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











Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Ann Vasc Surg ; 49: 64-74, 2018 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29486230

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Limited guidelines for the treatment and management of acute and chronic iliocaval thrombosis are published in the literature. The purpose of this report is to present global iliocaval stent reconstruction practices by interventionalists. METHODS: A 45-question survey focusing on iliocaval stent reconstruction evaluation was distributed through the Open Forum and Venous Disease Service Line of the Society of Interventional Radiology Connect website from June 20, 2017 until September 7, 2017 and the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe electronic newsletter on August 11, 2017. RESULTS: One hundred seven complete responses were received from interventional radiologists in the United States, 2 from South America, and 2 from Central America. 92.5% performed iliocaval reconstruction, and 79.8% performed the procedure for both acute and chronic iliocaval thrombosis. 82.8% completed a standardized physician assessment tool, and 91.9% obtained computed tomography (CT) venography before the procedure. 64.6% used intravascular ultrasound to guide reconstruction. 41.4% found blunt recanalization successful for >75% of patients. 63.6% used sharp recanalization for <25% of patients. 97.0% and 90.9% used uncovered and self-expanding stents, respectively. Wallstents were used most commonly. Most common stent diameters were 24-mm in the inferior vena cava, 14-mm in the common iliac vein, and 12-mm in the external iliac vein. 48.5% and 21.2% prescribed 2 and 3 anticoagulants after stent placement, respectively. 62.6% found iliocaval reconstruction provided symptomatic clinical improvement for iliocaval thrombosis in >75% of patients. 72.7% estimated their 1-year primary stent patency to be >75%. CONCLUSIONS: Iliocaval reconstruction is performed by many interventionalists; however, there are global inconsistencies in practices, suggesting a need for further research and guideline development.


Asunto(s)
Procedimientos Endovasculares/tendencias , Vena Ilíaca , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/tendencias , Stents/tendencias , Vena Cava Inferior , Trombosis de la Vena/terapia , Anticoagulantes/uso terapéutico , América Central , Angiografía por Tomografía Computarizada/tendencias , Procedimientos Endovasculares/efectos adversos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/instrumentación , Encuestas de Atención de la Salud , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/tendencias , Humanos , Vena Ilíaca/diagnóstico por imagen , Vena Ilíaca/fisiopatología , Flebografía/tendencias , Punciones/tendencias , América del Sur , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Ultrasonografía Intervencional/tendencias , Estados Unidos , Grado de Desobstrucción Vascular , Filtros de Vena Cava/tendencias , Vena Cava Inferior/diagnóstico por imagen , Vena Cava Inferior/fisiopatología , Trombosis de la Vena/diagnóstico por imagen , Trombosis de la Vena/fisiopatología
2.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 96(12): e6449, 2017 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28328857

RESUMEN

Inferior vena cava filter (IVCF) placement appears to be expanding over time despite absence of clear directing evidence.Two populations were studied. The first population included patients who received an IVCF between January 2005 and August 2013 at our community hospital center. Demographic information, indications for placement, and retrieval rate was recorded among other variables. The second population comprised of patients receiving an IVCF from 2005 to 2012 according to the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) using ICD-9CM coding. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on the year of admission for comparison, that is, first group from 2005 to 2008 and the second from 2009 to 2012. In addition, we analyzed annual trends in filter placement, acute venothromboembolic events (VTE) and several underlying comorbidities within this population.At our center, 802 IVCFs were placed (55.2% retrievable); 34% for absolute, 61% for relative, and 5% for prophylactic indications. Major bleeding (27.5%), minor self-limited bleeding (13.7%), and fall history (11.2%) were the commonest indications. Periprocedural complication rate was 0.7%, and filter retrieval rate was 7%. The NIS population (811,487 filters) saw a decline in IVCF placement after year 2009, following an initial uptrend (Ptrend < 0.01). IVCF use among patients with neither acute VTE nor bleeding among prior VTE saw a 3-fold absolute reduction from 2005 to 2012 (33,075-11,655; Ptrend < 0.01). Patients from 2009 to 2012 were more likely to be male and had higher rates of acute VTE, thrombolytic use, cancer, bleeding, hypotension, acute cardiorespiratory failure, shock, prior falls, blood product transfusion, hospital mortality including higher Charlson comorbidity scores. The patients were younger, had shorter length of stay, and were less likely to be associated with strokes including hemorrhagic or require ventilator support. Prior falls (adjusted odds ratio-aOR 2.8), thrombolytic use (aOR 1.76), and shock (aOR 1.45) were most predictive of IVCF placement between 2009 and 2012 on regression analysis.Recent trends suggest that a higher proportion of patients receive temporary IVCF, for predominantly relative indications. Nationally, the number of filters being placed is decreasing, especially among those who did not experience acute VTE or bleeding events. Prior falls, thrombolytic therapy, and shock were most predictive of IVCF placement in latter half of the study period.


Asunto(s)
Hemorragia/cirugía , Embolia Pulmonar/prevención & control , Filtros de Vena Cava/estadística & datos numéricos , Tromboembolia Venosa/cirugía , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Comorbilidad , Remoción de Dispositivos , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Factores Sexuales , Factores Socioeconómicos
3.
Contraception ; 74(5): 389-93, 2006 Nov.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17046380

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: National and international contraceptive guidelines reflect expert opinion that recommends against the use of estrogen-containing hormonal contraception in the early postpartum period. This study was undertaken to estimate providers' practices in prescribing hormonal contraception to breastfeeding women. METHODS: A 19-item survey was mailed to 397 obstetrician gynecologists, midwives and family physicians in the state of New Mexico. The survey included items covering attitudes about the impact of hormonal contraception on breastfeeding and prescribing practices. One hundred ninety-nine (50%) providers completed the survey. RESULTS: The majority (70%) of providers prescribe progestin-only contraceptive methods to breastfeeding women within the first 6 weeks. Despite these recommendations, a sizable minority of providers prescribe combined pills in the early postpartum period: 27% of providers have prescribed combined pills and 13% of providers, mostly those in a university setting, routinely recommend them within the first 6 weeks postpartum. CONCLUSION: Most providers follow expert recommendations regarding the initiation of hormonal contraception for breastfeeding women.


Asunto(s)
Lactancia Materna , Anticonceptivos Femeninos/administración & dosificación , Adhesión a Directriz , Adulto , Femenino , Personal de Salud , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , New Mexico , Periodo Posparto , Progestinas/administración & dosificación , Encuestas y Cuestionarios
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA