4.6 Article

Randomised controlled trial of bariatric surgery versus a community weight loss programme for the sustained treatment of idiopathic intracranial hypertension: the Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension Weight Trial (IIH:WT) protocol

期刊

BMJ OPEN
卷 7, 期 9, 页码 -

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017426

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institute for Health Research Clinician Scientist programme [NIHR-CS-011-028]
  2. patient charity IIH UK
  3. National Institute for Health Research [NIHR-CS-011-028, CL-2009-09-001] Funding Source: researchfish
  4. National Institutes of Health Research (NIHR) [NIHR-CS-011-028] Funding Source: National Institutes of Health Research (NIHR)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction Effective treatments are lacking for idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH), a condition characterised by raised intracranial pressure (ICP) and papilloedema, and found primarily in obese women. Weight loss and lowering body mass index (BMI) have been shown to lower ICP and improve symptoms in IIH; however, weight loss is typically not maintained, meaning IIH symptoms return. The Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension Weight Trial (IIH: WT) will assess whether bariatric surgery is an effective long-term treatment for patients with IIH with a BMI over 35 kg/m(2). The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommends bariatric surgery in people with a BMI over 35 kg/m(2) and a qualifying comorbidity; currently IIH does not qualify as a comorbidity. Methods and analysis IIH:WT is a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled clinical trial of 64 participants with active IIH and a BMI over 35 kg/m(2). Participants will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to bariatric surgery or a dietary weight loss programme and followed up for 5 years. The primary outcome measure is ICP at 12 months. Secondary outcome measures include ICP at 24 and 60 months, and IIH symptoms, visual function, papilloedema, headache, quality of life and cost-effectiveness at 12, 24 and 60 months.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据