Results: After a mean 8.1 y of follow-up, 215 women in the intervention group and 285 women in the comparison group (annualized rate: 0.14% and 0.12%, respectively) experienced a hip fracture (hazard ratio: 1.12; 95% CI: 0.94, 1.34; P = 0.21). The intervention group (n = 5423; annualized rate: 3.44%) had a lower rate of reporting >= 2 falls than did the comparison group (n = 8695; annualized rate: 3.67%) (HR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.89, 0.96; P < 0.01). There was a significant interaction according to hormone therapy use; those in the comparison group receiving hormone therapy had the lowest incidence of hip fracture. In a subset

of 3951 women, hip BMD at years 3, 6, and 9 was 0.4-0.5% lower in the intervention Go 6983 in vivo group than in the comparison group (P – 0.003).

Conclusions: A low-fat and increased fruit, vegetable, and grain diet intervention modestly reduced the risk of multiple falls and slightly lowered hip BMD but did not change the risk of osteoporotic fractures. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials. gov as NCT00000611. Am J Clin Nutr 2009; 89: 1864-76.”
“Methods: We analyzed 787

CRT-defibrillator (CRT-D) recipients with a glomerular filtration rate (GFR) measured prior to implant. Patients were grouped by GFR (in mL/min/1.73 m2): >= 60 (n = 376), 30-59 (n = 347), and < 30 (n = 64). Overall survival, changes in left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction and LV end-systolic diameter, and GFR change at 3-6 months were Elafibranor compared among CRT-D groups and with a control cohort (n = 88), also stratified by GFR, in whom LV lead implant was unsuccessful and a standard defibrillator (SD) was placed. All patients met clinical criteria for CRT-D.

Results: Among CRT-D recipients, overall survival improved incrementally with higher baseline GFR (for each 10 mL/min/1.73 m2 increase, corrected hazard ratio [HR] 1.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.13-1.30, P < 0.0001). Survival among SD and CRT-D patients within GFR < 30

and GFR >= 60 groups was similar, whereas CRT-D recipients with GFR 30-59 had significantly better survival compared click here to SD counterparts (HR 2.23, 95% CI 1.34-3.70; P = 0.002). This survival benefit was associated with improved renal and cardiac function. CRT recipients with GFR >= 60 derived significant echocardiographic benefit but experienced a GFR decline, whereas those with GFR < 30 had no echocardiographic benefit but did improve GFR.

Conclusions: CRT may provide the largest survival benefit in HF patients with moderate RI, perhaps by improving GFR and LV function. Severe baseline RI predicts poor survival and limited echocardiographic improvement despite a modest GFR increase, such that CRT may not benefit those with GFR < 30 mL/min/1.73 m2.