Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 199
Filtrar
1.
Ann Vasc Surg ; 98: 244-250, 2024 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37356657

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The widespread use of chemotherapies has increased the need for totally implantable venous access ports (TIVAPs). Previously, the subclavian puncture approach with the landmark technique was the most used implantation method; however, it has been related to early complications such as pneumothorax, hemothorax, and arterial puncture. Therefore, a safer implantation method is required. This study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of the cephalic vein cut-down method used in our institution. METHODS: Patients who underwent TIVAPs implantation using the cephalic vein cut-down method as the first choice between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2020, were included in this study. We retrospectively evaluated the technical success rates, operation times, and early complications. RESULTS: This study included 221 adult patients (men, 129; women, 92), with a mean age of 68 ± 11 years. The mean body mass index (BMI) was 21 ± 4 kg/m2. A total of 213 patients (96.4%) had malignant tumors that required chemotherapy. The mean postoperative follow-up period was 659 ± 442 days (range, 5-1,698 days). A total of 127 patients (57.5%) died during the follow-up period. The technical success rate was 86.4% (191/221). There were 30 failures, 24 of which were converted to the subclavian vein puncture approach. The mean operation time was 53 ± 21 min. Early complications were observed in 4 (1.8%) patients, corresponding to an incidence of 0.028 complications/1,000 catheter days. One patient had an unintended arterial puncture; however, it was not a result of the cephalic vein cut-down method but a secondary result of the subclavian vein puncture. No complications of pneumothorax, hemothorax, or arterial puncture were observed with the cephalic vein cut-down method. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that the cephalic vein cut-down method for TIVAPs had an acceptable success rate and fewer early complications than the conventional puncture techniques.


Assuntos
Cateterismo Venoso Central , Pneumotórax , Adulto , Masculino , Humanos , Feminino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Cateterismo Venoso Central/efeitos adversos , Cateterismo Venoso Central/métodos , Hemotórax/complicações , Pneumotórax/etiologia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Resultado do Tratamento , Cateteres de Demora/efeitos adversos , Venostomia/efeitos adversos
3.
Eur Heart J ; 44(46): 4847-4858, 2023 Dec 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37832512

RESUMO

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Intra-pocket ultrasound-guided axillary vein puncture (IPUS-AVP) for venous access in implantation of transvenous cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) is uncommon due to the lack of clinical evidence supporting this technique. This study investigated the efficacy and early complications of IPUS-AVP compared to the standard method using cephalic vein cutdown (CVC) for CIED implantation. METHODS: ACCESS was an investigator-led, interventional, randomized (1:1 ratio), monocentric, controlled superiority trial. A total of 200 patients undergoing CIED implantation were randomized to IPUS-AVP (n = 101) or CVC (n = 99) as a first assigned route. The primary endpoint was the success rate of insertion of all leads using the first assigned venous access technique. The secondary endpoints were time to venous access, total procedure duration, fluoroscopy time, X-ray exposure, and complications. Complications were monitored during a follow-up period of three months after procedure. RESULTS: IPUS-AVP was significantly superior to CVC for the primary endpoint with 100 (99.0%) vs. 86 (86.9%) procedural successes (P = .001). Cephalic vein cutdown followed by subclavian vein puncture was successful in a total of 95 (96.0%) patients, P = .21 vs. IPUS-AVP. All secondary endpoints were also significantly improved in the IPUS-AVP group with reduction in time to venous access [3.4 vs. 10.6 min, geometric mean ratio (GMR) 0.32 (95% confidence interval, CI, 0.28-0.36), P < .001], total procedure duration [33.8 vs. 46.9 min, GMR 0.72 (95% CI 0.67-0.78), P < .001], fluoroscopy time [2.4 vs. 3.3 min, GMR 0.74 (95% CI 0.63-0.86), P < .001], and X-ray exposure [1083 vs. 1423 mGy.cm², GMR 0.76 (95% CI 0.62-0.93), P = .009]. There was no significant difference in complication rates between groups (P = .68). CONCLUSIONS: IPUS-AVP is superior to CVC in terms of success rate, time to venous access, procedure duration, and radiation exposure. Complication rates were similar between the two groups. Intra-pocket ultrasound-guided axillary vein puncture should be a recommended venous access technique for CIED implantation.


Assuntos
Marca-Passo Artificial , Venostomia , Humanos , Venostomia/métodos , Veia Axilar/cirurgia , Veia Axilar/diagnóstico por imagem , Punções , Ultrassonografia de Intervenção/métodos
4.
Folia Med (Plovdiv) ; 65(4): 577-581, 2023 Aug 31.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37655375

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Totally implantable access ports (TIAPs) are commonly used in oncologic patients undergoing ongoing chemotherapy. The methods of choice for implantation are the subclavian vein puncture approach and the cephalic vein cutdown technique, followed by internal jugular vein access and external jugular vein access.


Assuntos
Veias Jugulares , Venostomia , Humanos , Veias Jugulares/cirurgia , Pacientes , Próteses e Implantes , Punções
5.
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol ; 46(8): 942-947, 2023 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37378419

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Cephalic vein cutdown (CVC) and axillary vein puncture (AVP) are both recommended for transvenous implantation of leads for cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). Nonetheless, it is still debated which of the two techniques has a better safety and efficacy profile. METHODS: We systematically searched Medline, Embase, and Cochrane electronic databases up to September 5, 2022, for studies that evaluated the efficacy and safety of AVP and CVC reporting at least one clinical outcome of interest. The primary endpoints were acute procedural success and overall complications. The effect size was estimated using a random-effect model as risk ratio (RR) and relative 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Overall, seven studies were included, which enrolled 1771 and 3067 transvenous leads (65.6% [n = 1162] males, average age 73.4 ± 14.3 years). Compared to CVC, AVP showed a significant increase in the primary endpoint (95.7 % vs. 76.1 %; RR: 1.24; 95% CI: 1.09-1.40; p = .001) (Figure 1). Total procedural time (mean difference [MD]: -8.25 min; 95% CI: -10.23 to -6.27; p < .0001; I2  = 0%) and venous access time (MD: -6.24 min; 95% CI: -7.01 to -5.47; p < .0001; I2  = 0%) were significantly shorter with AVP compared to CVC. No differences were found between AVP and CVC for incidence overall complications (RR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.28-1.10; p = .09), pneumothorax (RR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.13-4.0; p = .71), lead failure (RR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.23-1.48; p = .26), pocket hematoma/bleeding (RR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.15-2.23; p = .43), device infection (RR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.14-6.60; p = .96) and fluoroscopy time (MD: -0.24 min; 95% CI: -0.75 to 0.28; p = .36). CONCLUSION: Our meta-analysis suggests that AVP may improve procedural success and reduce total procedural time and venous access time compared to CVC.


Assuntos
Veia Axilar , Venostomia , Masculino , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Veia Axilar/cirurgia , Venostomia/métodos , Veia Subclávia , Punções/métodos , Coração
6.
J Interv Card Electrophysiol ; 66(4): 857-863, 2023 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35107720

RESUMO

PURPOSE: The cephalic vein cutdown (CVC) and the subclavian puncture (SP) is the most common access for pacemaker implantation. The purpose of this study was to compare the peri-/postoperative complications of these approaches. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the quality assurance data of the state of North Rhine-Westphalia was performed to evaluate the peri-/postoperative complications of first pacemaker implantation according to the venous access. The primary endpoint was defined as the occurrence of one of the following: asystole, ventricular fibrillation, pneumothorax, hemothorax, pericardial effusion, pocket hematoma, lead dislocation, lead dysfunction, postoperative wound infection or other complication requiring intervention. Descriptive analysis was done via absolute, relative frequencies and Odds Ratio. Fisher's exact test was used for comparison of the both study groups. RESULTS: From 139,176 pacemaker implantations from 2010 to 2014, 15,483 cases were excluded due to other/double access. The median age was 78 years and the access used was CVC for 75,251 cases (60.8%) and SP for 48,442 cases (39.2%). The implanted devices were mainly dual-chamber pacemakers (73.9% in the CVC group and 78.4% in the SP group), followed by single-chamber pacemakers VVI (24.9% and 19.9% in the CVC and SP group respectively). There were significantly fewer peri/postoperative complications in the CVC group compared to the SP group (2.49% vs. 3.64%, p = 0.0001, OR 1.47; 95% CI 1.38-1.57). CONCLUSIONS: CVC as venous access for pacemaker implantation has significantly fewer peri/postoperative complications than SP and appears to be an advantageous technique.


Assuntos
Marca-Passo Artificial , Veia Subclávia , Humanos , Idoso , Venostomia/métodos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Punções
7.
Minerva Cardiol Angiol ; 71(3): 342-348, 2023 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36305778

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Direct anchoring of PM and ICD leads over cephalic vein body is officially discouraged by manufactures due to a supposed risk of conductor fracture or insulation failure, however careful tightening of anchoring knots can probably prevent lead damage. Direct anchoring (DA) technique is routinely used in our center for all leads inserted by cephalic vein while standard anchoring sleeves are used to secure subclavian leads only. Aim of the study is to assess short- and long-term safety of cephalic direct anchoring technique. METHODS: All patients undergoing PM and ICD implantation in our center from November 2014 to March 2016 were consecutively enrolled. Primary endpoints were acute lead fracture, lead dislodgement and chronic lead failure. Secondary endpoint was a composite of short-term surgical complications (pocket hematoma, pneumothorax, and pericardial effusion) plus device infections. Subclavian leads secured with sleeve anchoring (SA) were used as control. RESULTS: A total of 550 leads were implanted in 310 consecutive patients. DA involved 323 leads (59%) while SA was used for 227 (41%). Median follow-up was 50 months (IQR 24-62 months). 17 lead malfunctions (3.1%) were observed during follow-up. No difference was observed between groups (10 DA vs. 7 SP, P=ns). Survival analysis found no difference between groups. Secondary endpoints were not statistically different between groups (5 vs. 1, P=0.08). CONCLUSIONS: Direct anchoring technique of PM and ICD leads is a safe technique and does not increase lead malfunction risk.


Assuntos
Marca-Passo Artificial , Humanos , Marca-Passo Artificial/efeitos adversos , Veia Axilar , Venostomia/métodos
8.
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol ; 45(6): 717-725, 2022 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35554947

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: Many of the complications arising from cardiac device implantation are associated to the venous access used for lead placement. Previous analyses reported that cephalic vein cutdown (CVC) is safer but less effective than subclavian vein puncture (SVP). However, comparisons between these techniques and axillary vein puncture (AVP) - guided either by ultrasound or fluoroscopy - are lacking. Thus, we aimed to compare safety and efficacy of these approaches. METHODS: We searched for articles assessing at least two different approaches regarding the incidence of pneumothorax and/or lead failure (LF). When available, bleeding and infectious complications as well as procedural success were analyzed. A frequentist random effects network meta-analysis model was adopted. RESULTS: Thirty-six studies were analyzed. Most articles assessed SVP versus CVC. Compared to SVP, both CVC and AVP were associated with reduced odds of pneumothorax (OR: 0.193, 95%CI: 0.136-0.275 and OR: 0.128, 95%CI: 0.050-0.329; respectively) and LF (OR: 0.63, 95%CI: 0.406-0.976 and OR: 0.425, 95%CI: 0.286-0.632; respectively). No significant differences between AVP and CVC were demonstrated. Limited data suggests no major impact of different approaches on infectious and bleeding complications. Initial CVC approach required significantly more often an alternate/additional venous access for lead placement, compared to both AVP and SVP. No differences between these two were identified. CONCLUSION: Both AVP and CVC seem to decrease incident pneumothorax and LF, compared to SVP. Initial AVP approach seems to decrease the need of alternate venous access, compared to CVC. These results suggest that AVP should be further clinically tested.


Assuntos
Cateterismo Venoso Central , Pneumotórax , Cateterismo Venoso Central/métodos , Eletrônica , Humanos , Metanálise em Rede , Veia Subclávia , Venostomia/métodos
9.
J Vet Emerg Crit Care (San Antonio) ; 32(3): 356-364, 2022 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35112468

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To compare the success rates and time taken to cannulate the jugular, cephalic, and lateral saphenous veins using a cutdown technique by personnel with 4 different levels of experience. DESIGN: Prospective ex vivo study. SETTING: Veterinary university teaching hospital. ANIMALS: Eighteen canine cadavers. INTERVENTIONS: Recently euthanized canine patients that were donated to the hospital for research purposes between October 2019 and March 2020 were enrolled. Four groups of personnel participated in the study to give 4 varying levels of experience: 8 final year veterinary students, 2 registered veterinary nurses, 1 emergency and critical care intern and 1 ACVECC diplomate. Each cannula placer had 5 minutes to attempt cannulation by venous cutdown at each site. Time to venous cannulation (VC) was compared for each site and group and complications encountered during each attempt recorded. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The overall success rate for cannulation of the jugular, cephalic, and lateral saphenous veins were 81%, 84%, and 87%, respectively. The median times for venous cutdown for all personnel were as follows: jugular vein 119 s (range 51-280 s), cephalic vein 82 s (range 39-291 s), and lateral saphenous vein 110 s (range 41-294 s). There was no difference in time to VC between veins. When comparing personnel at the 3 cannulation sites, the ACVECC diplomate was faster than the registered veterinary nurses and students (P = 0.042 and P = 0.048, respectively). No differences were found between any other groups. Complications encountered often related to cadaver factors such as hematoma from antemortem venipuncture. CONCLUSIONS: All groups were able to perform venous cutdown at each site with good overall success even without prior experience of the technique. VC by cutdown technique of the jugular, cephalic, or lateral saphenous veins may be considered in an emergency setting by personnel of various skill levels.


Assuntos
Cateterismo Venoso Central , Doenças do Cão , Animais , Cadáver , Cateterismo Venoso Central/métodos , Cateterismo Venoso Central/veterinária , Cães , Humanos , Veias Jugulares , Estudos Prospectivos , Veia Safena , Venostomia/métodos , Venostomia/veterinária
10.
J Chin Med Assoc ; 85(2): 259-262, 2022 02 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34974508

RESUMO

Total implantable venous access port (TIVAP) by cephalic vein cutdown (CVCD) is one of the first procedures surgery residents can be performed independently under supervision. There is currently a lack of affordable simulators for teaching and assessing TIVAP competency to improve patient safety. A panel of 10 experts divided the TIVAP by CVCD procedure into 9 steps. A homemade, low-cost ($3 USD) simulator was then designed for practicing standardized procedural steps in the context of a simulation-based mastery learning course. Residents were given a simulator for at-home practice and completed a survey evaluating the simulator and their learning experience. Twenty-eight first-year surgery residents participated in the course and completed the survey. They were highly satisfied with the simulator (mean score = 8.7 of 10) and generally agreed with its anatomical appearance and functional fidelity. They also appreciated the educational value of using this simulator to learn and practice basic techniques and procedural steps. Our novel, homemade simulator of CVCD TIVAP implantation is a cost-effective way of achieving procedural competence of a basic operation for inexperienced surgery residents. We envision the same principle can be applied to other procedures to enhance resident education.


Assuntos
Cateterismo Venoso Central/normas , Competência Clínica , Treinamento por Simulação , Dispositivos de Acesso Vascular , Venostomia/educação , Humanos , Inquéritos e Questionários
13.
Pneumologie ; 74(6): 371-373, 2020 Jun.
Artigo em Alemão | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32557508

RESUMO

HISTORY: An 80-year old female was referred to our hospital with left internal carotid artery stenosis and a childhood history of hemoptysis. INVESTIGATIONS AND DIAGNOSIS: The ECG showed 2nd degree Mobitz atrio-ventricular block. The chest x-ray and computerized tomography identified a shift of the mediastinum and the heart to the left. The left lung was completely destroyed whilst the right lung was enlarged and crossed the midline. Pulmonary function tests revealed a moderate restrictive ventilation disorder. The diagnosis of autopneumonectomy was based on patient history together with radiological findings. TREATMENT AND COURSE: A pacemaker was implanted with two stimulation electrodes via a left cephalic venous cutdown. A carotid endarterectomy was also performed without any complication. CONCLUSION: After autopneumonectomy, postpneumonectomy like syndrome may occur in very rare cases, whereupon operative treatment is mandatory. Any respiratory infections should be treated with antibiotics. Pacemaker electrode placement via the subclavian vein is contraindicated due to the risk of a catastrophic pneumothorax.


Assuntos
Estenose das Carótidas , Pneumopatias , Marca-Passo Artificial , Pneumonectomia/efeitos adversos , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Estenose das Carótidas/complicações , Estenose das Carótidas/diagnóstico por imagem , Estenose das Carótidas/cirurgia , Endarterectomia das Carótidas , Feminino , Hemoptise , Humanos , Pulmão , Pneumopatias/complicações , Pneumopatias/diagnóstico por imagem , Pneumopatias/fisiopatologia , Testes de Função Respiratória , Veia Subclávia , Resultado do Tratamento , Venostomia
14.
JACC Clin Electrophysiol ; 6(6): 661-671, 2020 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32553216

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of venous access techniques for cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) implantation. BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive transvenous access is a fundamental step during implantation of CIEDs. However, the preferred venous access is still subject to ongoing debate, and the decision depends on patient characteristics and operator experience. METHODS: A comprehensive search for studies comparing subclavian vein puncture (SVP) and axillary vein puncture (AVP) versus cephalic vein cutdown (CVC) for CIED implantation was performed in PubMed, Google Scholar, EMBASE, SCOPUS, ClinicalTrials.gov, and various scientific conferences from inception to July 1, 2019. A meta-analysis was performed by using a random effects model to calculate risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences with 95% confidence interval (CIs). RESULTS: Twenty-three studies were eligible that included 35,722 patients (SVP, n = 18,009; AVP, n = 409; and CVC, n = 17,304). Compared with CVC, SVP was associated with a higher risk of pneumothorax (RR: 4.88; 95% CI: 2.95 to 8.06) and device/lead failure (RR: 2.09; 95% CI: 1.07 to 4.09), whereas there was no significant difference in these outcomes compared with AVP. Acute procedural success was significantly higher with SVP compared with CVC (RR: 1.24; 95% CI: 1.00 to 1.53). There was no significant difference in other complications such as pocket hematoma/bleeding, device infection, or pericardial effusion between SVP or AVP compared with CVC. CONCLUSIONS: CVC was associated with a lower risk of pneumothorax and lead failure compared with SVP. AVP and CVC are both effective approaches for CIED lead implantation and offer the potential to avoid the complications usually observed with traditional SVP.


Assuntos
Veia Axilar , Desfibriladores Implantáveis , Veia Axilar/diagnóstico por imagem , Veia Axilar/cirurgia , Desfibriladores Implantáveis/efeitos adversos , Eletrônica , Humanos , Veia Subclávia , Venostomia/efeitos adversos
15.
J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord ; 7(6): 865-869.e1, 2019 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31495770

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Surgical venous cutdown is a method for totally implantable venous access device (TIVAD) insertion. The main drawback of this technique is its higher failure rate when compared with the percutaneous approach, which is mostly related to anatomic variations of the cephalic vein. The aim of this study was to assess preoperative ultrasound imaging as a tool to predict cephalic vein cutdown failure for TIVAD insertion. METHODS: Ultrasound and operative reports of a cohort of patients undergoing TIVAD insertion by cephalic vein cutdown were reviewed. Ultrasound venous (vein visibility, diameter, length, subcutaneous depth, vein path, and subclavian junction visibility) and patient variables were tested by logistic regression as predictors of TIVAD insertion failure. RESULTS: One hundred sixty consecutive patients underwent cephalic vein cutdown for attempted TIVAD insertion. An inability to visualize the vein on the preoperative ultrasound examination (odds ratio, 4.39; 95% confidence interval, 1.57-12.30; P < .05) and depth of the vein (odds ratio, 1.07; 95% confidence interval, 1.00-1.15; P = .042) were predictors of failure of TIVAD insertion by cephalic vein cutdown. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative ultrasound examination allows identifying patients at risk of failure of TIVAD insertion by cephalic vein cutdown. Preoperative ultrasound examination constitutes an efficient tool for choosing the most appropriate surgical approach and improving patient comfort.


Assuntos
Cateterismo Venoso Central/instrumentação , Cateteres de Demora , Cateteres Venosos Centrais , Ultrassonografia , Veias/cirurgia , Venostomia , Idoso , Cateterismo Venoso Central/efeitos adversos , Tomada de Decisão Clínica , Desenho de Equipamento , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Fatores de Risco , Resultado do Tratamento , Veias/diagnóstico por imagem , Venostomia/efeitos adversos
17.
Europace ; 21(1): 121-129, 2019 Jan 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30020452

RESUMO

AIMS: Cephalic vein cutdown (CVC) and subclavian puncture (SP) are widely used techniques for lead insertion of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). Whether one technique is superior to the other, is still being debated. The purpose of this study was to compare CVC vs. SP for lead implantation in CIEDs with respect to the incidence of pneumothorax, lead failure, and bleeding. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a systematic search of the pertinent literature on lead implantation in CIEDs via PubMed and Cochrane databases published over the last 25 years. Standard meta-analytic methods were applied to compare incidences of outcomes of interest. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to determine the impact of each study on the overall effect size. Risk of publication bias was assessed. A total of 20 studies were included in the analysis. These studies comprised more than 30 000 patients with more than 50 000 leads implanted via CVC or SP. The incidence of pneumothorax was lower with the CVC technique (n = 29/15 065, 0.19% vs. n = 205/15 824, 1.30%) [odds ratio (OR) 0.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.10-0.42, P < 0.001]. With respect to overall lead failure, CVC was associated with better outcomes as compared to SP (n = 10/2002, 0.50% vs. n = 40/2080, 1.92%) (OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.13-0.51, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in bleeding events (n = 25/811, 3.08% vs. n = 20/2136, 0.94%) (OR 1.69, 95% CI 0.37-7.79, P = 0.50). CONCLUSION: This comprehensive meta-analysis demonstrates lower risk for pneumothorax and lead failure associated with CVC as compared to SP. Cephalic vein cutdown should constitute the preferred venous access.


Assuntos
Cateterismo Venoso Central , Desfibriladores Implantáveis , Marca-Passo Artificial , Implantação de Prótese/instrumentação , Venostomia , Cateterismo Venoso Central/efeitos adversos , Hemorragia/epidemiologia , Humanos , Incidência , Pneumotórax/epidemiologia , Falha de Prótese , Implantação de Prótese/efeitos adversos , Punções , Medição de Risco , Fatores de Risco , Veia Subclávia , Resultado do Tratamento , Venostomia/efeitos adversos
18.
Pain Pract ; 19(2): 158-167, 2019 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30269418

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: It has previously been reported that venous cannulation-induced pain (VCP) can be used to predict acute postoperative pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Patients rating VCP at ≥2.0 VAS units had 3.4 times higher risk for moderate or severe pain. The purpose of this study was to evaluate if VCP scores of ≥2.0 VAS units are associated with higher risk for acute postoperative pain after various common surgical procedures. METHODS: In a prospective clinical observational study, 600 male and female 18- to 80-year-old patients scheduled for elective surgery were included. The primary outcome measure was the difference in maximum postoperative pain intensity between low responders (VCP < 2.0) and high responders (VCP ≥ 2.0) to VCP. Secondary outcome measures were the difference in proportion of patients with moderate or severe postoperative pain between low and high responders, and potential influence of age, gender, and preoperative habitual pain. RESULTS: Patients scoring VCP ≥2.0 VAS units reported higher acute postoperative pain intensity levels than those scoring VCP <2.0 VAS units (median 3.0 [interquartile range 0.0 to 5.0] vs. 0.2 [interquartile range 0.0 to 4.0], P = 0.001), and also had 1.7 times higher risk for moderate or severe postoperative pain (P = 0.005). Moderate or severe postoperative pain was reported by 38% of patients with VCP scores of ≥2.0 VAS units and by 26% with VCP scores of <2.0 VAS units (P = 0.005). CONCLUSION: Scoring of VCP intensity before surgery, requiring no specific equipment or training, is useful to predict individual risks for moderate or severe postoperative pain, regardless of patient age or gender, in a setting involving different kinds of surgery.


Assuntos
Dor Aguda , Medição da Dor/métodos , Percepção da Dor , Dor Pós-Operatória , Dor Aguda/epidemiologia , Dor Aguda/etiologia , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Colecistectomia Laparoscópica , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Dor Pós-Operatória/epidemiologia , Estudos Prospectivos , Venostomia/efeitos adversos , Adulto Jovem
19.
Am Surg ; 84(6): 841-843, 2018 Jun 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29981612

RESUMO

The request for totally implantable venous access devices (TIVADs) has rapidly grown up through the last decades. TIVADs are implanted by direct vein puncture or by surgical approach with vein cutdown. The authors present a comparative prospective study evaluating external jugular vein (EJV) and cephalic vein cutdown techniques. Two hundred and fifteen patients were consecutively submitted to TIVAD implantation to perform chemotherapy. Patients were divided in two groups, depending on the implantation technique. Group A patients (106) underwent implantation via EJV cutdown and group B (109) patients underwent implantation by cephalic vein cutdown. The following variables were investigated: operating time, need for conversion to other approaches, complications, and intraoperative and postoperative pain. In Group A patients, the success rate of the procedure was 100 per cent, whereas in 11 patients (10.1%) of Group B, a modification of the initial approach was needed. Mean operative time was 23.9 ± 9.2 minutes in Group A and 35.4 ± 11.9 in Group B, and this was statistically significant (P < 0.05). Complication rates at 30 days were similar. Considering intraoperative pain, a difference was found between the two groups because the mean value of pain in Group A was lower than that in Group B (4.13 ± 0.3 vs 5.22 ± 1.24), even if not significant. External jugular vein cutdown approach is quick and safe and allows a very high success rate with very low risk of complications. For these reasons, this approach could be considered as a first choice in TIVAD placement.


Assuntos
Cateterismo Venoso Central/métodos , Cateteres de Demora , Complicações Intraoperatórias/epidemiologia , Veias Jugulares/cirurgia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Venostomia/métodos , Adulto , Idoso , Antineoplásicos/administração & dosagem , Cateterismo Venoso Central/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Duração da Cirurgia , Estudos Prospectivos , Venostomia/efeitos adversos
20.
Vasc Endovascular Surg ; 52(4): 295-298, 2018 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29552944

RESUMO

Bullet embolization to the right heart through the vasculature is seen infrequently in cases presenting with penetrating trauma. Patients with unstable hemodynamic status are managed operatively. For a patient with stable hemodynamic parameters, diagnostic evaluation such as computed tomography angiogram, echocardiogram, or angiography could be performed to select the best treatment option. Endovascular treatment is employed infrequently in these cases but can be a viable option for select patients. We present a case of a bullet embolus to the right ventricle treated successfully with endovascular approach and discuss the technical aspects of this approach.


Assuntos
Cateterismo Cardíaco , Embolia/terapia , Procedimentos Endovasculares , Migração de Corpo Estranho/terapia , Ventrículos do Coração , Ferimentos por Arma de Fogo/complicações , Adulto , Embolia/diagnóstico por imagem , Embolia/etiologia , Veia Femoral/diagnóstico por imagem , Veia Femoral/cirurgia , Migração de Corpo Estranho/diagnóstico por imagem , Migração de Corpo Estranho/etiologia , Ventrículos do Coração/diagnóstico por imagem , Humanos , Masculino , Tomografia Computadorizada por Raios X , Resultado do Tratamento , Venostomia , Ferimentos por Arma de Fogo/diagnóstico por imagem
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...