PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

A R Lorimer

Publications and source records attributed to A R Lorimer.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2001

Pravastatin and the development of diabetes mellitus: evidence for a protective treatment effect in the West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study.

BACKGROUND: We examined the development of new diabetes mellitus in men aged 45 to 64 years during the West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study. METHODS AND RESULTS: Our definition of diabetes mellitus was based on the American Diabetic Association threshold of a blood glucose level of >/=7.0 mmol/L. Subjects who self-reported diabetes at baseline or had a baseline glucose level of >/=7.0 mmol/L were excluded from the analyses. A total of 5974 of the 6595 randomized subjects were included in the analysis, and 139 subjects became diabetic during the study. The baseline predictors of the transition from normal glucose control to diabetes were studied. In the univariate model, body mass index, log triglyceride, log white blood cell count, systolic blood pressure, total and HDL cholesterol, glucose, and randomized treatment assignment to pravastatin were significant predictors. In a multivariate model, body mass index, log triglyceride, glucose, and pravastatin therapy were retained as predictors of diabetes in this cohort. CONCLUSIONS: We concluded that the assignment to pravastatin therapy resulted in a 30% reduction (P:=0.042) in the hazard of becoming diabetic. By lowering plasma triglyceride levels, pravastatin therapy may favorably influence the development of diabetes, but other explanations, such as the anti-inflammatory properties of this drug in combination with its endothelial effects, cannot be excluded with these analyses.

Anticholesteremic Agents↗
PubMed1999

Auditing the implementation of SIGN (Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network) clinical guidelines.

Clinical practice guidelines are increasingly being recognised as integral to the clinical effectiveness agenda. According to the recent Scottish White Paper, Scotland "leads the way in clinical effectiveness". The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN), established in 1993, has produced over 20 clinical practice guidelines, and plans to produce at least as many more, while reviewing existing guidelines at a minimum of every two years. This represents a substantial investment of NHS resources. This paper investigates whether this investment is being recouped in Scottish NHS acute trusts via the implementation of SIGN guidelines, and whether their implementation is being audited properly. It is argued that without clinical audit, guideline implementation is unlikely to succeed. This has important ramifications for the implementation of clinical governance.

Accreditation↗
PubMed1998

Health and efficiency: clinical effectiveness dissected.

If the exclusive promotion of values inimical to our basic humanity extends to the health care policy arena, we face a defensive, restricted, impersonal and ultimately impoverished health care system. Americans known it already as 'managed-care'. This is why it is crucial for health policy analysts to make explicit the role of values in policy-making, especially that involving the input of 'value-neutral' economics. The nature of any clinical effectiveness policy will be determined by the understanding of cost-effectiveness employed in its design and implementation. Given that cost-effectiveness is nowadays usually defined according to health economists' criteria, the battle over the meaning of clinical effectiveness is a significant development in health economics' move to assume control of the NHS.

Clinical Competence↗
PubMed1998

Differences between amlodipine and lisinopril in control of clinic and twenty-four hour ambulatory blood pressures.

The anti-hypertensive efficacy of once-daily amlodipine (up to 10 mg) and lisinopril (up to 20 mg) were compared in terms of clinic and ambulatory blood pressure (BP) control, in an observer-blind, two-period crossover study. Following a 4-week placebo run-in period, patients underwent two active treatment phases each lasting 12 weeks and separated by a 4-week washout period. Sixty patients with a supine diastolic BP between 90 and 120 mm Hg were included, irrespective of whether or not they had received previous anti-hypertensive medication. Amlodipine reduced supine systolic and diastolic clinic BP significantly more than lisinopril (-20+/-2/-14+/-1 vs -11 3/-7+/-1 mm Hg; P=0.02/ P=0.001) 24 h post-dose. Clinic standing diastolic BP was also significantly reduced with amlodipine compared with lisinopril (P=0.05). Both drugs produced control of mean ambulatory BP relative to baseline over 24 h. Amlodipine showed more consistent control of BP over the 24-h period in contrast to lisinopril which exerted its greatest effect during the daytime.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1996

Effects of colestipol alone and in combination with simvastatin on apolipoprotein B metabolism.

The effects of colestipol therapy alone (20 g/d) or combined with simvastatin (20 mg/d) were examined in a group of eight male patients with primary moderate hypercholesterolemia (total cholesterol > or = 6.5 mmol/L [> or = 250 mg/dL]) who had undergone coronary artery bypass grafting more than 3 months previously. Colestipol therapy decreased total cholesterol by 14% (P < .001) and LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) by 23% (P < .001), while dual therapy decreased total cholesterol by 38% and LDL-C by 52% (both P < .001 versus baseline). No significant changes were observed in plasma triglyceride, VLDL cholesterol, or HDL cholesterol levels. VLDL subfraction turnovers were conducted at baseline and again on each regimen. ApoB kinetic parameters derived from a multicompartmental model suggested that colestipol therapy resulted in an expansion of the total VLDL apoB pool (36%, P < .05) that was largely due to a fall in the clearance rate of VLDL1 apoB (49%), while the LDL apoB pool decreased 23% as a result of diminished direct LDL input. The model used also revealed that addition of simvastatin to the resin therapy caused increases in the fractional transfer rates of VLDL2 to IDL and IDL to LDL together with a 37% increment in the LDL apoB fractional catabolic rate. Compared with baseline, combined therapy generated falls in both IDL (35%, P = .01) and LDL (37%, P < .04) apoB pools due to enhanced clearance of IDL (214%, P < .03) and reduced total input of LDL (39%, P < .003).

Adult↗
PubMed1995

Prevention of coronary heart disease with pravastatin in men with hypercholesterolemia. West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study Group.

BACKGROUND: Lowering the blood cholesterol level may reduce the risk of coronary heart disease. This double-blind study was designed to determine whether the administration of pravastatin to men with hypercholesterolemia and no history of myocardial infarction reduced the combined incidence of nonfatal myocardial infarction and death from coronary heart disease. METHODS: We randomly assigned 6595 men, 45 to 64 years of age, with a mean (+/- SD) plasma cholesterol level of 272 +/- 23 mg per deciliter (7.0 +/- 0.6 mmol per liter) to receive pravastatin (40 mg each evening) or placebo. The average follow-up period was 4.9 years. Medical records, electrocardiographic recordings, and the national death registry were used to determine the clinical end points. RESULTS: Pravastatin lowered plasma cholesterol levels by 20 percent and low-density-lipoprotein cholesterol levels by 26 percent, whereas there was no change with placebo. There were 248 definite coronary events (specified as nonfatal myocardial infarction or death from coronary heart disease) in the placebo group, and 174 in the pravastatin group (relative reduction in risk with pravastatin, 31 percent; 95 percent confidence interval, 17 to 43 percent; P < 0.001). There were similar reductions in the risk of definite nonfatal myocardial infarctions (31 percent reduction, P < 0.001), death from coronary heart disease (definite cases alone: 28 percent reduction, P = 0.13; definite plus suspected cases: 33 percent reduction, P = 0.042), and death from all cardiovascular causes (32 percent reduction, P = 0.033). There was no excess of deaths from noncardiovascular causes in the pravastatin group. We observed a 22 percent reduction in the risk of death from any cause in the pravastatin group (95 percent confidence interval, 0 to 40 percent; P = 0.051). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with pravastatin significantly reduced the incidence of myocardial infarction and death from cardiovascular causes without adversely affecting the risk of death from noncardiovascular causes in men with moderate hypercholesterolemia and no history of myocardial infarction.

Anticholesteremic Agents↗
PubMed1995

Metabolism of apolipoprotein B in primary moderate hypercholesterolaemia: effects of acipimox and cholestyramine therapy.

The effects of combined therapy with acipimox (1250 mg/day) and cholestyramine (20 g/day) were examined in a group of 7 subjects with primary moderate hypercholesterolaemia (total cholesterol >=7 mmol/L). Radiolabeled VLDL subfraction turnovers were performed at baseline, during acipimox therapy and during combined therapy. Acipimox and combined therapies lowered plasma low density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol by 20% (P<0.001) and 27% (P<0.001) respectively. The marked fall in LDL-cholesterol associated with acipimox therapy, was due to a reduced production rate of LDL (apolipoprotein) apoB. This is shown to be a result of reduced direct LDL apoB production, reduced IDL to LDL transfer consistent with inhibition of hepatic triglyceride lipase, and with a reduction in the overall throughput of VLDL1 apoB. With combined therapy both reduced production and increased catabolism of apoB containing LDL precursors and of LDL itself have to be invoked to explain the fall in plasma LDL-cholesterol.

Adult↗
PubMed1995

Heart rate variability in left ventricular hypertrophy.

BACKGROUND: Electrocardiographic left ventricular hypertrophy and strain are associated with increased cardiac morbidity and mortality. Impaired cardiac autonomic function, assessed non-invasively by spontaneous heart rate variability on Holter monitoring, is associated with an increased risk of sudden death after myocardial infarction. AIM: To study the effect of left ventricular hypertrophy on heart rate variability. PATIENTS: 36 controls and 154 patients with left ventricular hypertrophy (94 with hypertension and 60 with aortic valve disease). SETTING: Tertiary referral centre. METHODS: Heart rate variability was measured on 24 h Holter recordings by non-spectral methods. Left ventricular mass index and fractional shortening were measured by echocardiography. RESULTS: Patients with left ventricular hypertrophy had a higher left ventricular mass index (P < 0.001) and reduced heart rate variability (P < 0.001) compared with those of the controls. A continuous inverse relation was apparent between heart rate variability and left ventricular mass index (r = -0.478, P < 0.001). Heart rate variability was not affected by age, the presence of coronary artery disease in patients with left ventricular hypertrophy, or beta blocker treatment for hypertension. Multivariate analysis showed that left ventricular mass index is the most important determinant of heart rate variability. CONCLUSION: Heart rate variability is significantly reduced in patients with left ventricular hypertrophy secondary to hypertension or aortic valve disease. A continuous inverse relation exists between heart rate variability and left ventricular mass index. Impaired cardiac autonomic function in left ventricular hypertrophy may contribute to the mechanism of sudden death.

Aortic Valve Stenosis↗
PubMed1995

Overproduction of small very low density lipoproteins (Sf 20-60) in moderate hypercholesterolemia: relationships between apolipoprotein B kinetics and plasma lipoproteins.

An analysis of apolipoprotein (apo) B turnovers conducted in subjects with moderate hypercholesterolemia was performed to discover relationships that may exist between apoB kinetic parameters and plasma lipid and lipoprotein levels. A group of 21 subjects with plasma cholesterol in the range 250-300 mg/dl and triglyceride < 265 mg/dl were injected with tracers of 131I-labeled very low density lipoprotein 1 (VLDL1, Sf 60-400) and 125I-labeled VLDL2 (Sf 20-60) prepared by cumulative flotation ultracentrifugation. The metabolism of apoB in these fractions was followed through intermediate density (IDL, Sf 12-20) to low density (LDL, Sf 0-12) lipoprotein. The most consistent feature giving rise to the higher apoB levels that occurred in VLDL2, IDL, and LDL in the hypercholesterolemic group was increased input of VLDL2 (787 +/- 607 (SD) mg/day vs. 349 +/- 213 in normals, P < 0.01). VLDL1 apoB input was variably affected and not significantly different from normal. However, the plasma residence time of this subfraction was increased (0.15 +/- 0.07 days vs. 0.08 +/- 0.03 days in normals, (P < 0.001) due to a decreased fractional rate of direct catabolism. Fractional transfer rates (FTR) down the delipidation cascade and other fractional rates of direct catabolism were, overall, not significantly different from normal. The plasma residence time of VLDL2 apoB and LDL apoB was similar in hypercholesterolemic and normal subjects, while that of IDL apoB was slightly increased. Variation in LDL apoB mass within the hypercholesterolemic group correlated with VLDL1 apoB input (r = 0.58, P = 0.006), the fractional rate of transfer from IDL to LDL (r = 0.61, P = 0.003), and direct LDL input (r = 0.64, P = 0.002). The proportion of LDL apoB mass derived by direct, i.e., VLDL-independent input, varied from 5 to 50% and was inversely correlated with plasma triglyceride (r = -0.53, P = 0.014) and positively with HDL2 (r = 0.66, P = 0.002). In addition, the amount of direct LDL input was related to the amount of VLDL1 removed by direct catabolism (r = 0.53, P = 0.013). The analysis indicated that moderate hypercholesterolemia arose principally from overproduction of small VLDL, while variation in VLDL1 input and the IDL to LDL conversion rate (presumably hepatic lipase-mediated) modulated the extent of the elevation in LDL apoB.

Apolipoproteins B↗
PubMed1994

The role of nuclear cardiology in hypertension.

In view of the increased risk of cardiac events in systemic hypertension, particularly in patients with left ventricular hypertrophy, it is important to have reliable methods of assessing cardiac structure and function and myocardial perfusion in these patients. While echocardiography is the noninvasive method of choice for measuring the severity of left ventricular hypertrophy there is no alternative at present to invasive coronary angiography to define accurately coronary artery anatomy. Nuclear cardiological investigations are extremely useful in the assessment of systolic and diastolic function at rest and during exercise. Furthermore, myocardial perfusion imaging is of value in identifying myocardial ischaemia and assessing the functional importance of coronary artery lesions. Recent studies have also suggested that nuclear cardiology investigations may be the best way to identify nonfunctioning but viable areas of the myocardium which may benefit from revascularization.

Coronary Disease↗
PubMed1994

Double-blind comparison of amlodipine and nifedipine retard in the treatment of mild to moderate hypertension.

The efficacy and safety profiles of amlodipine (5-10 mg once daily) and nifedipine retard (20-40 mg twice daily) were compared in 111 hypertensive patients (sitting DBP in 95-115 mmHg) during eight weeks of treatment in a randomised double-blind parallel group study. BP was measured 22-24 hours after the daily dose of amlodipine and 10-12 hours after a dose of nifedipine retard. Baseline sitting BPs of 175/105 mmHg and 168/104 mmHg were significantly reduced (P < 0.05) to 157/93 mmHg and 151/92 mmHg at the end of treatment in response to mean daily doses of amlodipine 7.3 mg and nifedipine retard 58.9 mg. There were no clinically significant changes in heart rate with either treatment. Three patients in the amlodipine group and five patients in the nifedipine retard group could not be considered in analysis. The total numbers of adverse events (considered related or possibly related to treatment) (42 vs. 36) as well as the numbers of patients experiencing such events (22 vs. 22) were similar in the amlodipine and nifedipine retard treated groups, respectively, but with a greater incidence of headaches in response to nifedipine retard and of oedema in response to amlodipine. Five patients in each treatment group discontinued therapy due to such events. Overall the results showed once daily amlodipine as equivalent to twice daily nifedipine retard in the management of mild to moderate hypertension.

Adult↗
PubMed1993

Effects of simvastatin on apoB metabolism and LDL subfraction distribution.

Seven moderately hypercholesterolemic subjects were studied before and after 10 weeks of simvastatin therapy (20 mg/day). Therapy reduced low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol by 39% (p < 0.001), whereas high density lipoprotein and very low density lipoprotein (VLDL) cholesterol were unchanged. Apolipoprotein (apo) B-containing lipoproteins were divided into VLDL1 (Sf 60-400), VLDL2 (Sf 20-60), intermediate density lipoprotein (IDL) (Sf 12-20), and LDL (Sf 0-12), and metabolic changes were sought in dual-tracer VLDL1 and VLDL2 turnover studies. VLDL1 apoB pool size was unaltered by therapy, as were its rates of synthesis, catabolism, and delipidation to VLDL2. Similarly, the VLDL2 apoB pool size was unchanged, but its metabolic fate was altered. The IDL pool size fell significantly (27%, p < 0.01) due entirely to an increased fractional catabolism of the lipoprotein. In our subjects, the circulating mass of LDL apoB decreased (49%, p < 0.01) primarily due to a reduction in its synthesis. Before therapy, 30% of the apoB entering the delipidation cascade in these hyperlipidemic subjects was converted to LDL. On therapy the input remained the same, but direct catabolism from VLDL2 and IDL was increased (p < 0.05), and as a result only 16% eventually appeared in LDL. These kinetic changes were associated with a fall in particle cholesteryl ester content throughout the delipidation cascade. We also observed a link between LDL kinetics and its subfraction distribution. Simvastatin influences the metabolism of LDL, IDL, and VLDL2 but not VLDL1.

Adult↗
PubMed1993

Comparison of captopril, hydralazine and nifedipine as third drug in hypertensive patients.

The antihypertensive, biochemical and adverse effects of captopril, hydralazine, nifedipine and placebo were compared in 160 patients with BP inadequately controlled by atenolol 100 mg daily plus bendrofluazide 5 mg daily. Treatments were given for up to 12 weeks. Beta-blocker and thiazide were continued unchanged. All three active drugs reduced supine BP relative to placebo; mean BP changes attributable to active treatment (95% confidence intervals): captopril 13.4/10.3 mmHg (0.6/4.0 to 26.2/16.6), hydralazine 15.0/10.0 mmHg (1.7/3.4 to 28.3/16.6), nifedipine 16.8/8.1 mmHg (4.0/1.8 to 29.6/14.4). There were no significant differences between the agents. Results for erect BP were similar. Target BP (< 140/95 mmHg) was achieved more frequently on captopril (33%), hydralazine (29%) and nifedipine (17%) than on placebo (10%). Compared with the other treatments captopril increased serum potassium concentration (P = 0.01), and hydralazine reduced serum cholesterol concentration (median changes: captopril -0.2 mmol/l, hydralazine -0.8 mmol/l, nifedipine -0.2 mmol/l, and placebo +0.2 mmol/l, P < 0.001). Overall, side-effects did not differ significantly between the groups; withdrawals resulting from adverse reactions: captopril 15%, hydralazine 24%, nifedipine 22%, and placebo 3% (chi 2 = 8.2, P = 0.04). Captopril, hydralazine and nifedipine did not differ significantly in efficacy and tolerability when added to atenolol and bendrofluazide. However, there were trends in favour of captopril, on which drug the highest proportion of patients had their BP controlled and the lowest proportion were withdrawn because of side-effects. Thus, of the drugs tested, captopril appears to be the best option as third drug in hypertension.

Adrenergic beta-Antagonists↗