Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Más filtros




Base de datos
Asunto de la revista
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Am J Cardiol ; 218: 34-42, 2024 05 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38432336

RESUMEN

Radial artery occlusion (RAO) is a major impediment to reintervention in patients who underwent proximal transradial access (p-TRA) for coronary catheterization. Distal transradial access (d-TRA) at the level of snuffbox distal to the radial artery bifurcation is a novel alternative to p-TRA. We conducted an updated meta-analysis of all available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the incidence of RAO between p-TRA and d-TRA, along with access site-related complications. PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched for RCTs published since 2017 to October 2023 comparing d-TRA and p-TRA for coronary angiography and/or intervention. Risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using the random-effects model for procedural and clinical outcomes for the 2 approaches. A total of 18 RCTs with 8,205 patients (d-TRA n = 4,096, p-TRA n = 4,109) were included. The risk of RAO (RR 0.31, 0.21 to 0.46, p ≤0.001) and time to hemostasis (minutes) (MD -51.18, -70.62 to -31.73, p <0.001) was significantly lower in the d-TRA group. Crossover rates (RR 2.39, 1.71 to 3.32, p <0.001), access time (minutes) (MD 0.93, 0.50 to 1.37, p <0.001), procedural pain (MD 0.46, 0.13 to 0.79, p = 0.006), and multiple puncture attempts (RR 2.13, 1.10 to 4.11, p = 0.03) were significantly higher in the d-TRA group. The use of d-TRA for coronary angiography and/or intervention is associated with a lower risk of RAO at the forearm and may preserve p-TRA site for reintervention in selective patients by reducing the incidence of RAO.


Asunto(s)
Arteriopatías Oclusivas , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Humanos , Angiografía Coronaria/efectos adversos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Arteria Radial , Arteriopatías Oclusivas/epidemiología , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Resultado del Tratamiento
2.
Am J Cardiol ; 201: 260-267, 2023 08 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37393728

RESUMEN

Patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with concomitant atrial fibrillation (AF) are at a higher risk for thromboembolic and bleeding events. The optimal antithrombotic strategy for patients with AF after TAVI remains unclear. We sought to determine the comparative efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) versus oral vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in these patients. Electronic databases such as PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases were searched till January 31, 2023, for relevant studies evaluating clinical outcomes of VKA versus DOAC in patients with AF after TAVI. Outcomes assessed were (1) all-cause mortality, (2) stroke, (3) major/life-threatening bleeding, and (4) any bleeding. Hazard ratios (HRs) were pooled in meta-analysis using random effect model. Nine studies (2 randomized and 7 observational) were included in systematic review, and 8 studies with 25,769 patients were eligible to be included in the meta-analysis. The mean age of the patients was 82.1 years, and 48.3% were male. Pooled analysis using random-effects model showed no statistically significant difference in all-cause mortality (HR 0.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76 to 1.10, p = 0.33), stroke (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.16, p = 0.70), and major/life-threatening bleeding (HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.35, p = 0.70) in patients that received DOAC compared with oral VKA. Risk of any bleeding was lower in the DOAC group compared with oral VKA (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.91, p = 0.0001). In patients with AF, DOACs appear to be a safe alternative oral anticoagulation strategy to oral VKA after TAVI. Further randomized studies are required to confirm the role of DOACs in those patients.


Asunto(s)
Fibrilación Atrial , Accidente Cerebrovascular , Reemplazo de la Válvula Aórtica Transcatéter , Humanos , Masculino , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Femenino , Fibrilación Atrial/complicaciones , Fibrilación Atrial/tratamiento farmacológico , Fibrilación Atrial/cirugía , Reemplazo de la Válvula Aórtica Transcatéter/efectos adversos , Fibrinolíticos/uso terapéutico , Anticoagulantes/uso terapéutico , Accidente Cerebrovascular/epidemiología , Accidente Cerebrovascular/etiología , Accidente Cerebrovascular/prevención & control , Hemorragia/inducido químicamente , Hemorragia/epidemiología , Hemorragia/complicaciones , Vitamina K , Administración Oral , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto
3.
Integr Med Res ; 6(1): 66-78, 2017 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28462146

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Jawarish Jalinoos (JJ) is a classical semisolid traditional Unani formulation clinically used for the treatment of weakness of vital organs, liver, and stomach. Although JJ has been widely used clinically for several decades, no scientific report is available for its safety. METHODS: JJ and its sugar-free tablet version (SFJJ; formulated to target diabetic population) were assessed for safety in rats. Ninety-day repeated dose oral toxicity study was performed as per the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Guideline 408. JJ was orally administered at the dose of 2000 mg/kg bw/d, whereas SFJJ was orally administered at the doses of 506 mg/kg body weight (bw)/d, 1012 mg/kg bw/d, and 2024 mg/kg bw/d for 90 days. The animals were periodically observed for clinical signs of toxicity, mortality, morbidity, body weight changes, and feed consumption. At the end of the study, hematology, clinical biochemistry, electrolytes, gross pathology, relative organ weight, and histological examination were performed. RESULTS: Treatment with SFJJ and JJ showed no significant differences in body weight gain, feed consumption, hematology, clinical biochemistry, and serum electrolytes. No gross pathological findings and differences in relative organ weights were observed between control and drug treated rats. Histological examination revealed no toxicologically significant abnormalities related with SFJJ or JJ treatment. CONCLUSION: The 90-day repeated dose oral toxicity study demonstrates that the no observed adverse effect level of SFJJ and JJ is greater than 2024 mg/kg bw/d and 2000 mg/kg bw/d (p.o.) in rats, respectively. Both formulations were found to be safe up to the tested dose levels and experimental conditions, and therefore safe for clinical use as specified in the literature.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA