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

Banco de datos
Tipo del documento
Asunto de la revista
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Surgery ; 139(3): 312-6, 2006 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-16546494

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Nothing by mouth (NPO) is the standard treatment for small-bowel obstruction. Whether oral medications should be prohibited during treatment of adhesive, partial small-bowel obstruction is unclear. The goal of this study was to determine whether a combination of specific oral medications in adhesive, partial small-bowel obstruction will decrease the need for operative intervention. METHODS: Of 266 consecutive adult patients with partial small-bowel obstruction admitted at a tertiary medical center, 236 were randomized into 2 groups. Group I patients were treated with intravenous hydration, nasogastric tube decompression, and NPO. Group II patients were placed on intravenous hydration, nasogastric tube decompression, and oral fluids incorporating an oral laxative, a digestant, and a defoaming agent. We compared differences between the groups in (1) the number of patients having a successful nonoperative treatment, (2) complications, and (3) recurrence of symptoms. RESULTS: A total of 116 and 120 patients comprised groups I and II, respectively. The number of patients treated successfully by a nonoperative approach was less in group I than in group II (77% vs 90%, P < .01). The complications and recurrence rate for groups I and II did not differ (4% vs 5% and 5% vs 4%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The NPO status for patients with adhesive, partial small-bowel obstruction may not be necessary. This cocktail of oral medications can decrease the need for operative intervention in patients with presumed adhesive, partial small-bowel obstruction.


Asunto(s)
Antiespumantes/administración & dosificación , Catárticos/administración & dosificación , Fluidoterapia , Fármacos Gastrointestinales/administración & dosificación , Obstrucción Intestinal/tratamiento farmacológico , Administración Oral , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Antiespumantes/uso terapéutico , Catárticos/uso terapéutico , Femenino , Fármacos Gastrointestinales/uso terapéutico , Humanos , Obstrucción Intestinal/cirugía , Intestino Delgado/patología , Intubación Gastrointestinal , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Recurrencia , Resultado del Tratamiento
2.
CMAJ ; 173(10): 1165-9, 2005 Nov 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-16275967

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Patients with partial adhesive small-bowel obstruction are usually managed conservatively, receiving intravenous hydration and nothing by mouth. Previous studies have suggested that this approach is associated with longer hospital stays and an increased risk of delayed surgery. We conducted a randomized controlled trial to see if combining standard conservative treatment with oral administration of a laxative, a digestant and a defoaming agent would reduce the frequency of subsequent surgical intervention and reduce the length of hospital stay. METHODS: We identified 144 consecutive patients admitted between February 2000 and July 2001 with adhesive partial small-bowel obstruction and randomly assigned 128 who met the inclusion criteria to either the control group (intravenous hydration, nasogastric-tube decompression and nothing by mouth) or the intervention group (intravenous hydration, nasogastric-tube decompression and oral therapy with magnesium oxide, Lactobacillus acidophilus and simethicone). The primary outcome measures were the number of patients whose obstruction was successfully treated without surgery and the length of hospital stay. We also monitored rates of complications and recurring obstructions. RESULTS: Of the 128 patients, 63 were in the control group and 65 in the intervention group; the mean ages were 54.4 (standard deviation [SD] 15.9) years and 53.9 (SD 16.3) years respectively. Most of the patients were male. More patients in the intervention group than in the control group had successful treatment without surgery (59 [91%] v. 48 [76%], p = 0.03; relative risk 1.19, 95% confidence interval 1.03-1.40). The mean hospital stay was significantly longer among patients in the control group than among those in the intervention group (4.2 [SD 2.7] v. 1.0 [SD 0.7] days, p < 0.001). The complication and recurrence rates did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. INTERPRETATION: Oral therapy with magnesium oxide, L. acidophilus and simethicone was effective in hastening the resolution of conservatively treated partial adhesive small-bowel obstruction and shortening the hospital stay.


Asunto(s)
Antiácidos/uso terapéutico , Antiespumantes/uso terapéutico , Obstrucción Intestinal/terapia , Óxido de Magnesio/uso terapéutico , Simeticona/uso terapéutico , Administración Oral , Adulto , Anciano , Femenino , Fluidoterapia , Humanos , Intubación Gastrointestinal , Lactobacillus acidophilus , Tiempo de Internación , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Resultado del Tratamiento
3.
PLoS One ; 10(7): e0130655, 2015.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26154286

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Current research suggests that administration of vasopressin to patients with uncontrolled hemorrhagic shock (UHS) can avoid the detrimental effects associated with aggressive fluid resuscitation. However, vasopressin has a short half-life of 10~35 minutes in in vivo use and precludes its use in the pre-hospital setting. To increase the half-life of vasopressin, we proposed to synthesize liposome-encapsulated vasopressin and test it in a rat model of UHS. METHODS: The film hydration method was used to prepare liposomal vasopressin consisting of: Dipalmitoylphosphatidylcholine, cholesterol, and dipalmitoyl phosphatidylethanolamine (20:20:1 mole ratio). 42 rats were subjected to UHS and randomly received 5 different treatments (vasopressin, liposomal vasopressin, lactate ringer (LR), liposome only and sham). Outcome of UHS were measured using 4 common prognostic tests: mean arterial pressure (MAP), serum lactate level, inflammatory profile and pulmonary edema. RESULTS: The dynamic light scattering results confirmed that we had prepared a successful liposomal vasopressin complex. Comparing the serum vasopressin concentration of liposomal vasopressin and vasopressin treated animals by ELISA, we found that the concentration of vasopressin for the liposomal vasopressin treated group is higher at 60 minutes. However, there was no significant difference between the MAP profile of rats treated with vasopressin and liposomal vasopressin in UHS. We also observed that animals treated with liposomal vasopressin performed indifferently to vasopressin treated rats in serum lactate level, inflammatory profile and edema profile. For most of our assays, the liposome only control behaves similarly to LR resuscitation in UHS rats. CONCLUSION: We have synthesized a liposomal vasopressin complex that can prolong the serum concentration of vasopressin in a rat model of UHS. Although UHS rats treated with either liposomal vasopressin or vasopressin showed no statistical differences, it would be worthwhile to repeat the experiments with different liposomal compositions.


Asunto(s)
Liposomas/química , Resucitación/métodos , Choque Hemorrágico/fisiopatología , Choque Hemorrágico/terapia , Vasopresinas/uso terapéutico , 1,2-Dipalmitoilfosfatidilcolina/química , Animales , Colesterol/química , Modelos Animales de Enfermedad , Fluidoterapia , Interleucina-6/sangre , Soluciones Isotónicas/química , Luz , Masculino , Fosfatidiletanolaminas/química , Edema Pulmonar , Ratas , Ratas Wistar , Lactato de Ringer , Dispersión de Radiación , Factor de Necrosis Tumoral alfa/sangre , Vasopresinas/química
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA