Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
1.
J Vasc Access ; 12(4): 292-305, 2011.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21534233

ABSTRACT

The use of totally implantable venous access devices in radiology may be associated with complications such as occlusion of the system (because of the high density of some contrast), infection (if the port is not handled in aseptic conditions, using proper barrier protections), and mechanical complications due to the high-pressure administration of contrast by automatic injectors (so-called power injector), including extravasation of contrast media into the soft tissues, subintimal venous or myocardial injection, or serious damage to the device itself (breakage of the external connections, dislocation of the non-coring needle, or breakage of the catheter). The last problem - i.e., the damage of the device from a power injection - is not an unjustified fear, but a reality. A warning by the US Food and Drug Administration of July 2004 reports around 250 complications of this kind, referring to both port and central venous catheters and peripherally inserted central catheter systems, which occurred over a period of several years; in all cases, the damage occurred during the injection of contrast material by means of power injectors for computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging procedures. Though the risk associated with the use of ports in radiodiagnostics is thus clear, it has been suggested that administration of the contrast material via the port may have some advantage in terms of image quality, increased comfort for the patient, and maybe more accurate reproducibility of the patient's own follow-up exams. This contention needs to be supported by evidence. Also, since many cancer patients who need frequent computed tomography studies already have totally implantable systems, it would seem reasonable to try to define how and when such systems may safely be used. The purpose of this consensus statement is to define recommendations based on the best available evidence, for the safe use of implantable ports in radiodiagnostics.


Subject(s)
Catheterization, Central Venous/instrumentation , Catheters, Indwelling , Contrast Media , Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Interventional/instrumentation , Radiography, Interventional/instrumentation , Catheterization, Central Venous/adverse effects , Catheterization, Central Venous/standards , Catheters, Indwelling/adverse effects , Catheters, Indwelling/standards , Contrast Media/administration & dosage , Equipment Design , Equipment Failure , Humans , Injections , Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Interventional/adverse effects , Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Interventional/standards , Patient Safety , Predictive Value of Tests , Pressure , Radiography, Interventional/adverse effects , Radiography, Interventional/standards , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors
2.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med ; 168(12): 1432-7, 2003 Dec 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-12958051

ABSTRACT

Studies employing noninvasive pressure support ventilation in cardiogenic pulmonary edema have been performed in the intensive care unit when overt respiratory failure is already present and in small groups of patients. In this multicenter study, performed in emergency departments, 130 patients with acute respiratory failure were randomized to receive medical therapy plus O2 (65 patients) or noninvasive pressure support ventilation (65 patients). The primary end point was the need for intubation; secondary end points were in-hospital mortality and changes in some physiological variables. Noninvasive pressure support ventilation improved PaO2/FIO2, respiratory rate, and dyspnea significantly faster. Intubation rate, hospital mortality, and duration of hospital stay were similar in the two groups. In the subgroup of hypercapnic patients noninvasive pressure support ventilation improved PaCO2 significantly faster and reduced the intubation rate compared with medical therapy (2 of 33 versus 9 of 31; p=0.015). Adverse events, including myocardial infarction, were evenly distributed in the two groups. We conclude that during acute respiratory failure due to cardiogenic pulmonary edema the early use of noninvasive pressure support ventilation accelerates the improvement in PaO2/FIO2, PaCO2, dyspnea, and respiratory rate, but does not affect the overall clinical outcome. Noninvasive pressure support ventilation does, however, reduce the intubation rate in the subgroup of hypercapnic patients.


Subject(s)
Heart Diseases/complications , Positive-Pressure Respiration/methods , Pulmonary Edema/therapy , Respiratory Insufficiency/therapy , Acute Disease , Dyspnea/therapy , Emergency Service, Hospital , Feasibility Studies , Humans , Hypercapnia/therapy , Intubation, Intratracheal , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy/methods , Prospective Studies , Pulmonary Edema/etiology , Respiration , Respiratory Function Tests , Respiratory Insufficiency/etiology , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL