and sialorrhea. EVIDENCE REVIEW: References were identified using searches of PubMed between January 1985 and February 2014 for English-language human studies and the full database of the Cochrane Library. The classification of studies by quality (classes I-IV) was assessed using the levels of evidence guidelines from the American Academy of Neurology and the highest-quality data for each topic. RESULTS: Although levodopa is the most effective medication available for treating the motor symptoms of Parkinson disease, in certain instances (eg, mild symptoms, tremor as the only or most prominent symptom, aged <60 years) other medications (eg, monoamine oxidase type B inhibitors [MAOBIs], amantadine, anticholinergics, β-blockers, or dopamine agonists) may be initiated first to avoid levodopa-related motor complications. Motor fluctuations may be managed by modifying the levodopa dosing regimen or by adding several other medications, such as MAOBIs, catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibitors, or dopamine agonists. Impulse control disorders are typically managed by reducing or withdrawing dopaminergic medication, particularly dopamine agonists. Evidence-based management of some nonmotor symptoms is limited by a paucity of high-quality positive studies. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Strong evidence supports using levodopa and dopamine agonists for motor symptoms at all stages of Parkinson disease. Dopamine agonists and drugs that block dopamine metabolism are effective for motor fluctuations and clozapine is effective for hallucinations. Cholinesterase inhibitors may improve symptoms of dementia and antidepressants and pramipexole may improve depression. Evidence supporting other therapies for motor and nonmotor features is less well established.