Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther ; 20(7): 581-588, 2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35770517

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has emerged as a safe and effective alternative to surgical replacement for tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) stenosis. However, utilization of TAVI for aortic stenosis in bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) compared to TAV remains controversial. METHODS: We queried online databases with various keywords to identify relevant articles. We compared major cardiovascular events and procedural outcomes using a random effect model to calculate odds ratios (OR). RESULTS: We included a total of 22 studies comprising 189,693 patients (BAV 12,669 vs. TAV 177,024). In the pooled analysis, there were no difference in TAVI for BAV vs. TAV for all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), vascular complications, acute kidney injury (AKI), coronary occlusion, annulus rupture, and reintervention/reoperation between the groups. The incidence of stroke (OR 1.24; 95% CI 1.1-1.39), paravalvular leak (PVLR) (OR 1.42; 95% CI 1.26-1.61), and the need for pacemaker (OR 1.15; 95% CI 1.06-1.26) was less in the TAV group compared to the BAV group, while incidence of life-threatening bleeding was higher in the TAV group. Subgroup analysis mirrored pooled outcomes except for all-cause mortality. CONCLUSION: The use of TAVI for the treatment of aortic stenosis in selective BAV appears to be safe and effective.


Subject(s)
Aortic Valve Stenosis , Bicuspid Aortic Valve Disease , Heart Valve Diseases , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement , Aortic Valve/surgery , Aortic Valve Stenosis/surgery , Constriction, Pathologic/surgery , Heart Valve Diseases/surgery , Humans , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/adverse effects , Treatment Outcome
2.
Cogn Behav Neurol ; 35(3): 155-168, 2022 09 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35507449

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Abbreviated neurocognitive tests offer a practical alternative to full-length versions but often lack clear interpretive guidelines, thereby limiting their clinical utility. OBJECTIVE: To replicate validity cutoffs for the Boston Naming Test-Short Form (BNT-15) and to introduce a clinical classification system for the BNT-15 as a measure of object-naming skills. METHOD: We collected data from 43 university students and 46 clinical patients. Classification accuracy was computed against psychometrically defined criterion groups. Clinical classification ranges were developed using a z -score transformation. RESULTS: Previously suggested validity cutoffs (≤11 and ≤12) produced comparable classification accuracy among the university students. However, a more conservative cutoff (≤10) was needed with the clinical patients to contain the false-positive rate (0.20-0.38 sensitivity at 0.92-0.96 specificity). As a measure of cognitive ability, a perfect BNT-15 score suggests above average performance; ≤11 suggests clinically significant deficits. Demographically adjusted prorated BNT-15 T-scores correlated strongly (0.86) with the newly developed z -scores. CONCLUSION: Given its brevity (<5 minutes), ease of administration and scoring, the BNT-15 can function as a useful and cost-effective screening measure for both object-naming/English proficiency and performance validity. The proposed clinical classification ranges provide useful guidelines for practitioners.


Subject(s)
Neuropsychological Tests , Humans , Language Tests
3.
Psychiatry Res ; 298: 113651, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33618234

ABSTRACT

This study was designed to cross-validate the V-5, a quick psychiatric screener, across administration formats and levels of examinee acculturation. The V-5 was administered twice (once at the beginning and once at the end of the testing session) to three samples (N = 277) with varying levels of symptom severity and English language proficiency, varying type of administration, alongside traditional self-reported symptom inventories as criterion measures. The highest rest-retest reliability was observed on the Depression (.84) and Pain scales (.85). The V-5 was sensitive to the variability in symptom severity. Classification accuracy was driven by the base rate of the target construct, and was invariant across administration format (in-person or online) or level of English proficiency. The V-5 demonstrated promise as a cross-culturally robust screening instrument that is sensitive to change over time, lends itself to online administration, and is suitable for examinees with limited English proficiency.


Subject(s)
Mental Disorders , Humans , Language , Pain Measurement , Psychometrics , Reproducibility of Results , Surveys and Questionnaires
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...