657).
 
  In patients on hemodialysis, diabetes and CVD carry similar risks for CV events. These results are congruent with the diabetes mellitus-CVD equivalence risk concept reported in the general population.
 In patients on hemodialysis, diabetes and CVD carry similar risks for CV events. These results are congruent with the diabetes mellitus-CVD equivalence risk concept reported in the general population.
  Despite growing evidence that type 2 diabetes is associated with dementia, the question of whether intensive glucose control can prevent or arrest cognitive decline remains unanswered. In the analysis reported here, we explored the effect of intensive glucose control versus standard care on brain health, including structural abnormalities of the brain (atrophy, white matter hyperintensities, lacunar infarction, and cerebral microbleeds), cognitive dysfunction, and risk of dementia.
 
  We searched the PubMed and Embase databases, the Web of Science website, and the Clinicaltrial.gov registry for studies published in English prior to July 2020. Only studies with a randomized controlled trial (RCT) design were considered. We analyzed structural abnormalities of the brain (atrophy, white matter hyperintensities, lacunar infarction, and cerebral microbleeds), cognitive function (cognitive impairment, executive function, memory, attention, and information-processing speed), and dementia (Alzheimer's disease, vascun patients with type 2 diabetes can slow down cognitive decline, especially the decline in composite cognition and memory function. However, further studies are necessary to confirm the impact of strict glucose control on structural abnormalities in the brain and the risk of dementia.
 This meta-analysis suggests that intensive glucose control in patients with type 2 diabetes can slow down cognitive decline, especially the decline in composite cognition and memory function.  https://www.selleckchem.com/products/CP-690550.html  However, further studies are necessary to confirm the impact of strict glucose control on structural abnormalities in the brain and the risk of dementia.
  Budesonide-formoterol taken as needed is an emerging treatment for mild asthma.
 
  We used data from the SYGMA studies to assess the safety of As-needed budesonide-formoterol compared with As-needed terbutaline and compared with maintenance budesonide.
 
  SYGMA 1 and 2 were 52-week, double-blind, parallel-group studies in patients aged ≥ 12years with physician-assessed mild asthma. Patients were randomized to As-needed budesonide-formoterol 200/6 μg, twice-daily budesonide 200μg as maintenance plus As-needed terbutaline 0.5mg, and As-needed terbutaline 0.5mg (SYGMA 1 only). Adverse events (AEs), serious AEs (SAEs), discontinuations due to AEs (DAEs), and study-defined asthma-related discontinuations from corresponding treatment groups in both studies were pooled. SYGMA 1 data were used for comparisons with As-needed terbutaline alone.
 
  The pooled analysis included 3366 patients in the As-needed budesonide-formoterol group and 3369 in the budesonide maintenance group, with AEs in 40.8% and 42.5% of patients, respectively. Common AEs included viral upper respiratory tract infection (viral URTI) and URTI. SAE, DAE, and asthma-related discontinuation rates were similar with As-needed budesonide-formoterol and maintenance budesonide. Potential local and systemic corticosteroid class effects were reported in ≤ 1% of patients for each budesonide-containing regimen. In SYGMA 1, AEs were more common in the As-needed terbutaline (n = 1277) than As-needed budesonide-formoterol (n = 1277) groups (42.7 vs. 38.0%), as were DAEs (2.9 vs. 0.8%) and asthma-related discontinuations (1.6 vs. 0.3%).
 
  Budesonide-formoterol anti-inflammatory reliever therapy is generally well-tolerated in patients with mild asthma and has a safety profile similar to that of daily budesonide. No new safety signals were identified. CLINICALTRIAL.
 
  NCT02149199 (SYGMA 1) and NCT02224157 (SYGMA 2).
 NCT02149199 (SYGMA 1) and NCT02224157 (SYGMA 2).
  Around 10% to 30% patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) do not have a cause after the routine investigations, and are considered as having idiopathic acute pancreatitis (IAP). Establishing the etiology in such patients will prevent recurrences and evolution to chronic pancreatitis. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) characteristically are used to diagnose IAP when routine methods fail, but their exact role is not determined.
 
  This prospective study was undertaken in a tertiary care hospital, in which patients admitted initially with diagnosis of IAP were evaluated. These patients underwent MRCP and EUS at least 4weeks after an attack of AP. The results of EUS and MRCP were compared and analyzed with various clinical variables using suitable statistical tests.
 
  A total of 31 patients with IAP were included. EUS and/or MRCP was able to establish at least one etiology in 17 patients (54.8%). The diagnoses revealed were gallbladder (GB) microlithiasis, GB sludge, choledocholithiasis, pancreatobiliary ductal anomalies, pancreatic adenocarcinoma, and intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm. Comparing the diagnostic accuracy of both the modalities, EUS (14/31) was able to diagnose more cases than MRCP (8/31). The diagnostic capability of EUS was lower in patients who had a cholecystectomy (12.5% vs. 56.5%; p = 0.03).
 
  EUS and MRCP are useful modalities in the etiological diagnosis of IAP and should be used in conjunction. EUS is better for establishing a possible biliary etiology and MRCP for an anatomical alteration in pancreatobiliary ducts.
 EUS and MRCP are useful modalities in the etiological diagnosis of IAP and should be used in conjunction. EUS is better for establishing a possible biliary etiology and MRCP for an anatomical alteration in pancreatobiliary ducts.
  The impact of incidentally detected hepatocellular carcinoma (iHCC) in explanted liver on the prognosis of the patients undergoing orthotopic liver transplantation remains controversial with several studies reporting survival worse than truenon-hepatocellular carcinoma (non-HCC) recipients. Patients undergoing living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) have the benefit of a shorter waiting time to transplant which in principle should reduce the frequency of new tumors developing while waiting for transplant. We aimed to evaluate the incidence, histopathological features, and impact of iHCC on short- and long-term outcomes inadult LDLT recipients.
 
  The present study retrospectively analyzed the patients' demographics, tumor characteristics, and outcomes of iHCC in adult patients undergoing LDLT for non-HCC indicationsat our center between August 2009 and March 2018.
 
  Five hundred and forty-five adults underwent LDLT in our center during the study period. iHCC was detected in the explanted livers in28 patients (5.