Publications by authors named "Hoda M Rabea"

3 Publications

  • Page 1 of 1

Efficacy and Safety of Ombitasvir plus Paritaprevir, Ritonavir and Ribavirin in Non-cirrhotic Treatment-naïve and Treatment-experienced Egyptians with Chronic HCV Genotype-4 Infection.

Curr Med Sci 2021 Jun 28;41(3):581-586. Epub 2021 May 28.

Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Beni Suef University, Beni Suef, 62521, Egypt.

Hepatitis C virus genotype 4 (HCV-GT4) is a risk factor for cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma and liver failure. A combination of three new direct-acting antivirals ombitasvir, paritaprevir, and ritonavir has been recommended for treatment of HCV-GT4 infection. The current study was aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of this combination plus ribavirin in non-cirrhotic, treatment-naïve and -experienced Egyptians with HCV-GT4 infection in a real-world setting. A total of 255 Egyptians with HCV-GT4 infection were enrolled, including 82 treatment-experienced and 173 treatment-naïve patients. All of them completed 12-week treatment protocol of ombitasvir, paritaprevir and ritonavir as an oral dose combination with ribavirin. Virological response (VR) was measured, as well as the biochemical parameters related to treatment efficacy and adverse events at baseline and after treatment, at 4 (VR4) and 12 (VR12) weeks post-treatment. The results showed that the VR4 rates were 98.8% in both groups, and VR12 rates were 97.7% and 96.3% in treatment-naïve and -experienced patients, respectively, with no significant differences found between the groups concerning VR4 (P=0.9) and VR12 (P=0.3). The most common adverse events were headache and fatigue, which were significantly more common (P=0.001 and 0.003, respectively) in treatment-experienced than in treatment-naïve group. The quadruple regimen was well-tolerated, and the reported adverse events were generally mild to moderate. This real-world setting study confirms that the combination of ombitasvir, paritaprevir, ritonavir, and ribavirin is highly effective in the treatment of HCV- GT4 infection with a good safety and tolerability profile.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11596-021-2363-9DOI Listing
June 2021

Effect of Amlodipine/Valsartan Versus Nebivolol/Valsartan Fixed Dose Combinations on Peripheral and Central Blood Pressure.

High Blood Press Cardiovasc Prev 2018 Dec 3;25(4):407-413. Epub 2018 Nov 3.

Beni-Suef Hospital University, Beni-Suef, Egypt.

Introduction: Although hypertensive drugs may have the same effect on peripheral blood pressure, they vary in their effect on central blood pressure and its indices.

Aim: To evaluate efficacy of fixed-dose combination of amlodipine 10 mg/valsartan 160 mg versus nebivolol 5 mg/valsartan 160 mg in grade 2 or more hypertensive patients assessed by peripheral and central blood pressure.

Methods: A prospective, open label, randomized study done in the outpatient cardiology clinic at Beni-Suef University Hospital. A total of 137 patients continued the study; group I (n = 75) received Amlodipine 10 mg/Valsartan 160 mg (A/V) and group II (n = 62) received Nebivolol 5 mg/Valsartan 160 mg (N/V). Peripheral, central blood pressure and its indices were measured at baseline, after 6 and 12 weeks.

Results: The two combinations reduced peripheral and central BP (P < 0.0001) after 6 and 12 weeks. A/V combination significantly reduces central Pulse Pressure (PP) after 6 and 12 weeks (- 8.53 ± 13.80 and - 10.17 ± 11.29 (P < 0.0001) respectively), while N/V showed its efficacy in reducing central PP after 12 weeks (- 7.03 ± 13.10, P = 0.005). A/V combination was more effective in reducing Pulse Wave Velocity (PWV) after 6 and 12 weeks; P < 0.0001 vs P = 0.004. After 6 weeks, N/V was more effective in reducing Augmentation Index (AIx) (- 6.00 ± 10.94 (P = 0.002) vs. - 3.44 ± 9.80 (P = 0.026)) while after 12 weeks A/V did not show any significance (P = 0.085).

Conclusions: Both treatment groups lowered patients' peripheral, central blood pressure after 6 and 12 week of treatment, but Amlodipine/Valsartan combination was more effective. Both treatments exerted different effects on central indices.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40292-018-0286-8DOI Listing
December 2018

Transradial artery approach in STEMI patients reperfused early and late by either primary PCI or pharmaco-invasive approach.

Egypt Heart J 2018 Mar 12;70(1):1-7. Epub 2017 Jun 12.

Prof. of Cardiology, Beni-Suef Hospital University, Beni-Suef, Egypt.

The purpose of the study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of transradial artery approach (TRA) in STEMI patients who reperfused early (≤3 h from symptoms onset) or late (>3 h from symptoms onset) by either PPCI or pharmaco-invasive strategy (PI), thrombolysis followed by CA. Therefore, a total 143 STEMI patients (who were presented within 12 h from symptoms onset or 12-24 h with an evidence of ongoing ischemia or suffered from an acute STEMI were randomized for either PI or PPCI. Eighty-two patients were assigned to PI arm while the rest assigned were to PPCI arm. Patients who were taken to a non-PCI capable hospital received streptokinase and were then transferred to our Hospital for CA. TRA was used in the catheterization laboratory for all patients. Each arm was divided according to reperfusion time into early and late subgroups. A primary endpoint was death, shock, congestive heart failure, or reinfarction up to 30 days. There was a non-significant difference regarding LVEF in both arms. Myocardium wall preservation was significant in the early PI arm ( = 0.023). TIMI flow had no discrepancy between both arms ( = 0.569). Mean procedural and fluoroscopic time were 35.1 ± 6.1 and 6.3 ± 0.9 min. There were no reported entry site complications. There was no difference in primary endpoint complications ( = 0.326) considering the different times of patients' reperfusion (early;  = 0.696 vs. late;  = 0.424). In conclusion, it is safe and effective to use TRA in STEMI patients who reperfused by either early or late PPCI or PI. We recommend PI for STEMI patients with delay presentation if PPCI is not available.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ehj.2017.04.001DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5883500PMC
March 2018
-->