Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
1.
BMC Gastroenterol ; 20(1): 162, 2020 May 27.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32460696

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Outcomes of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) using Toupet fundoplication (TF) and Stretta radiofrequency (SRF) have not been compared and this study was conducted to compare therapeutic efficacy of the two methods. METHODS: This retrospective study analyzed a total of 230 patients undergoing TF or SRF at our hospital. Baseline data, reflux symptoms, the DeMeester scores, lower esophageal sphincter (LES) pressure and adverse events were compared over 1 year period. RESULTS: A total of 226 patients were included in the study. The time and frequency of reflux and percentage of reflux time before and 12 months after therapy were not significantly different. There were significantly interactions between the therapy method and follow-up time on the DeMeester score and LES pressure. Twelve months post therapy, the DeMeester score was significantly higher in SRF than in TF group, while the LES pressure was lower. At 12 months after therapy, multivariate Cox proportional regression analysis showed that reflux frequency, the DeMeester score and LES pressure were risk factors for poor prognosis in TF group, while reflux frequency and the DeMeester score, and LES pressure were risk factors for poor prognosis in SFR group. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with TF, SFR can significantly improve the esophageal pH and pressure in GERD patients without increasing the risk of poor prognosis.


Asunto(s)
Fundoplicación/estadística & datos numéricos , Reflujo Gastroesofágico/terapia , Terapia por Radiofrecuencia/estadística & datos numéricos , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Esfínter Esofágico Inferior/fisiopatología , Monitorización del pH Esofágico , Femenino , Fundoplicación/métodos , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Presión , Pronóstico , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , Terapia por Radiofrecuencia/métodos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Resultado del Tratamiento
2.
J Cosmet Dermatol ; 19(2): 289-295, 2020 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31840388

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Laser and energy-based devices may be used for many cutaneous indications, including facial resurfacing, improving skin conditions, and reducing signs of photoaging. Currently, no consensus papers or guidelines exist concerning peri-operative agents and specifically their use for laser skin resurfacing and their potential/possible role in prevention or treatment of side effects. AIM: To explore current practice using laser and energy devices, a survey was developed to identify the trends in pre- and postprocedural treatment measures. METHODS: The survey was sent out digitally to 300 randomly selected US dermatologist and plastic surgeon physicians practicing medical esthetics using laser and other energy devices treatment for facial rejuvenation. The survey gathered information on demographics, types of devices used in the clinic and pre-/postprocedural measures for facial laser, and other energy-based devices treatment. RESULTS: The survey was active from June 15, to July 15, 2018, and fifty-eight dermatologists and plastic surgeons completed the survey (19.3% response rate, 58/300). The results showed inconsistency in skin preparation strategies and postprocedure wound care. The majority of survey participants (55/58 [96%]) reported prophylactic oral antiviral use pre- and post-treatment; however, there was inconsistency about when to start and when to stop the use. A similar inconsistency existed in the recommended period of post-treatment sun protection before and after treatment. CONCLUSION: The results of the survey confirmed the lack of consistency in the types and duration of pre- and postprocedural measures-emphasizing the need for evidence-based recommendations to optimize outcomes, prevent infection, enhance comfort, and reduce downtime.


Asunto(s)
Terapia por Luz de Baja Intensidad/efectos adversos , Regeneración de la Piel con Plasma/efectos adversos , Cuidados Posoperatorios/estadística & datos numéricos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/terapia , Cuidados Preoperatorios/estadística & datos numéricos , Terapia por Radiofrecuencia/efectos adversos , Consenso , Dermatólogos/estadística & datos numéricos , Cara , Humanos , Terapia por Luz de Baja Intensidad/normas , Terapia por Luz de Baja Intensidad/estadística & datos numéricos , Regeneración de la Piel con Plasma/normas , Regeneración de la Piel con Plasma/estadística & datos numéricos , Cuidados Posoperatorios/métodos , Cuidados Posoperatorios/normas , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Cuidados Preoperatorios/métodos , Cuidados Preoperatorios/normas , Terapia por Radiofrecuencia/normas , Terapia por Radiofrecuencia/estadística & datos numéricos , Rejuvenecimiento , Piel/inmunología , Piel/efectos de la radiación , Envejecimiento de la Piel/fisiología , Envejecimiento de la Piel/efectos de la radiación , Cirujanos/estadística & datos numéricos , Encuestas y Cuestionarios/estadística & datos numéricos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Cicatrización de Heridas
3.
Radiol Oncol ; 53(1): 116-122, 2019 03 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30840591

RESUMEN

Background To compare the frequency of adverse events of thermal microwave (MWA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) with non-thermal irreversible electroporation (IRE) in percutaneous ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Patients and methods We retrospectively analyzed 117 MWA/RFA and 47 IRE procedures (one tumor treated per procedure; 144 men and 20 women; median age, 66 years) regarding adverse events, duration of hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) stays and occurrence of a post-ablation syndrome. Complications were classified according to the Clavien & Dindo classification system. Results 70.1% of the RFA/MWA and 63.8% of the IRE procedures were performed without complications. Grade I and II complications (any deviation from the normal postinterventional course, e.g., analgesics) occurred in 26.5% (31/117) of MWA/RFA and 34.0% (16/47) of IRE procedures. Grade III and IV (major) complications occurred in 2.6% (3/117) of MWA/RFA and 2.1% (1/47) of IRE procedures. There was no significant difference in the frequency of complications (p = 0.864), duration of hospital and ICU stay and the occurrence of a post-ablation syndrome between the two groups. Conclusions Our results suggest that thermal (MWA and RFA) and non-thermal IRE ablation of malignant liver tumors have comparable complication rates despite the higher number of punctures and the lack of track cauterization in IRE.


Asunto(s)
Carcinoma Hepatocelular/terapia , Electroporación , Neoplasias Hepáticas/terapia , Ablación por Radiofrecuencia/efectos adversos , Terapia por Radiofrecuencia/efectos adversos , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Electroporación/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Humanos , Tiempo de Internación/estadística & datos numéricos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Ablación por Radiofrecuencia/estadística & datos numéricos , Terapia por Radiofrecuencia/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios Retrospectivos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA