Patients and methods: We investigated 51 adult volunteers 28 pancreatic insufficient CF patients [13 with CF-related diabetes (CFRD) and
15 non-diabetic] and 23 male non-CF patients 112 with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) and selleck inhibitor 11 healthy control subjects! Patients with known liver cirrhosis or portal hypertension were excluded. The size of the spleen was measured in all subjects by an investigator unaware of patients’ clinical status For comparison of spleen size in the four study groups only male CF patients were included For CF patients, spleen size was compared with forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)), body mass index (WAD, total number of days of intravenous (IV) antibiotic treatment for pulmonary exacerbations in year previous to study, levels of circulating white blood cells, glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), and exocrine function of H 89 solubility dmso the pancreas, as assessed by
daily requirement of oral
Results: Amongst the four study groups, spleen size was greatest in the male non-diabetic CF patients (P = 0 01) For CF patients, spleen size was greater in male compared to female patients (P = 0 012) For patients with CFRD, there was an inverse correlation between the spleen size and HbA1c (r = -0 59, P = 0 04) and the daily intake of supplementary lipase (r = -0.63, P = 0 02) The size of the spleen in patients with CFRD, but not in CF patients without CFRD, inversely correlated with the days of IV antibiotic treatment received in the year previous to the study (r = -0 67, P = 0 012).
There was no correlation between spleen size and BMI, FEV1 and white blood cell counts in any group
Conclusions: On MRI, the spleen size was greatest in male non-diabetic CF patients in comparison with other groups. The size of the spleen in CFRD patients was smaller when BRSK2 diabetes was poorly controlled, when exocrine pancreatic function was greatly impaired and in those with greater need for IV antibiotics in the year prior to the study”
“Objectives: Recent evidence indicated that the use of a bioprosthesis in young patients at first-time aortic valve replacement (AVR) is associated with an increased reoperation risk, but not with an increase in long-term mortality, when compared with the use of a mechanical valve. However, at reoperative AVR, follow-up data by prosthesis type have been lacking from the literature. Therefore, we examined long-term survival and valve-related complications according to the type of prosthesis used at reoperative AVR.
Methods: We studied 437 patients who underwent reoperative AVR, at a mean age of 58.6 +/- 14.2 years, for failure of a previously implanted aortic valve prosthesis. Thirty-day mortality at reoperative AVR was 6% (n = 27). A bioprosthesis was used in 135 (31%) patients. Patients were subsequently followed up for a mean of 7.6 +/- 6.8 years after reoperative AVR.