München Klinik Bogenhausen

About: München Klinik Bogenhausen is a healthcare organization based out in Munich, Germany. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Stent & Type 2 diabetes. The organization has 83 authors who have published 89 publications receiving 6834 citations. The organization is also known as: Klinikum Bogenhausen.

Effect of the Angiotensin-Converting–Enzyme Inhibitor Benazepril on the Progression of Chronic Renal Insufficiency

Abstract: Background Drugs that inhibit angiotensin-converting enzyme slow the progression of renal insufficiency in patients with diabetic nephropathy. Whether these drugs have a similar action in patients with other renal diseases is not known. We conducted a study to determine the effect of the angiotensin-converting–enzyme inhibitor benazepril on the progression of renal insufficiency in patients with various underlying renal diseases. Methods In a three-year trial involving 583 patients with renal insufficiency caused by various disorders, 300 patients received benazepril and 283 received placebo. The underlying diseases included glomerulopathies (in 192 patients), interstitial nephritis (in 105), nephrosclerosis (in 97), polycystic kidney disease (in 64), diabetic nephropathy (in 21), and miscellaneous or unknown disorders (in 104). The severity of renal insufficiency was classified according to the base-line creatinine clearance: 227 patients had mild insufficiency (creatinine clearance, 46 to 60 ml per minu...

Comparison of Zotarolimus-Eluting and Everolimus-Eluting Coronary Stents

Abstract: BACKGROUND: New-generation coronary stents that release zotarolimus or everolimus have been shown to reduce the risk of restenosis. However, it is unclear whether there are differences in efficacy and safety between the two types of stents on the basis of prospectively adjudicated end points endorsed by the Food and Drug Administration. METHODS: In this multicenter, noninferiority trial with minimal exclusion criteria, we randomly assigned 2292 patients to undergo treatment with coronary stents releasing either zotarolimus or everolimus. Twenty percent of patients were randomly selected for repeat angiography at 13 months. The primary end point was target-lesion failure, defined as a composite of death from cardiac causes, any myocardial infarction (not clearly attributable to a nontarget vessel), or clinically indicated target-lesion revascularization within 12 months. The secondary angiographic end point was the extent of in-stent stenosis at 13 months. RESULTS: At least one off-label criterion for stent placement was present in 66% of patients. The zotarolimus-eluting stent was noninferior to the everolimus-eluting stent with respect to the primary end point, which occurred in 8.2% and 8.3% of patients, respectively (P<0.001 for noninferiority). There were no significant between-group differences in the rate of death from cardiac causes, any myocardial infarction, or revascularization. The rate of stent thrombosis was 2.3% in the zotarolimus-stent group and 1.5% in the everolimus-stent group (P = 0.17). The zotarolimus-eluting stent was also noninferior regarding the degree (±SD) of in-stent stenosis (21.65±14.42% for zotarolimus vs. 19.76±14.64% for everolimus, P = 0.04 for noninferiority). In-stent late lumen loss was 0.27±0.43 mm in the zotarolimus-stent group versus 0.19±0.40 mm in the everolimusstent group (P = 0.08). There were no significant between-group differences in the rate of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: At 13 months, the new-generation zotarolimus-eluting stent was found to be noninferior to the everolimus-eluting stent in a population of patients who had minimal exclusion criteria.

Effect of eritoran, an antagonist of MD2-TLR4, on mortality in patients with severe sepsis: the ACCESS randomized trial.

Abstract: Importance Eritoran is a synthetic lipid A antagonist that blocks lipopolysaccharide (LPS) from binding at the cell surface MD2-TLR4 receptor. LPS is a major component of the outer membrane of gram-negative bacteria and is a potent activator of the acute inflammatory response. Objective To determine if eritoran, a TLR4 antagonist, would significantly reduce sepsis-induced mortality. Design, Setting, and Participants We performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multinational phase 3 trial in 197 intensive care units. Patients were enrolled from June 2006 to September 2010 and final follow-up was completed in September 2011. Interventions Patients with severe sepsis (n = 1961) were randomized and treated within 12 hours of onset of first organ dysfunction in a 2:1 ratio with a 6-day course of either eritoran tetrasodium (105 mg total) or placebo, with n = 1304 and n = 657 patients, respectively. Main Outcome Measures The primary end point was 28-day all-cause mortality. The secondary end points were all-cause mortality at 3, 6, and 12 months after beginning treatment. Results Baseline characteristics of the 2 study groups were similar. In the modified intent-to-treat analysis (randomized patients who received at least 1 dose) there was no significant difference in the primary end point of 28-day all-cause mortality with 28.1% (366/1304) in the eritoran group vs 26.9% (177/657) in the placebo group (P = .59; hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.88-1.26; difference in mortality rate, −1.1; 95% CI, −5.3 to 3.1) or in the key secondary end point of 1-year all-cause mortality with 44.1% (290/657) in the eritoran group vs 43.3% (565/1304) in the placebo group, Kaplan-Meier analysis of time to death by 1 year, P = .79 (hazard ratio, 0.98; 0.85-1.13). No significant differences were observed in any of the prespecified subgroups. Adverse events, including secondary infection rates, did not differ between study groups. Conclusions and Relevance Among patients with severe sepsis, the use of eritoran, compared with placebo, did not result in reduced 28-day mortality. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00334828

Insulin adherence behaviours and barriers in the multinational Global Attitudes of Patients and Physicians in Insulin Therapy study

Abstract: AIMS To examine patient and physician beliefs regarding insulin therapy and the degree to which patients adhere to their insulin regimens. METHODS Internet survey of 1250 physicians (600 specialists, 650 primary care physicians) who treat patients with diabetes and telephone survey of 1530 insulin-treated patients (180 with Type 1 diabetes, 1350 with Type 2 diabetes) in China, France, Japan, Germany, Spain, Turkey, the UK or the USA. Results: One third (33.2%) of patients reported insulin omission/non-adherence at least 1 day in the last month, with an average of 3.3 days. Three quarters (72.5%) of physicians report that their typical patient does not take their insulin as prescribed, with a mean of 4.3 days per month of basal insulin omission/non-adherence and 5.7 days per month of prandial insulin omission/non-adherence. Patients and providers indicated the same five most common reasons for insulin omission/non-adherence: too busy; travelling; skipped meals; stress/emotional problems; public embarrassment. Physicians reported low patient success at initiating insulin in a timely fashion and adjusting insulin doses. Most physicians report that many insulin-treated patients do not have adequate glucose control (87.6%) and that they would treat more aggressively if not for concern about hypoglycaemia (75.5%). Although a majority of patients (and physicians) regard insulin treatment as restrictive, more patients see insulin treatment as having positive than negative impacts on their lives. CONCLUSIONS Glucose control is inadequate among insulin-treated patients, in part attributable to insulin omission/non-adherence and lack of dose adjustment. There is a need for insulin regimens that are less restrictive and burdensome with lower risk of hypoglycaemia.