| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Kharbanda, K. K., et al.
(författare)
-
Role of the ghrelin system in alcohol use disorder and alcohol-associated liver disease: A narrative review
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Alcoholism-Clinical and Experimental Research. - : Wiley. - 0145-6008 .- 1530-0277. ; 46:12, s. 2149-2159
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Unhealthy alcohol consumption is a global health problem. Adverse individual, public health, and socioeconomic consequences are attributable to harmful alcohol use. Epidemiological studies have shown that alcohol use disorder (AUD) and alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD) are the top two pathologies among alcohol-related diseases. Consistent with the major role that the liver plays in alcohol metabolism, uncontrolled drinking may cause significant damage to the liver. This damage is initiated by excessive fat accumulation in the liver, which can further progress to advanced liver disease. The only effective therapeutic strategies currently available for ALD are alcohol abstinence or liver transplantation. Any molecule with dual-pronged effects at the central and peripheral organs controlling addictive behaviors and associated metabolic pathways are a potentially important therapeutic target for treating AUD and ALD. Ghrelin, a hormone primarily derived from the stomach, has such properties, and regulates both behavioral and metabolic functions. In this review, we highlight recent advances in understanding the peripheral and central functions of the ghrelin system and its role in AUD and ALD pathogenesis. We first discuss the correlation between blood ghrelin concentrations and alcohol use or abstinence. Next, we discuss the role of ghrelin in alcohol-seeking behaviors and finally its role in the development of fatty liver by metabolic regulations and organ crosstalk. We propose that a better understanding of the ghrelin system could open an innovative avenue for improved treatments for AUD and associated medical consequences, including ALD.
|
|
| 3. |
- Escaned, Javier, et al.
(författare)
-
Safety of the Deferral of Coronary Revascularization on the Basis of Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio and Fractional Flow Reserve Measurements in Stable Coronary Artery Disease and Acute Coronary Syndromes
- 2018
-
Ingår i: JACC. - : Elsevier. - 1936-8798 .- 1876-7605. ; 11:15, s. 1437-1449
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical outcomes of patients deferred from coronary revascularization on the basis of instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) or fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurements in stable angina pectoris (SAP) and acute coronary syndromes (ACS). BACKGROUND Assessment of coronary stenosis severity with pressure guidewires is recommended to determine the need for myocardial revascularization. METHODS The safety of deferral of coronary revascularization in the pooled per-protocol population (n = 4,486) of the DEFINE-FLAIR (Functional Lesion Assessment of Intermediate Stenosis to Guide Revascularisation) and iFR-SWEDEHEART (Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio Versus Fractional Flow Reserve in Patients With Stable Angina Pectoris or Acute Coronary Syndrome) randomized clinical trials was investigated. Patients were stratified according to revascularization decision making on the basis of iFR or FFR and to clinical presentation (SAP or ACS). The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as the composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization at 1 year. RESULTS Coronary revascularization was deferred in 2,130 patients. Deferral was performed in 1,117 patients (50%) in the iFR group and 1,013 patients (45%) in the FFR group (p < 0.01). At 1 year, the MACE rate in the deferred population was similar between the iFR and FFR groups (4.12% vs. 4.05%; fully adjusted hazard ratio: 1.13; 95% confidence interval: 0.72 to 1.79; p = 0.60). A clinical presentation with ACS was associated with a higher MACE rate compared with SAP in deferred patients (5.91% vs. 3.64% in ACS and SAP, respectively; fully adjusted hazard ratio: 0.61 in favor of SAP; 95% confidence interval: 0.38 to 0.99; p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS Overall, deferral of revascularization is equally safe with both iFR and FFR, with a low MACE rate of about 4%. Lesions were more frequently deferred when iFR was used to assess physiological significance. In deferred patients presenting with ACS, the event rate was significantly increased compared with SAP at 1 year. (C) 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier on behalf of the American College of Cardiology Foundation.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
