We have evaluated the efficacy of SR 49059, a new orally active and specific vasopressin V1 receptor antagonist (arginine-vasopressin [AVP]), in the blockade of the vascular effects of exogenous AVP in healthy subjects. In preliminary experiments, two procedures to measure the V1 vascular effects of AVP were assessed. First, the AVP-induced changes in skin blood flow were investigated by the injection of increasing doses of AVP intradermally, with or without a previous local vasodilation with calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP). In a second protocol, AVP was infused intra-arterially, and the changes in radial artery diameter and blood flow were measured. The intradermal injection of AVP caused significant decreases in skin blood flow, and the use of CGRP increased the sensitivity of the method by a factor of 10(2) to 10(3). AVP infused intra-arterially caused dose-dependent decreases in the radial artery diameter and blood flow. In the main study, the potency and efficacy of SR 49059 to block the AVP-induced changes in skin blood flow were assessed in 12 healthy men with a double-blind, triple crossover study design. The subjects were randomized to receive a placebo orally and 30 mg and 300 mg of the antagonist at a 1-week interval. The subjects were then further randomized to evaluate the efficacy of the same doses of the antagonist to block the vasoconstriction of the radial artery induced by an intra-arterial infusion of AVP. SR 49059 inhibits, dose-dependently and significantly, the AVP-induced changes in skin blood flow, with a peak effect occurring between 2 and 6 hours after injection. In addition, the 300-mg dose of SR 49059 completely blocked the vasoconstriction of the radial artery induced by AVP. In conclusion, skin blood-flow measurement, after intradermal injection of AVP on a skin area vasodilated with CGRP, is an effective method to investigate the V1 vascular effect of AVP in humans. SR 49059 is a potent and specific antagonist of V1 receptors, which blocks the AVP-induced vasoconstriction.

Introduction: COVID-19 is the disease caused by an infection of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, previously known as 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) respiratory disease. World Health Organization (WHO) declared the official name as COVID-19 in February 2020 and in 11 th March 2020 declared COVID-19 as Global Pandemic. In June 6 th 2020, over 7 million cases registered in the world, recovered 3.4 million and death over 402.000. Aim: The aim of this study is to retreive published papers about COVID-19 infection deposited in PubMed data base and analyzed current results of investigations regarding morbidity and mortality rates as consequences of COVID-19 infection and opinions of experts about treatment of afected patients with COVID-19 who have Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs). Methods: It’s used method of descriptive analysis of the published papers with described studies about Corona virus connected with CVDs. Results: After searching current scientific literature (on PubMed till today is deposited more than 1.000 papers about COVID-19 with consequences in almost every medical disciplines), we have acknowledged that till today not any Evidence Based Medicine (EBM) study in the world. Also, there are no unique proposed ways of treatments and drugs to protect patients, especially people over 65 years old, who are very risk group to be affected with COVID-19, including patients with CVDs. Vaccine against COVID-19 is already produced and being in phases of testing in praxis in treatment of COVID-19 at affected patients, but the opinions of experts and common people whole over the world about vaccination are full of controversis. Conclusion: Frequent hand washing, avoiding crowds and contact with sick people, and cleaning and disinfecting frequently touched surfaces can help prevent coronavirus infections are the main proposal of WHO experts in current Guidelines, artefacts stored on a web site. Those preventive measures at least can help to everybody, including also the patients who have evidenced CVDs in their histories of illness. Authors analyzed most important dilemmas about all aspects of CVDs, including etipathogenesis, treatment with current drugs and use of potential discovered vaccines against COVID-19 infection, described in scientific papers deposited in PubMed data base.

Probably in the history of medicine, doctors were not as united as they are today, in that fight against COVID-19, when the pandemic spread incredibly fast - from East to West, from North to South. The COVID-19 pandemic is likely to have unprecedented and unforeseeable consequences, from those on a worldwide/global level to those at the local level - at the level of local communities and families, and individuals (and not just humans, but all other living beings), of which the future will testify in various ways. The consequences will be political, economic, social, but probably to the greatest degree, the consequences of a health nature - systemic and individual. The death toll is high, despite the therapy being applied. We do not currently have a specific and effective therapy against COVID-19. In addition, we do not have a single clinical study that would support prophylactic therapy that could affect COVID-19. All of the therapeutic options now available to us are based on the experience we have gained in treating SARS and MERS. When the vaccine is discovered, at that moment we will be able to say that we have an appropriate and effective method in fighting against COVID-19. Some historians of medicine believe that voluntary vaccination against COVID-19 would be, not only less politically risky but also more effective in protecting the population from coronavirus. It remains to be seen what the new wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, announced by WHO experts these days, and which is expected in the fall of 2020, will bring us.

I ntroduction: Tight blood glucose control has become a therapeutical goal for anesthetic management for patients scheduled for cardiac surgery, especially if they are diabetic patients. Aim: This study was created to confirm the benefits of intraoperative GIK solution usage during coronary bypass operation of diabetic patients. Methods: Patients with type 1 and 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) referred for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) were randomized to receive GIK solution (GIK -study group) in the first 24 hours intraoperatively or to receive official Clinical protocol without GIK solution (non GIK -control group). The primary clinical outcome was the cardiac index (CI) since it represents the most sensitive measure of cardiac work in the immediate postoperative period, and the secondary clinical outcomes were the glycemic control, insulin consumption, duration of mechanical ventilation (MV), potassium level and atrial fibrillation (AF) appearance. Results: One hundred diabetic patients, divided into two groups, were included in the study. The cardiac index did not show a significant difference, although the study group had CI with only minor variations than those of the controlled group, hence the reason we considered the study group as the more stable. The atrial fibrillation showed a difference between two groups, with 14 (28%) patients with postoperative AF in the control group compared with 3 (6%) patients with postoperative AF in the study group. As potassium values were stable in study group, we concluded that it can be one of the reasons for less postoperative AF in this group. The duration of MV showed a significant difference (0,003) between the two groups as well. In the study group the average MV time was 534,38 minutes, compared with the control group with 749,20 minutes. The average value of glucose was 11.1 mmol/l in the control group vs. 9.8 mmol/l in the study group. The study group had less insulin consumption in order to maintain target glycemia (p=0,001). In the non GIK group average insulin consumption was 44 IJ per patient vs. 28,5 IJ in the GIK group. Conclusion: Intraoperative GIK solution given to diabetic patients with CABG operation provides more stable CI, shorter time of MV, more stable values of potassium which provides normal rhythm and less AF onset, less insulin to maintain target glycemia. All the above mentioned provides more stable intraoperative hemodynamic and better recovery of diabetic patients with coronary artery bypass operations.

Nurse blood pressure is less accurate than ABPM in diagnosing hypertension, defined as a blood pressure of over 140/90mmHg. It could, however, be an acceptable substitute, especially to exclude people who do not need to be treated, in situations where lower resources require a less rigorous definition of hypertension.