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

Bases de datos
País/Región como asunto
Tipo del documento
Asunto de la revista
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
BMC Pediatr ; 22(1): 392, 2022 07 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35787254

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children (MIS-C) is an emerging complication of COVID-19 which lacks a definitive diagnostic test and evidence-based guidelines for workup. We sought to assess practitioners' preferences when initiating a workup for pediatric patients presenting with symptoms concerning for MIS-C. METHODS: In a cross-sectional vignette-based survey, providers were presented with clinical vignettes of a patient presenting with 24 h of fever from a community with high rates of COVID-19. Respondents were asked about their general practices in pursuing a workup for potential MIS-C including testing obtained, criteria for diagnosis, and timing to confirm or rule out the diagnosis. RESULTS: Most of the 174 respondents were physicians from the United States at academic medical centers. The majority of providers would not initiate MIS-C workup for fever and non-specific symptoms unless the fever lasted more than 72 h. Skin rash, abdominal pain, and shortness of breath were symptoms that raised greatest concern for MIS-C. Most providers would obtain COVID-19 PCR or antigen testing, plus blood work, in the initial workup. The list of laboratory studies providers would obtain is extensive. Providers primarily rely on cardiac involvement to confirm a MIS-C diagnosis, and establishing a diagnosis takes 24-48 h. CONCLUSIONS: Significant heterogeneity exists amongst providers as to when to initiate the MIS-C workup, the order and content of the workup, and how to definitively diagnose MIS-C. A diagnostic test with high sensitivity and specificity for MIS-C and refined evidence-based guidelines are needed to expedite diagnosis and treatment.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/complicaciones , COVID-19/diagnóstico , Niño , Estudios Transversales , Humanos , Síndrome de Respuesta Inflamatoria Sistémica , Estados Unidos
2.
Ann Am Thorac Soc ; 21(1): 114-121, 2024 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37879037

RESUMEN

Rationale: The physiological factors modulating the severity of snoring have not been adequately described. Airway collapse or obstruction is generally the leading determinant of snore sound generation; however, we suspect that ventilatory drive is of equal importance. Objective: To determine the relationship between airway obstruction and ventilatory drive on snore loudness. Methods: In 40 patients with suspected or diagnosed obstructive sleep apnea (1-98 events/hr), airflow was recorded via a pneumotachometer attached to an oronasal mask, ventilatory drive was recorded using calibrated intraesophageal diaphragm electromyography, and snore loudness was recorded using a calibrated microphone attached over the trachea. "Obstruction" was taken as the ratio of ventilation to ventilatory drive and termed flow:drive, i.e., actual ventilation as a percentage of intended ventilation. Lower values reflect increased flow resistance. Using 165,063 breaths, mixed model analysis (quadratic regression) quantified snore loudness as a function of obstruction, ventilatory drive, and the presence of extreme obstruction (i.e., apneic occlusion). Results: In the presence of obstruction (flow:drive = 50%, i.e., doubled resistance), snore loudness increased markedly with increased drive (+3.4 [95% confidence interval, 3.3-3.5] dB per standard deviation [SD] change in ventilatory drive). However, the effect of drive was profoundly attenuated without obstruction (at flow:drive = 100%: +0.23 [0.08-0.39] dB per SD change in drive). Similarly, snore loudness increased with increasing obstruction exclusively in the presence of increased drive (at drive = 200% of eupnea: +2.1 [2.0-2.2] dB per SD change in obstruction; at eupneic drive: +0.14 [-0.08 to 0.28] dB per SD change). Further, snore loudness decreased substantially with extreme obstruction, defined as flow:drive <20% (-9.9 [-3.3 to -6.6] dB vs. unobstructed eupneic breathing). Conclusions: This study highlights that ventilatory drive, and not simply pharyngeal obstruction, modulates snore loudness. This new framework for characterizing the severity of snoring helps better understand the physiology of snoring and is important for the development of technologies that use snore sounds to characterize sleep-disordered breathing.


Asunto(s)
Síndromes de la Apnea del Sueño , Apnea Obstructiva del Sueño , Humanos , Ronquido/diagnóstico , Polisomnografía/métodos , Sonido
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA