RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to retrospectively evaluate the effect of plasmapheresis treatment concomitant with chemotherapy and the number of sessions on renal improvement and survival in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) presenting with acute kidney injury (AKI). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis was performed on 55 newly diagnosed MM patients who were presented with AKI to the Hematology Clinic of University of the Health Sciences Antalya Training and Research Hospital between 2013 and 2021. RESULTS: The study included 55 patients between 39 and 91 years of age and comprised 22 (40%) women and 33 (60%) men. Forty-eight (87.3%) patients were treated with plasmapheresis and chemotherapy. Based on the median number of plasmapheresis sessions, the patients were grouped as ≤ 3 and > 3. A significant difference was observed in both groups between the mean values of repeated measurements at the time of diagnosis, after completion of plasmapheresis treatment, and at 1 month of plasmapheresis, when statistics of differences were evaluated for urea, creatinine, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (ml/min), total protein, albumin, and globulin (p < 0.05); however, there was no difference between these parameters and the number of plasmapheresis sessions. The 1.16 (0.56-2.38) fold higher risk of ex found in patients with ≤ 3 plasmapheresis sessions compared to those with > 3 was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: It was observed that plasmapheresis is beneficial in the short term for renal recovery in the treatment of MM with AKI and that > 3 plasmapheresis sessions have no superior effectiveness in renal improvement or survival.
Assuntos
Injúria Renal Aguda , Mieloma Múltiplo , Masculino , Humanos , Feminino , Mieloma Múltiplo/complicações , Mieloma Múltiplo/terapia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Injúria Renal Aguda/etiologia , Injúria Renal Aguda/terapia , Rim , Plasmaferese/efeitos adversosRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: It is still debatable whether diagnostic coronary angiography (CA) or percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) increase radiation exposure when performed via radial approach as compared to femoral approach. This question was investigated in this study by comparison of dose-area product (DAP), reference air kerma (RAK), and fluoroscopy time (FT) among radial and femoral approaches. METHODS: All coronary procedures between November 2015 and November 2017 were assessed; and 4215 coronary procedures were enrolled in the study. Patients with bifurcation, chronic total occlusion, cardiogenic shock, or prior coronary artery bypass surgery were excluded. These 4215 procedures were evaluated for three different categories: diagnostic CA (Group I), PCI in patients with stable angina (Group II), and PCI in patients with ACS (Group III). RESULTS: Age was significantly higher in the femoral arm of all groups. Among patients in the radial arm of Groups I and II, males were over-represented. Therefore, a multiple linear regression analysis with stepwise method was performed. After adjusting these clinical confounders, there was no significant difference with regard to DAP, RAK, and FT between femoral and radial access in Group I. In contrast, PCI via radial access was significantly associated with increased DAP, RAK, and FT in Groups II and III. CONCLUSION: In spite of an increased experience with trans-radial approach, PCI of coronary lesions via radial route was associated with a relatively small but significant radiation exposure in our study. Compared to femoral access, diagnostic CA via radial access was not related to an increased radiation exposure.