MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is prospective controlled trial. Peripheral venous blood sample is obtained from 20 patients with AAA and 36 normal control subjects. MMP-9 concentration levels were determined by an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and compared with subjects abdominal ultrasonography or computed tomography of abdomen.
RESULTS: Mean (± SE) MMP-9 was 23.94 ± 0.60 ng/mL in normal control subjects and 21.39 ± 1.03 ng/mL in patients with AAAs (p ← 0.05 versus normal control subjects). MMP-9 correlate significantly with AAA (p=0.004). There was no correlation of MMP-9 levels with age, gender, or other risk factors. The cutoff point is 12.54 for aorta size <3.0 cm. The sensitivity and specificity of MMP-9 were 60% and 64% respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: MMP-9 levels correlate significantly with AAA with a cutoff point of 12.54. However, the utility of MMP-9 as a diagnostic test is limited due to low sensitivity and specificity. An elevated MMP-9 has limited use to predict the presence of AAA (positive predictive value: 60%) and a normal MMP-9 level was insufficient to determine the absence of AAA (negative predictive value: 36.1%).
METHODS: 50 POAG patients and 50 normal subjects were recruited and an MRI brain with T1-magnetization-prepared rapid gradient-echo was performed. Medial temporal lobe and parietal lobe atrophy were by MTA and PCA/Koedam scoring. The score of the PCA and MTA were compared between the POAG group and the controls.
RESULTS: There was a significant statistical difference between PCA score in POAG and the healthy control group (p-value = 0.026). There is no statistical difference between MTA score in POAG compared to the healthy control group (p-value = 0.58).
CONCLUSION: This study suggests a correlation between POAG and PCA score. Potential application of this scoring method in clinical diagnosis and monitoring of POAG patients.
ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: The scoring method used in AD may also be applied in the diagnosis and monitoring of POAGMRI brain, specifically rapid volumetric T1 spoiled gradient echo sequence, may be applied in POAG assessment.
METHODS: In an international, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study, symptomatic individuals classified CEAP C0s to C4s were randomized in either treatment arm and treated for 8 weeks. Lower limb symptoms (discomfort, pain and heaviness) were assessed using Visual Analog Scales (VAS), and quality of life (QoL) was measured with the CIVIQ-20 Questionnaire.
RESULTS: A total of 1139 patients were included in the study. Both MPFF treatment regimens were well tolerated and associated with a significant reduction in lower limb symptoms. A non-inferiority of MPFF 1000-mg oral suspension once daily compared to MPFF 500-mg tablet twice daily (P<0.0001) was found for lower limb discomfort (-3.33 cm for MPFF 1000 mg and -3.37 cm for MPFF 500 mg), leg pain (-3.27 cm for MPFF 1000 mg and -3.31 cm for MPFF 500 mg) and leg heaviness (-3.41 cm for MPFF 1000 mg and -3.46 cm for MPFF 500 mg). The patients' QoL was improved by about 20 points on the CIVIQ scale in both groups (19.33 points for MPFF 1000 mg and 20.28 points for MPFF 500 mg).
CONCLUSIONS: MPFF 1000-mg oral suspension and MPFF 500-mg tablets treatments were associated with similar reductions in lower limb symptoms and QoL improvement. The new once daily MPFF1000-mg oral suspension has a similar safety profile to two tablets of MPFF 500 mg, with the advantage of one daily intake, potentially associated with improved patient adherence and easier CVD management.