Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 11.394
Filtrar
1.
PLoS One ; 19(5): e0300425, 2024.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38709807

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Deep Venous Thrombosis (DVT) due to Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC) is one of the most threatening complications after device insertion. OBJECTIVE: To assess the rate of PICC-associated DVT and analyze the risk factors associated with this event in cancer and critically ill patients. METHODS: We conducted a descriptive, retrospective cohort study with 11,588 PICCs from December 2014 to December 2019. Patients ≥ 18 years receiving a PICC were included. Pre-and post-puncture variables were collected and a logistic regression was used to identify the independent factors associated with the risk of DVT. RESULTS: The DVT prevalence was 1.8% (n = 213). The median length of PICC use was 15.3 days. The median age was 75 years (18; 107) and 52% were men, 53.5% were critically ill and 29.1% oncological patients. The most common indications for PICC's were intravenous antibiotics (79.1%). Notably, 91.5% of PICC showed a catheter-to-vein ratio of no more than 33%. The tip location method with intracavitary electrocardiogram was used in 43%. Most catheters (67.9%) were electively removed at the end of intravenous therapy. After adjusting for cancer profile ou chemotherapy, regression anaysis revealed that age (OR 1.011; 95% CI 1.002-1.020), previous DVT (OR 1.96; 95% CI 1.12-3.44) and obstruction of the device (OR 1.60; 95% CI 1.05-2.42) were independent factors associated with PICC-associated DVT, whereas the use of an anticoagulant regimen was a protective variable (OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.54-0.99). CONCLUSION: PICC is a safe and suitable intravenous device for medium and long-term therapy, with low rates of DVT even in a cohort of critically ill and cancer patients.


Asunto(s)
Cateterismo Periférico , Trombosis de la Vena , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Anciano , Estudios Retrospectivos , Trombosis de la Vena/etiología , Trombosis de la Vena/epidemiología , Persona de Mediana Edad , Brasil/epidemiología , Cateterismo Periférico/efectos adversos , Factores de Riesgo , Adulto , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Neoplasias/complicaciones , Neoplasias/tratamiento farmacológico , Cateterismo Venoso Central/efectos adversos , Enfermedad Crítica , Adolescente , Adulto Joven , Prevalencia
2.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev ; 5: CD013023, 2024 May 23.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38780138

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Peripheral arterial catheters (ACs) are used in anaesthesia and intensive care settings for blood sampling and monitoring. Despite their importance, ACs often fail, requiring reinsertion. Dressings and securement devices maintain AC function and prevent complications such as infection. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of peripheral AC dressing and securement devices to prevent failure and complications in hospitalised people. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL Plus up to 16 May 2023. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform up to 16 May 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different dressing and securement devices for the stabilisation of ACs in hospitalised people. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using Cochrane's RoB 1 tool. We resolved disagreements by discussion, or by consulting a third review author when necessary. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: We included five RCTs with 1228 participants and 1228 ACs. All included studies had high risk of bias in one or more domains. We present the following four comparisons, with the remaining comparisons reported in the main review. Standard polyurethane (SPU) plus tissue adhesive (TA) compared with SPU: we are very uncertain whether use of SPU plus TA impacts rates of AC failure (risk ratio (RR) 0.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.20 to 0.98; I² = 0%; 2 studies, 165 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Neither study (165 participants) reported catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSI), thus we are very uncertain whether SPU plus TA impacts on the incidence of CRBSI (very low-certainty evidence). It is very uncertain whether use of SPU plus TA impacts AC dislodgement risk (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.03 to 9.62; I² = 44%; 2 studies, 165 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain whether use of SPU plus TA impacts AC occlusion rates (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.37 to 3.91; I² = 3%; 2 studies, 165 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain whether use of SPU plus TA impacts rates of adverse events with few reported events across groups (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.09 to 8.33; I² = 0%; 2 studies, 165 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Bordered polyurethane (BPU) compared to SPU: we are very uncertain whether use of BPU impacts rates of AC failure (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.21 to 2.13; 1 study, 60 participants; very low-certainty evidence). BPU may make little or no difference to CRBSI compared to SPU (RR 3.05, 95% CI 0.12 to 74.45; I² = not applicable as 1 study (60 participants) reported 0 events; 2 studies, 572 participants; low-certainty evidence). BPU may make little or no difference to the risk of AC dislodgement compared with SPU (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.17 to 3.22; I² = 0%; 2 studies, 572 participants; low-certainty evidence). BPU may make little or no difference to occlusion risk compared with SPU (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.07; I² = 0%; 2 studies, 572 participants; low-certainty evidence). It is very uncertain whether BPU impacts on the risk of adverse events compared with SPU (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.87; 1 study, 60 participants; very low-certainty evidence). SPU plus sutureless securement devices (SSD) compared to SPU: we are very uncertain whether SPU plus SSD impacts risk of AC failure compared with SPU (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.52; I² = 0%; 2 studies, 157 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain if SPU plus SSD impacts CRBSI incidence rate with no events in both groups (2 studies, 157 participants; very low-certainty evidence). It is very uncertain whether SPU plus SSD impacts risk of dislodgement (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.57; I² = not applicable as 1 study (96 participants) reported 0 events; 2 studies, 157 participants; very low-certainty evidence). It is very uncertain whether SPU plus SSD impacts risk of AC occlusion (RR 1.94, 95% CI 0.50 to 7.48; I² = 38%; 2 studies, 157 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain whether SPU plus SSD impacts on the risk of adverse events (RR 1.94, 95% CI 0.19 to 20.24; I² = not applicable as 1 study (96 participants) reported 0 events; 2 studies, 157 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Integrated securement dressings compared to SPU: integrated securement dressings may result in little or no difference in risk of AC failure compared with SPU (RR 1.96, 95% CI 0.80 to 4.84; 1 study, 105 participants; low-certainty evidence); may result in little or no difference in CRBSI incidence with no events reported (1 study, 105 participants; low-certainty evidence); may result in little or no difference in the risk of dislodgement (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.04; 1 study, 105 participants; low-certainty evidence), may result in little or no difference in occlusion rates with no events reported (1 study, 105 participants; low-certainty evidence), and may result in little or no difference in the risk of adverse events (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.45; 1 study, 105 participants; low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is currently limited rigorous RCT evidence available about the relative clinical effectiveness of AC dressing and securement products. Limitations of current evidence include small sample size, infrequent events, and heterogeneous outcome measurements. We found no clear difference in the incidence of AC failure, CRBSI, or adverse events across AC dressing or securement products including SPU, BPU, SSD, TA, and integrated securement products. The limitations of current evidence means further rigorous RCTs are needed to reduce uncertainty around the use of dressing and securement devices for ACs.


Asunto(s)
Vendajes , Infecciones Relacionadas con Catéteres , Cateterismo Periférico , Poliuretanos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Humanos , Cateterismo Periférico/efectos adversos , Cateterismo Periférico/instrumentación , Infecciones Relacionadas con Catéteres/prevención & control , Sesgo , Falla de Equipo
3.
Br J Nurs ; 33(7): S4-S8, 2024 Apr 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38700139

RESUMEN

AIM: Insertion of a peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) is one of the most common procedures carried out in hospitals worldwide, but failure rates are unacceptably high. This local quality improvement project aimed to assess improvements in first-stick success rate, dwell time and overall catheter success rate when implementing a longer-length peripheral intravenous catheter (LPIVC) under ultrasound guidance for patients with difficult venous access (DVA). METHODS: Data were collected from 386 DVA patients requiring a PIVC at one hospital. Number of catheter insertion attempts, catheter dwell time and reason for catheter removal were recorded for each patient. To implement the new DVA catheterisation pathway, registered nurses undertook a training programme comprising workshops and ultrasound-guided cannulation technique practice on phantoms. Costs and waste weights associated with LPIVC insertion, compared with midline insertion, were calculated. RESULTS: First-stick success rate was 95.0% using the LPIVC under ultrasound guidance. Dwell time ranged from 1 to 80 days, with a large proportion of those dwelling <1 day being placed in day-case patients. Treatment success rate with the LPIVCs was 83.6%. Equipment costs for an LPIVC insertion were £89.22 lower than for a midline insertion, and the weight of waste generated per procedure was 1 kg lower for LPIVCs. CONCLUSIONS: First-stick success rate of LPIVCs, aided by improved purchase in the vein and visualisation with ultrasound guidance, was very high, superior to rates reported in other studies. The procedure provides a better patient experience as successful first attempts avoid unnecessary further insertion attempts. Other benefits are increased nursing time efficiency, a reduction in clinical waste and the lower cost of the equipment required.


Asunto(s)
Cateterismo Periférico , Ultrasonografía Intervencional , Humanos , Cateterismo Periférico/enfermería , Cateterismo Periférico/métodos , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Mejoramiento de la Calidad , Anciano , Adulto
5.
PLoS One ; 19(5): e0303152, 2024.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38722995

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Short peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) failure is a common complication that is generally underdiagnosed. Some studies have evaluated the factors associated with these complications, but the impact of care complexity individual factors and nurse staffing levels on PIVC failure is still to be assessed. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence and risk factors of PIVC failure in the public hospital system of the Southern Barcelona Metropolitan Area. METHODS: A retrospective multicentre observational cohort study of hospitalised adult patients was conducted in two public hospitals in Barcelona from 1st January 2016 to 31st December 2017. All adult patients admitted to the hospitalisation ward were included until the day of discharge. Patients were classified according to presence or absence of PIVC failure. The main outcomes were nurse staffing coverage (ATIC patient classification system) and 27-care complexity individual factors. Data were obtained from electronic health records in 2022. RESULTS: Of the 44,661 patients with a PIVC, catheter failure was recorded in 2,624 (5.9%) patients (2,577 [5.8%] phlebitis and 55 [0.1%] extravasation). PIVC failure was more frequent in female patients (42%), admitted to medical wards, unscheduled admissions, longer catheter dwell time (median 7.3 vs 2.2 days) and those with lower levels of nurse staffing coverage (mean 60.2 vs 71.5). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the female gender, medical ward admission, catheter dwell time, haemodynamic instability, uncontrolled pain, communication disorders, a high risk of haemorrhage, mental impairments, and a lack of caregiver support were independent factors associated with PIVC failure. Moreover, higher nurse staffing were a protective factor against PIVC failure (AUC, 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.72-0.74). CONCLUSION: About 6% of patients presented PIVC failure during hospitalisation. Several complexity factors were associated with PIVC failure and lower nurse staffing levels were identified in patients with PIVC failure. Institutions should consider that prior identification of care complexity individual factors and nurse staffing coverage could be associated with a reduced risk of PIVC failure.


Asunto(s)
Cateterismo Periférico , Humanos , Femenino , Masculino , Estudios Retrospectivos , Cateterismo Periférico/efectos adversos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Factores de Riesgo , Adulto , Admisión y Programación de Personal , Falla de Equipo/estadística & datos numéricos , Personal de Enfermería en Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , España/epidemiología
6.
BMJ Open ; 14(5): e081749, 2024 May 17.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38760049

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To compare catheter-related outcomes of individuals who received a tunnelled femorally inserted central catheter (tFICC) with those who received a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) in the upper extremities. DESIGN: A propensity-score matched cohort study. SETTING: A 980-bed tertiary referral hospital in South West Sydney, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: In-patients referred to the hospital central venous access service for the insertion of a central venous access device. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome of interest was the incidence of all-cause catheter failure. Secondary outcomes included the rates of catheters removed because of suspected or confirmed catheter-associated infection, catheter dwell and confirmed upper or lower extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT). RESULTS: The overall rate of all-cause catheter failure in the matched tFICC and PICC cohort was 2.4/1000 catheter days (95% CI 1.1 to 4.4) and 3.0/1000 catheter days (95% CI 2.3 to 3.9), respectively, and when compared, no difference was observed (difference -0.63/1000 catheter days, 95% CI -2.32 to 1.06). We found no differences in catheter dwell (mean difference of 14.2 days, 95% CI -6.6 to 35.0, p=0.910); or in the cumulative probability of failure between the two groups within the first month of dwell (p=0.358). No significant differences were observed in the rate of catheters requiring removal for confirmed central line-associated bloodstream infection (difference 0.13/1000 catheter day, 95% CI -0.36 to 0.63, p=0.896). Similarly, no significant differences were found between the groups for confirmed catheter-related DVT (difference -0.11 per 1000 catheter days, 95% CI -0.26 to 0.04, p=1.00). CONCLUSION: There were no differences in catheter-related outcomes between the matched cohort of tFICC and PICC patients, suggesting that tFICCs are a possible alternative for vascular access when the veins of the upper extremities or thoracic region are not viable for catheterisation.


Asunto(s)
Infecciones Relacionadas con Catéteres , Cateterismo Venoso Central , Cateterismo Periférico , Puntaje de Propensión , Humanos , Femenino , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Infecciones Relacionadas con Catéteres/epidemiología , Infecciones Relacionadas con Catéteres/etiología , Cateterismo Venoso Central/efectos adversos , Cateterismo Venoso Central/métodos , Cateterismo Periférico/efectos adversos , Anciano , Catéteres Venosos Centrales/efectos adversos , Estudios de Cohortes , Australia/epidemiología , Adulto , Catéteres de Permanencia/efectos adversos , Remoción de Dispositivos/estadística & datos numéricos , Falla de Equipo/estadística & datos numéricos
7.
Crit Care Explor ; 6(6): e1096, 2024 Jun 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38787296

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: Measurement of blood pressure taken from different anatomical sites, are often perceived as interchangeable, despite them representing different parts of the systemic circulation. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis on blood pressure differences between central and peripheral arterial cannulation in critically ill patients. DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Embase from inception to December 26, 2023, using Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms and keywords. STUDY SELECTION: Observation study of adult patients in ICUs and operating rooms who underwent simultaneous central (femoral, axillary, or subclavian artery) and peripheral (radial, brachial, or dorsalis pedis artery) arterial catheter placement in ICUs and operating rooms. DATA EXTRACTION: We screened and extracted studies independently and in duplicate. We assessed risk of bias using the revised Quality Assessment for Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy tool. DATA SYNTHESIS: Twenty-four studies that enrolled 1598 patients in total were included. Central pressures (mean arterial pressure [MAP] and systolic blood pressure [SBP]) were found to be significantly higher than their peripheral counterparts, with mean gradients of 3.5 and 8.0 mm Hg, respectively. However, there was no statistically significant difference in central or peripheral diastolic blood pressure (DBP). Subgroup analysis further highlighted a higher MAP gradient during the on-cardiopulmonary bypass stage of cardiac surgery, reperfusion stage of liver transplant, and in nonsurgical critically ill patients. SBP or DBP gradient did not demonstrate any subgroup specific changes. CONCLUSIONS: SBP and MAP obtained by central arterial cannulation were higher than peripheral arterial cannulation; however, clinical implication of a difference of 8.0 mm Hg in SBP and 3.5 mm Hg in MAP remains unclear. Our current clinical practices preferring peripheral arterial lines need not change.


Asunto(s)
Presión Arterial , Cateterismo Periférico , Enfermedad Crítica , Humanos , Presión Arterial/fisiología , Determinación de la Presión Sanguínea/métodos , Presión Sanguínea/fisiología , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos
8.
PLoS One ; 19(5): e0295347, 2024.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38739611

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: When clinicians need to administer a vasopressor infusion, they are faced with the choice of administration via either peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) or central venous catheter (CVC). Vasopressor infusions have traditionally been administered via central venous catheters (CVC) rather than Peripheral Intra Venous Catheters (PIVC), primarily due to concerns of extravasation and resultant tissue injury. This practice is not guided by contemporary randomised controlled trial (RCT) evidence. Observational data suggests safety of vasopressor infusion via PIVC. To address this evidence gap, we have designed the "Vasopressors Infused via Peripheral or Central Access" (VIPCA) RCT. METHODS: The VIPCA trial is a single-centre, feasibility, parallel-group RCT. Eligible critically ill patients requiring a vasopressor infusion will be identified by emergency department (ED) or intensive care unit (ICU) staff and randomised to receive vasopressor infusion via either PIVC or CVC. Primary outcome is feasibility, a composite of recruitment rate, proportion of eligible patients randomised, protocol fidelity, retention and missing data. Primary clinical outcome is days alive and out of hospital up to day-30. Secondary outcomes will include safety and other clinical outcomes, and process and cost measures. Specific aspects of safety related to vasopressor infusions such as extravasation, leakage, device failure, tissue injury and infection will be assessed. DISCUSSION: VIPCA is a feasibility RCT whose outcomes will inform the feasibility and design of a multicentre Phase-3 trial comparing routes of vasopressor delivery. The exploratory economic analysis will provide input data for the full health economic analysis which will accompany any future Phase-3 RCT.


Asunto(s)
Cateterismo Periférico , Catéteres Venosos Centrales , Enfermedad Crítica , Estudios de Factibilidad , Vasoconstrictores , Humanos , Vasoconstrictores/administración & dosificación , Vasoconstrictores/uso terapéutico , Catéteres Venosos Centrales/efectos adversos , Cateterismo Periférico/efectos adversos , Cateterismo Periférico/métodos , Adulto , Infusiones Intravenosas , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Cateterismo Venoso Central/efectos adversos , Cateterismo Venoso Central/métodos , Masculino , Femenino , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto
9.
J Infus Nurs ; 47(3): 155-162, 2024.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38744240

RESUMEN

This study aims to analyze the incidences of peripheral intravenous catheter-related phlebitis and infiltration and the associated risk factors in emergency departments. This descriptive cross-sectional, nonexperimental study was conducted with 300 participants in the emergency department of a university hospital in Türkiye between January 15 and February 15, 2018. The incidence of peripheral intravenous catheter-related phlebitis was 31%, which was grade 1 in 29.7% and grade 2 in 1.3% of the emergency department participants. Additionally, the incidence of peripheral intravenous catheter-related infiltration was 55.4%, including grades 1, 2, and 3 in 36.0%, 12.7%, and 6.7% of the participants, respectively. Incidences of phlebitis and infiltration were related to age, duration of peripheral intravenous catheterization longer than 24 hours, and repeated use of the catheter insertion site. The findings of this study may draw attention to the factors that trigger phlebitis and infiltration due to peripheral intravenous catheter insertions in the emergency department and may guide practices to prevent these complications before they develop. In this context, the Phlebitis Scale and Infiltration Scale developed by the Infusion Nurses Society are recommended to be used in the emergency department.


Asunto(s)
Cateterismo Periférico , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Flebitis , Humanos , Flebitis/etiología , Flebitis/epidemiología , Estudios Transversales , Cateterismo Periférico/efectos adversos , Femenino , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Adulto , Factores de Riesgo , Incidencia , Anciano , Turquía , Hospitales Universitarios
10.
J Infus Nurs ; 47(3): 190-199, 2024.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38744244

RESUMEN

This study aimed to compare patients' experience of pain during ultrasound (US)-guided peripheral venipuncture versus conventional peripheral venipuncture. This randomized clinical trial was conducted at a public university hospital in 2021. Adult patients with indication for intravenous therapy compatible with peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) were included: intervention group (IG), US peripheral venipuncture executed by specialist nurses; control group (CG), conventional peripheral venipuncture executed by clinical practice nurses. The primary outcome was patient experience of pain during the procedure and patient experience related to the PIVC placement method. Sixty-four patients were included, 32 for each group. The pain experienced was none-to-mild in the IG for 25 patients (78.1%) and moderate-to-severe in the CG for 21 patients (65.7%; P < .001). The overall pain rating was 2 (1-3) in the IG and 4 (3-6) in the CG (P < .001). The recommendation of the procedure in IG (net promoter score [NPS] + 90.6%) versus CG (NPS + 18.8%) was considered excellent and good, respectively (P < .001). Patients had less pain and significantly recommended the US-guided procedure. Patient experience with US-guided PIVC, performed by a specialist nurse, was superior to that of conventional peripheral venipuncture.


Asunto(s)
Flebotomía , Ultrasonografía Intervencional , Humanos , Femenino , Masculino , Flebotomía/efectos adversos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Cateterismo Periférico/efectos adversos , Adulto , Dimensión del Dolor , Dolor/prevención & control , Manejo del Dolor/métodos , Anciano
11.
JACC Cardiovasc Interv ; 17(8): 979-988, 2024 Apr 22.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38658126

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Symptomatic patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) at high risk for surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) sustain comparable improvements in health status over 5 years after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or SAVR. Whether a similar long-term benefit is observed among intermediate-risk AS patients is unknown. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to assess health status outcomes through 5 years in intermediate risk patients treated with a self-expanding TAVR prosthesis or SAVR using data from the SURTAVI (Surgical Replacement and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) trial. METHODS: Intermediate-risk patients randomized to transfemoral TAVR or SAVR in the SURTAVI trial had disease-specific health status assessed at baseline, 30 days, and annually to 5 years using the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ). Health status was compared between groups using fixed effects repeated measures modelling. RESULTS: Of the 1,584 patients (TAVR, n = 805; SAVR, n = 779) included in the analysis, health status improved more rapidly after TAVR compared with SAVR. However, by 1 year, both groups experienced large health status benefits (mean change in KCCQ-Overall Summary Score (KCCQ-OS) from baseline: TAVR: 20.5 ± 22.4; SAVR: 20.5 ± 22.2). This benefit was sustained, albeit modestly attenuated, at 5 years (mean change in KCCQ-OS from baseline: TAVR: 15.4 ± 25.1; SAVR: 14.3 ± 24.2). There were no significant differences in health status between the cohorts at 1 year or beyond. Similar findings were observed in the KCCQ subscales, although a substantial attenuation of benefit was noted in the physical limitation subscale over time in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: In intermediate-risk AS patients, both transfemoral TAVR and SAVR resulted in comparable and durable health status benefits to 5 years. Further research is necessary to elucidate the mechanisms for the small decline in health status noted at 5 years compared with 1 year in both groups. (Safety and Efficacy Study of the Medtronic CoreValve® System in the Treatment of Severe, Symptomatic Aortic Stenosis in Intermediate Risk Subjects Who Need Aortic Valve Replacement [SURTAVI]; NCT01586910).


Asunto(s)
Estenosis de la Válvula Aórtica , Válvula Aórtica , Arteria Femoral , Estado de Salud , Prótesis Valvulares Cardíacas , Calidad de Vida , Recuperación de la Función , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Reemplazo de la Válvula Aórtica Transcatéter , Humanos , Estenosis de la Válvula Aórtica/cirugía , Estenosis de la Válvula Aórtica/diagnóstico por imagen , Estenosis de la Válvula Aórtica/fisiopatología , Femenino , Masculino , Factores de Tiempo , Reemplazo de la Válvula Aórtica Transcatéter/efectos adversos , Reemplazo de la Válvula Aórtica Transcatéter/instrumentación , Resultado del Tratamiento , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Factores de Riesgo , Válvula Aórtica/cirugía , Válvula Aórtica/fisiopatología , Válvula Aórtica/diagnóstico por imagen , Medición de Riesgo , Implantación de Prótesis de Válvulas Cardíacas/instrumentación , Implantación de Prótesis de Válvulas Cardíacas/efectos adversos , Cateterismo Periférico/efectos adversos , Punciones , Diseño de Prótesis
12.
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv ; 103(6): 982-994, 2024 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38584518

RESUMEN

Endovascular aortic repair is an emerging novel intervention for the management of abdominal aortic aneurysms. It is crucial to compare the effectiveness of different access sites, such as transfemoral access (TFA) and upper extremity access (UEA). An electronic literature search was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, and Google Scholar databases. The primary endpoint was the incidence of stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA), while the secondary endpoints included technical success, access-site complications, mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), spinal cord ischemia, among others. Forest plots were constructed for the pooled analysis of data using the random-effects model in Review Manager, version 5.4. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. Our findings in 9403 study participants (6228 in the TFA group and 3175 in the UEA group) indicate that TFA is associated with a lower risk of stroke/TIA [RR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.40-0.75; p = 0.0002], MI [RR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.38-0.69; p < 0.0001], spinal cord ischemia [RR: 0.41; 95% CI: 0.32-0.53, p < 0.00001], and shortens fluoroscopy time [SMD: -0.62; 95% CI: -1.00 to -0.24; p = 0.001]. Moreover, TFA required less contrast agent [SMD: -0.33; 95% CI: -0.61 to -0.06; p = 0.02], contributing to its appeal. However, no significant differences emerged in technical success [p = 0.23], 30-day mortality [p = 0.48], ICU stay duration [p = 0.09], or overall hospital stay length [p = 0.22]. Patients with TFA had a lower risk of stroke, MI, and spinal cord ischemia, shorter fluoroscopy time, and lower use of contrast agents. Future large-scale randomized controlled trials are warranted to confirm and strengthen these findings.


Asunto(s)
Implantación de Prótesis Vascular , Cateterismo Periférico , Reparación Endovascular de Aneurismas , Arteria Femoral , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/cirugía , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/diagnóstico por imagen , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/mortalidad , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/métodos , Cateterismo Periférico/métodos , Reparación Endovascular de Aneurismas/métodos , Arteria Femoral/diagnóstico por imagen , Proyectos Piloto , Punciones , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Accidente Cerebrovascular/etiología , Accidente Cerebrovascular/mortalidad , Accidente Cerebrovascular/prevención & control , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Extremidad Superior/irrigación sanguínea
13.
JAMA Pediatr ; 178(5): 437-445, 2024 May 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38558161

RESUMEN

Importance: Peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) facilitate essential treatment. Failure of these essential devices is frequent and new securement strategies may reduce failure and improve patient outcomes. Objective: To evaluate clinical effectiveness of novel PIVC securement technologies for children to reduce catheter failure. Design, Setting, and Participants: A 3-arm, parallel group, superiority randomized clinical trial was conducted at 2 regional Australian hospitals from February 5, 2020, to January 14, 2022. Children aged 6 months to 8 years who were anticipated to require admission with a PIVC for at least 24 hours of in hospital treatment were eligible. Data were analyzed from May 25, 2022, to February 20, 2024. Interventions: Participants were randomly allocated in a 1:1:1 ratio to standard care, bordered polyurethane (Tegaderm [3M]), integrated securement dressing (SorbaView SHIELD [Medline]), and integrated securement dressing with tissue adhesive (Secureport IV). One catheter was studied per patient. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was PIVC failure, defined as premature cessation of PIVC function for any reason prior to completion of planned treatment. Secondary outcomes were PIVC complications (any time dislodgement, occlusion, infiltration, partial dislodgement, extravasation, device leaking, phlebitis, pain), PIVC longevity, intervention acceptability (clinicians, participants, caregivers; 0-10 scale), and pain on removal (participants and caregivers; 0-10 scale relevant to age), adverse events, and health care costs. Results: A total of 383 patients (51% female; median age 36 [25th-75th percentiles, 22-72] months) were randomized 134 to standard care, 118 to integrated securement dressing, and 131 to integrated securement dressing with tissue adhesive. PIVC failure was lowest in integrated securement dressing with tissue adhesive (15 [12%]; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.47; 95% CI, 0.26-0.84) compared with integrated securement dressing (24 [21%]; aHR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.47-1.28) and standard care (43 [34%]). Direct costs were significantly lower for integrated securement dressing with tissue adhesive (median, Australian dollars [A$], 312 [A$1 is equal to $0.65 US dollars]; IQR, A$302-A$380) and integrated securement dressing (median, A$303; IQR, A$294-A$465) compared with standard care (median, A$341; IQR, A$297-A$592; P ≤ .002) when considering the economic burden related to failure of devices. PIVC longevity and intervention acceptability were similar across all groups. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, PIVCs secured with integrated securement dressings and tissue adhesive, in comparison with standard care, bordered polyurethane dressings, were associated with significantly reduced PIVC failure, for children admitted to hospital via the emergency department. Further research should focus on implementation in inpatient units where prolonged dwell and reliable intravenous access is most needed. Trial Registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry Identifier: ACTRN12619001026112.


Asunto(s)
Cateterismo Periférico , Falla de Equipo , Humanos , Femenino , Masculino , Cateterismo Periférico/métodos , Cateterismo Periférico/instrumentación , Cateterismo Periférico/economía , Niño , Preescolar , Lactante , Vendajes/economía , Australia , Poliuretanos , Adhesivos Tisulares/administración & dosificación
15.
Dtsch Med Wochenschr ; 149(10): 587-591, 2024 May.
Artículo en Alemán | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38657598

RESUMEN

Probably everyone who works in emergency medicine has been in the situation of having to insert a peripheral vein under time pressure in difficult venous conditions. So what do I do if I don't succeed? Establish a peripheral venous catheter? In recent years, the intraosseous approach has become increasingly popular as an alternative procedure. In this article, you will be guided step by step through the creation of an intraosseous access.


Asunto(s)
Infusiones Intraóseas , Humanos , Infusiones Intraóseas/métodos , Cateterismo Periférico/métodos
19.
Crit Care Sci ; 36: e20240235en, 2024.
Artículo en Inglés, Portugués | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38597484

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Newborn infants admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit require arterial cannulation for hemodynamic monitoring and blood sampling. Arterial access is achieved through catheterization of umbilical or peripheral arteries. Peripheral artery cannulation is performed in critically ill newborns, but artery localization and cannulation is often challenging and unsuccessful. Therefore, increasing the internal diameter and preventing vasospasm are important for successful peripheral artery cannulation in neonates. Topical glyceryl trinitrate has the potential to increase cannulation success by relaxing arterial smooth muscles and thus increasing the internal diameter. We aim to conduct a pilot randomized controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of topycal glyceryl trinitrate in increasing the diameter of the radial artery in neonates. METHODS/DESIGN: This study will be a single-center, observer-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial conducted in the neonatal intensive care unit of Perth Children's Hospital, Western Australia. A total of 60 infants born at >34 weeks of gestation who are admitted for elective surgery or medical reasons and for whom a peripheral arterial line is needed for sampling or blood pressure monitoring will be recruited after informed parental consent is obtained. The primary outcome will be the change in radial arterial diameter from baseline to postintervention. Secondary outcomes will be the absolute and percentage change from baseline in the radial arterial diameter in both limbs and safety (hypotension and methemoglobinemia). DISCUSSION: This will be the first randomized controlled trial evaluating the use of topical glyceryl trinitrate to facilitate peripheral artery cannulation in neonates. If our pilot randomized controlled trial confirms the benefits of glyceryl trinitrate patches, it will pave the way for large multicenter randomized controlled trials in this field.


Asunto(s)
Cateterismo Periférico , Nitroglicerina , Lactante , Niño , Humanos , Recién Nacido , Nitroglicerina/uso terapéutico , Arteria Radial , Cateterismo Periférico/efectos adversos , Australia Occidental , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Estudios Multicéntricos como Asunto
20.
Perfusion ; 39(1_suppl): 23S-38S, 2024 Apr.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38651584

RESUMEN

Limb ischaemia is a clinically relevant complication of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA ECMO) with femoral artery cannulation. No selective distal perfusion or other advanced techniques were used in the past to maintain adequate distal limb perfusion. A more recent trend is the shift from the reactive or emergency management to the pro-active or prophylactic placement of a distal perfusion cannula to avoid or reduce limb ischaemia-related complications. Multiple alternative cannulation techniques to the distal perfusion cannula have been developed to maintain distal limb perfusion, including end-to-side grafting, external or endovascular femoro-femoral bypass, retrograde limb perfusion (e.g., via the posterior tibial, dorsalis pedis or anterior tibial artery), and, more recently, use of a bidirectional cannula. Venous congestion has also been recognized as a potential contributing factor to limb ischaemia development and specific techniques have been described with facilitated venous drainage or bilateral cannulation being the most recent, to reduce or avoid venous stasis as a contributor to impaired limb perfusion. Advances in monitoring techniques, such as near-infrared spectroscopy and duplex ultrasound analysis, have been applied to improve decision-making regarding both the monitoring and management of limb ischaemia. This narrative review describes the evolution of techniques used for distal limb perfusion during peripheral VA ECMO.


Asunto(s)
Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea , Arteria Femoral , Humanos , Oxigenación por Membrana Extracorpórea/métodos , Perfusión/métodos , Cateterismo/métodos , Isquemia/prevención & control , Isquemia/etiología , Adulto , Cateterismo Periférico/métodos , Cateterismo Periférico/efectos adversos , Extremidades/irrigación sanguínea
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA