Biomedical subjects

M Nordwall

Publications and source records attributed to M Nordwall.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2004

Declining incidence of severe retinopathy and persisting decrease of nephropathy in an unselected population of Type 1 diabetes-the Linköping Diabetes Complications Study.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: In a previous study conducted over the last decades we found a decreased incidence of nephropathy but unchanged incidence of severe retinopathy among patients with Type 1 diabetes diagnosed in childhood and with 20 years duration of diabetes. The aim of our current study was to investigate the incidence 5 to 10 years later in the same population. METHODS: We studied all 269 patients in whom Type 1 diabetes was diagnosed in childhood between 1961 and 1985 in a district in southeastern Sweden. Ninety-one percent were monitored for retinopathy until at least 1997 and 95% were monitored for nephropathy. Severe retinopathy was defined as laser-treated retinopathy and nephropathy as persistent proteinuria. Survival analysis was used and the patients divided into five cohorts according to the time of onset of diabetes. RESULTS: The cumulative proportion of severe retinopathy had declined ( p=0.006). After 25 years it was 47% (95% CI 34-61), 28% (15-40) and 24% (12-36) in the cohorts 1961 to 1965, 1966 to 1970 and 1971 to 1975 respectively. After 30 years it was 53% (40-66) and 44% (28-59) in the oldest cohorts. The cumulative proportion of nephropathy after 25 years duration was 30% (18-42), 8% (1-16) and 13% (4-23) in the cohorts 1961 to 1965, 1966 to 1970 and 1971 to 1975 respectively. After 30 years, it was 32% (20-44) and 11% (2-20) for the oldest cohorts ( p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: In an unselected population with Type 1 diabetes diagnosed in childhood, modern diabetes care markedly reduced the incidence of severe retinopathy and nephropathy.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2001

One thousand small-bowel biopsies in children. A single-port versus a double-port capsule.

BACKGROUND: Small-bowel biopsy is a well-established technique in the evaluation of children with intestinal malabsorption, e.g. coeliac disease. The biopsy is performed endoscopically or with a peroral capsule instrument. The aim of the present retrospective study was to compare the single-port Watson capsule with the double-port Storz capsule with regard to procedure and fluoroscopy time, complications and failure rate. METHODS: All 1,078 peroral small-bowel biopsies performed at our department during 1989-99 were studied. In 387 of these, the Watson capsule was used and in the remaining 691 the Storz capsule. Median age of the children was 2.5 years. About one-third of the children were premedicated with the prokinetic drug cisapride and as sedatives alimemazine or diazepam orally. Two-thirds of the children were given metoclopramide along with midazolam intravenously. The biopsies were performed under intermittent fluoroscopy. RESULTS: The median biopsy procedure time was significantly shorter with the Storz capsule (7 min) compared to the Watson capsule (10 min) (P < 0.05). The median fluoroscopy time was 5 sec with the Storz capsule and 8 sec with the Watson capsule (P < 0.01). The failure rate did not differ significantly between the two capsule types: 10.3% (Watson) and 7.7% (Storz). One potential but no serious complication occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Providing that effective sedation is available, small-bowel biopsy with a peroral capsule, and the Storz double-port multibiopsy capsule in particular, is a safe and fast method exposing the child to a minimal radiation dose.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2001

Small bowel capsule biopsy in children: parents' opinions on children's discomfort.

UNLABELLED: This questionnaire study asked the parents of 62 children undergoing small bowel capsule biopsy for their reactions to the discomfort experienced by their children. The children were randomized to receive sedation with midazolam either intravenously or intranasally. With regard to the biopsy procedure the parents of 94% of the children had no objections. The parents of 3% of the children found the biopsy very unpleasant and another 3% suggested that the biopsy should be performed under general anaesthesia. The proportion of parents with negative reactions to the biopsy procedure did not differ significantly between the intravenously and intranasally sedated children. With regard to the sedation given, the parents of 79% of the children did not think that their children were in any discomfort at all. Ten percent of the children had obvious signs of nasal discomfort using the intranasal administration. In the remaining 11% of the children the parents reported various symptoms. CONCLUSION: The vast majority of parents of children undergoing small bowel capsule biopsy found the procedure satisfactory providing that the sedative medication was given intravenously rather than intranasally.

Administration, Intranasal↗