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











Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Rev Esp Enferm Dig ; 115(10): 546-552, 2023 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37114392

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: difficulty of cecal intubation should be a main indicator for the need of sedated colonoscopy and skilled endoscopists. The present study aimed to explore the factors associated with easy and difficult cecal intubation in unsedated colonoscopy. METHODS: all consecutive patients who underwent unsedated colonoscopy at our department by the same endoscopist from December 3, 2020 to August 30, 2022 were retrospectively collected. Age, gender, body mass index (BMI), reasons for colonoscopy, position change, Boston Bowel Preparation Scale score, cecal intubation time (CIT) and major colonoscopic findings were analyzed. CIT < 5 min, CIT 5-10 min and CIT > 10 min or failed cecal intubation were defined as easy, moderate and difficult cecal intubation, respectively. Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify independent factors associated with easy and difficult cecal intubation. RESULTS: overall, 1,281 patients were included. The proportions of easy and difficult cecal intubation were 29.2 % (374/1,281) and 27.2 % (349/1,281), respectively. Multivariate logistic regression analysis found that age ≤ 50 years, male, BMI > 23.0 kg/m2 and the absence of position change were independently associated with easy cecal intubation, and that age > 50 years, female, BMI ≤ 23.0 kg/m2, position change, and insufficient bowel preparation were independently associated with difficult cecal intubation. CONCLUSIONS: some convenient factors independently associated with easy and difficult cecal intubation have been identified, which will be potentially helpful to determine whether a colonoscopy should be sedated and a skilled endoscopist should be selected. The current findings should be further validated in large-scale prospective studies.


Asunto(s)
Ciego , Colonoscopía , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estudios Prospectivos , Índice de Masa Corporal
2.
Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol ; 15(1): 79-88, 2022 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34806503

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Barrett's esophagus (BE) is an important risk factor for high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and/or esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). The effect of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) on the chemoprevention of HGD and/or EAC arising from BE remains controversial. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched. Risk ratios (RRs) or odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled by a random-effect model. Heterogeneity and its potential source were assessed. RESULTS: Fifteen studies with 26,291 BE patients were included. Meta-analysis of eight cohort studies showed that PPIs can significantly reduce the risk of HGD and/or EAC in BE patients (RR = 0.46; P < 0.001), but meta-analysis of six case-control studies showed no significant benefit of PPIs (OR = 0.64; P = 0.334). Heterogeneity was significant among both cohort and case-control studies, which might be attributed to the information sources of PPIs. There was no significant protective effect of high-dose PPIs on HGD and/or EAC in one RCT (RR = 0.84; P = 0.21), meta-analysis of two cohort studies (RR = 0.61; P = 0.28), or meta-analysis of two case-control studies (OR = 0.32; P = 0.08). CONCLUSIONS: Chemoprevention of HGD and/or EAC by PPIs may be considered in BE patients. However, there might not be further preventive effect of high-dose PPIs.


Asunto(s)
Adenocarcinoma , Esófago de Barrett , Neoplasias Esofágicas , Adenocarcinoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Adenocarcinoma/etiología , Adenocarcinoma/prevención & control , Esófago de Barrett/complicaciones , Esófago de Barrett/tratamiento farmacológico , Esófago de Barrett/patología , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Neoplasias Esofágicas/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Esofágicas/etiología , Neoplasias Esofágicas/prevención & control , Humanos , Inhibidores de la Bomba de Protones , Factores de Riesgo
3.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34221082

RESUMEN

METHODS: PubMed Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, China Biology Medicine disc, VIP, and Wanfang databases were searched. The primary outcome was treatment response. The secondary outcomes included changes in clinical and laboratory indicators and incidence of AP-related complications. Meta-analyses were performed by using a random-effect model. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) or weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% CIs were calculated. RESULTS: Overall, 23 RCTs were included. The rates of overall (RR = 1.16; 95% CI = 1.12 to 1.20; P < 0.00001) and complete (RR = 1.40; 95% CI = 1.30 to 1.50; P < 0.00001) responses were significantly higher in the Xuebijing injection group. After treatment, the levels of interleukin-6 (WMD = -18.22; 95% CI = -23.36 to -13.08; P < 0.00001), tumor necrosis factor-α (WMD = -16.44; 95% CI = -20.49 to -12.40; P < 0.00001), serum amylase (WMD = -105.61; 95% CI = -173.77 to -37.46; P=0.002), white blood cell (WMD = -1.51; 95% CI = -1.66 to -1.36; P < 0.00001), and C-reactive protein (WMD = -11.05; 95% CI = -14.32 to -7.78; P < 0.00001) were significantly lower in the Xuebijing injection group. Abdominal pain (WMD = -1.74; 95% CI = -1.96 to -1.52; P < 0.00001), abdominal distension (WMD = -1.56; 95% CI = -2.07 to -1.04; P < 0.00001), gastrointestinal function (WMD = -2.60; 95% CI = -3.07 to -2.13; P < 0.00001), body temperature (WMD = -2.16; 95% CI = -2.83 to -1.49; P < 0.00001), serum amylase level (WMD = -1.81; 95% CI = -2.66 to -0.96; P < 0.0001), and white blood cell (WMD = -2.16; 95% CI = -2.99 to -1.32; P < 0.00001) recovered more rapidly in the Xuebijing injection group. The incidence of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (RR = 0.18; 95% CI = 0.05 to 0.62; P=0.006), pancreatic pseudocyst (RR = 0.17; 95% CI = 0.04 to 0.77; P=0.02), and renal failure (RR = 0.16; 95% CI = 0.05 to 0.60; P=0.006) was significantly lower in the Xuebijing injection group. CONCLUSIONS: Xuebijing injection added on the basis of conventional treatment has a potential benefit for improving the outcomes of AP.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA