Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros








Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Transfusion ; 64(3): 449-453, 2024 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38299721

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Administering platelets through a rapid infuser is proven to be safe. However, the clinical significance of infusing ABO-incompatible platelets with red blood cells (RBCs) in a rapid infuser remains unclear. There is a theoretical risk that isoagglutinin in the plasma of a platelet unit can interact with RBCs and induce hemolysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seven in vitro studies were performed including five cases (type A RBCs and type O platelets) and two controls (type A RBCs and platelets). Anti-A titers were measured in platelet units. An RBC unit and a platelet unit were mixed in the rapid infuser reservoir and incubated for 30 min. The primary outcome was the presence of hemolysis based on the following parameters: free hemoglobin concentration, hemolysis check, direct antiglobulin test (DAT), and direct agglutination. RESULTS: The post-mix DAT was positive for IgG in all test samples (5/5), and weakly positive for complement in 3/5. The changes in free Hb in test cases between measured and calculated post-mix spanned -2.2 to +3.4 mg/dL. Post-mix hemolysis check was negative in 3/5 and slightly positive in 2/5 cases, with no significant differences compared to the control case. Anti-A titers ranged from 16 to 512 and were not associated with hemolysis. All samples were negative for direct agglutination. CONCLUSION: Our study suggested that mixing ABO-incompatible platelets with RBCs in a rapid infuser does not induce in vitro hemolysis. These findings support the use of rapid infusers regardless of platelet compatibility in support of hemostatic resuscitation.


Assuntos
Sistema ABO de Grupos Sanguíneos , Hemólise , Humanos , Transfusão de Plaquetas/efeitos adversos , Incompatibilidade de Grupos Sanguíneos , Plaquetas , Anticorpos
2.
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv ; 98(4): E626-E636, 2021 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33847434

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: We present our initial experience with the fourth-generation MitraClip™ (G4) system and propose preliminary criteria for device selection. BACKGROUND: The MitraClip™ G4 system recently underwent a "controlled release" for transcatheter edge-to-edge mitral valve repair. The four new devices include technical improvements such as controlled gripper actuation (independent leaflet capture) and continuous left atrial pressure monitoring. To date, a patient-specific device selection algorithm, and the technology's impact on procedural times and success, have not been described. METHODS: We present an initial multi-center experience and short-term outcomes with the new system, suggest procedural and imaging considerations, and propose initial guidance for device selection. RESULTS: Sixty-one procedures performed by three operators at two centers between November 2019 and May 2020 were analyzed. At 30-day follow-up, there were three deaths (4.9%), four neurological events (6.6%), and seven re-hospitalizations (11.5%). Fifty-nine patients achieved device and procedural success (96.7%), and there was one device-related technical issue (1.6%). Compared to the same operators utilizing the third generation MitraClip™, the G4 system resulted in a significant reduction in the median number of clips used per patient (1 IQR 1-2 vs. 2 IQR 1-3, p = .023) and a trend toward shorter device times. CONCLUSION: Based on our initial experience, we found that the MitraClip™ G4 system is associated with high procedural success and fewer devices needed per procedure. The expanded device options may allow a more targeted approach to the myriad of pathologic presentations of mitral regurgitation. This early experience should provide a foundational opportunity for further refinement.


Assuntos
Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Cardíacos , Implante de Prótese de Valva Cardíaca , Insuficiência da Valva Mitral , Cateterismo Cardíaco/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Valva Mitral/diagnóstico por imagem , Valva Mitral/cirurgia , Insuficiência da Valva Mitral/diagnóstico por imagem , Insuficiência da Valva Mitral/cirurgia , Resultado do Tratamento
3.
A A Pract ; 12(8): 270-272, 2019 Apr 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30299296

RESUMO

Dual epidural catheter (DEC) therapy improves postoperative pain control in scoliosis correction surgery, esophagectomies, and labor. Reports about the use of a second epidural catheter to improve pain control after abdominal surgeries are sparse. We describe the successful use of unplanned DEC therapy in 2 complex pain patients who underwent large exploratory laparotomies. In both patients, the addition of the second catheter led to improved pain control and mobility and reduced side effects from adjuvant intravenous analgesics. DEC therapy merits consideration as an additional tool for managing postoperative pain after large abdominal surgeries despite existing incomplete epidural analgesia.


Assuntos
Dor Abdominal/tratamento farmacológico , Analgesia Epidural , Cateterismo , Dor Pós-Operatória/tratamento farmacológico , Adenocarcinoma/cirurgia , Adulto , Analgésicos/administração & dosagem , Neoplasias do Colo/cirurgia , Feminino , Humanos , Obstrução Intestinal/cirurgia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Urotélio/cirurgia
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA