Análise de diagnósticos, intervenções e atividades de enfermagem em pacientes submetidos à hemodiálise secundária à COVID-19: estudo descritivo / Analysis of nursing diagnoses, interventions, and activities in patients undergoing hemodialysis secondary to COVID-19: a descriptive study

OBJETIVO: Analisar os diagnósticos, as intervenções e atividades de enfermagem em pacientes submetidos à hemodiálise secundária à COVID-19. MÉTODO: Estudo descritivo, retrospectivo e de natureza quantitativa. A população do estudo foi representada pelos prontuários de pacientes submetidos à hemodiálise secundária à COVID-19, totalizando cerca de 64 registros. Consultaram-se os dados do instrumento de coleta de dados, bem como dados sociodemográficos, clínicos e indicadores dos diagnósticos de enfermagem. Para análise, utilizou-se da estatística descritiva e inferencial. RESULTADOS: Os principais diagnósticos de enfermagem encontrados foram: risco de infecção, risco de volume de líquidos desequilibrado, déficit no autocuidado para banho/higiene íntima e troca de gases prejudicada. As intervenções e atividades assinaladas foram correspondentes aos diagnósticos traçados. CONCLUSÃO: O estudo possibilitou identificar os principais diagnósticos, as intervenções e atividades de enfermagem em pacientes acometidos pela COVID-19 que desenvolveram lesão renal aguda.

Objective: To analyze nursing diagnoses, interventions, and activities in patients undergoing hemodialysis secondary to COVID-19. METHOD: This is a descriptive, retrospective, and quantitative study. The study population was represented by the medical records of patients undergoing hemodialysis secondary to COVID-19, totaling about 64 records. Data from the data collection instrument, sociodemographic and clinical data, and indicators of nursing diagnoses were consulted. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used for analysis. RESULTS: The main nursing diagnoses found were risk for infection, risk for imbalanced fluid volume, bathing/toileting self-care deficit, and impaired gas exchange. The registered interventions and activities corresponded to the outlined diagnoses. CONCLUSION: The study identified the main diagnoses, interventions, and nursing activities in patients affected by COVID-19 who developed acute kidney injury.

Atrial Fibrillation in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19: Incidence, Predictors, Outcomes, and Comparison to Influenza.

OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study is to determine the incidence, predictors, and outcomes of atrial fibrillation (AF) or atrial flutter (AFL) in patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). BACKGROUND: COVID-19 results in increased inflammatory markers previously associated with atrial arrhythmias. However, little is known about their incidence or specificity in COVID-19 or their association with outcomes. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of 3,970 patients admitted with polymerase chain reaction-positive COVID-19 between February 4 and April 22, 2020, with manual review performed of 1,110. The comparator arm included 1,420 patients with influenza hospitalized between January 1, 2017, and January 1, 2020. RESULTS: Among 3,970 inpatients with COVID-19, the incidence of AF/AFL was 10% (n = 375) and in patients without a history of atrial arrhythmias it was 4% (n = 146). Patients with new-onset AF/AFL were older with increased inflammatory markers including interleukin 6 (93 vs. 68 pg/ml; p < 0.01), and more myocardial injury (troponin-I: 0.2 vs. 0.06 ng/ml; p < 0.01). AF and AFL were associated with increased mortality (46% vs. 26%; p < 0.01). Manual review captured a somewhat higher incidence of AF/AFL (13%, n = 140). Compared to inpatients with COVID-19, patients with influenza (n = 1,420) had similar rates of AF/AFL (12%, n = 163) but lower mortality. The presence of AF/AFL correlated with similarly increased mortality in both COVID-19 (relative risk: 1.77) and influenza (relative risk: 1.78). CONCLUSIONS: AF/AFL occurs in a subset of patients hospitalized with either COVID-19 or influenza and is associated with inflammation and disease severity in both infections. The incidence and associated increase in mortality in both cohorts suggests that AF/AFL is not specific to COVID-19, but is rather a generalized response to the systemic inflammation of severe viral illnesses.

Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Heart Failure: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

This article has been corrected. The original version (PDF) is appended to this article as a Supplement. Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) frequently coexist and are associated with increased morbidity and mortality risk. Purpose: To compare benefits and harms between catheter ablation and drug therapy in adult patients with AF and HF. Data Sources: ClinicalTrials.gov, PubMed, Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics), EBSCO Information Services, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Google Scholar, and various scientific conference sessions from 1 January 2005 to 1 October 2018. Study Selection: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in English that had at least 6 months of follow-up and compared clinical outcomes of catheter ablation versus drug therapy in adults with AF and HF. Data Extraction: 2 investigators independently extracted data and assessed study quality. Data Synthesis: 6 RCTs involving 775 patients met inclusion criteria. Compared with drug therapy, AF ablation reduced all-cause mortality (9.0% vs. 17.6%; risk ratio [RR], 0.52 [95% CI, 0.33 to 0.81]) and HF hospitalizations (16.4% vs. 27.6%; RR, 0.60 [CI, 0.39 to 0.93]). Ablation improved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (mean difference, 6.95% [CI, 3.0% to 10.9%]), 6-minute walk test distance (mean difference, 20.93 m [CI, 5.91 to 35.95 m]), peak oxygen consumption (Vo2max) (mean difference, 3.17 mL/kg per minute [CI, 1.26 to 5.07 mL/kg per minute]), and quality of life (mean difference in Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire score, -9.02 points [CI, -19.75 to 1.71 points]). Serious adverse events were more common in the ablation groups, although differences between the ablation and drug therapy groups were not statistically significant (7.2% vs. 3.8%; RR, 1.68 [CI, 0.58 to 4.85]). Limitation: Results driven primarily by 1 clinical trial, possible patient selection bias in the ablation group, lack of patient-level data, open-label trial designs, and heterogeneous follow-up length among trials. Conclusion: Catheter ablation was superior to conventional drug therapy in improving all-cause mortality, HF hospitalizations, LVEF, 6-minute walk test distance, Vo2max, and quality of life, with no statistically significant increase in serious adverse events. Primary Funding Source: None.

Synchronous colorectal liver metastases: a national survey of surgeon opinions on simultaneous resection and multidisciplinary cooperation.

BACKGROUND: The management of patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastases (sCRLM) has evolved significantly (improved chemotherapy, hepatic surgery advancements, colonic stenting, consultation synergies). We sought to better understand surgeon viewpoints on optimal referral patterns and the delivery of simultaneous resections. METHODS: A 40 question on-line survey was offered to members of the Canadian surgical community. Statistical analysis was descriptive. RESULTS: A total of 52 surgeons responded. Most colorectal surgeons (CRS) had access to and a good working relationship with regional hepatobiliary (HPB) surgeons (86%) and medical oncologists (100%). The majority (92%) believed there was a role for simultaneous resection of sCRLM, with 69% having first hand experience. Many CRS (62%) discussed all cases of known hepatic metastases with HPB prior to any resection. When a lesion was asymptomatic/minimally symptomatic, most CRS (92%) discussed them with medical oncology/HPB prior to resection (8%). Bilobar metastases (58%), patient comorbidities (35%), portal lymphadenopathy (35%), and patient age (15%) restricted CRS from obtaining HPB consultations. Many CRS (46%) did not believe that resecting hepatic metastases prior to the primary lesion might be beneficial. Most CRS (60%) reported they could not accurately predict hepatic resectability, with only 27% familiarity with evidence-based guidelines. Despite working in smaller hospitals with less access to HPB and less experience with simultaneous resections, non-CR general surgeons more commonly supported a 'liver-first' approach. CONCLUSIONS: There was general agreement between CRS and general surgeons on numerous topics, but additional education is required with regard to HPB surgical capabilities and to provide truly individualized patient-centered care.

Outcomes of Ventricular Tachycardia Ablation Using Percutaneous Left Ventricular Assist Devices.

BACKGROUND: Although percutaneous left ventricular assist devices (pLVADs) facilitate mapping and ablation of hemodynamically unstable ventricular tachycardia (VT), there is limited data whether clinical outcomes are improved. We sought to retrospectively compare the outcomes of patients undergoing scar-related VT ablation with and without pLVAD support. METHODS AND RESULTS: The study population comprised 194 patients (109 pLVAD and 85 non-pLVAD). The pLVAD group more often had dilated cardiomyopathy (33% versus 13%; P=0.001), New York Heart Association heart failure class ≥III (51% versus 25%; P<0.001), lower left ventricular ejection fractions (26±10% versus 39±16%; P<0.001), and electrical storm (49% versus 34%; P=0.04). Procedure times (422±112 versus 330±92 minutes; P<0.001), postablation VT inducibility (20% versus 7%; P=0.02), and length of subsequent hospitalization (median 6 versus 4 days; P=0.001) were all higher in the pLVAD group. During median follow-up of 215 days, the primary end point (recurrent VT, heart transplantation, or death) occurred in 36% of the pLVAD versus 26% of the non-pLVAD groups (P=0.14). After propensity matching for differences between groups, no differences were seen between groups for both acute procedural outcomes and the primary end point. CONCLUSIONS: In this large single-center scar-related VT ablation experience, despite the worse clinical status of the patients selected for pLVAD support, clinical outcomes were better than expected and were similar to healthier patients not receiving hemodynamic support. Patients with dilated cardiomyopathy presenting with electrical storm, advanced heart failure, and severe left ventricular dysfunction most frequently received hemodynamic support during VT ablation.

Safe resumption of electroconvulsive therapy after non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction.

We present the case of a 69-year-old woman with psychotic depression who suffered a non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction at her first electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). Her course of ECT was resumed 19 days later, and she was able to complete it without further problems. Her depression remitted fully. We report the details of her cardiac management during subsequent treatment sessions and review the literature on cardiac adverse events with ECT.

Canadian consensus conference on the development of training and practice standards in advanced minimally invasive surgery: Edmonton, Alta., Jun. 1, 2007.

Despite the complexities of minimally invasive surgery (MIS), a Canadian approach to training surgeons in this field does not exist. Whereas a limited number of surgeons are fellowship-trained in the specialty, guidelines are still clearly needed to implement advanced MIS. Leaders in the field of gastrointestinal surgery and MIS attended a consensus conference where they proposed a comprehensive mentoring program that may evolve into a framework for a national mentoring and training system. Leadership and commitment from national experts to define the most appropriate template for introducing new surgical techniques into practice is required. This national framework should also provide flexibility for truly novel procedures such as natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery.

Surgical trauma referrals from rural level III hospitals: should our community colleagues be doing more, or less?

BACKGROUND: Rural citizens die more frequently because of trauma than their urban counterparts. Skill maintenance is a potential issue among rural surgeons because of infrequent exposure to severely injured patients. The primary goal was to evaluate the outcomes of multiple injuries patients who required a laparotomy after referral from level III trauma centers. METHODS: All severely injured patients (injury severity score >12) referred to a level I trauma center from level III hospitals, during a 48-month period were evaluated. Comparisons between referrals (level III and IV) as well as survivors and nonsurvivors used standard statistical methodology. RESULTS: One thousand two hundred and thirty patients (35%) were transferred from level III (33%) and level IV (67%) centers (43% underwent an operative procedure). Only 13% required a laparotomy, whereas 87% needed procedures from other subspecialists. Referred patients had a mean injury severity score of 28, length of stay of 28 days, and mortality rate of 26%. More patients arrived hemodynamically unstable from level IV (55%) versus level III (35%) hospitals (p < 0.05). Nonsurvivors from level III centers were more likely to transfer via aircraft (100%) than from level IV hospitals (55%) (p < 0.05). Most (91%) definitive general surgery procedures could have been completed by surgeons at level III centers; however, 90% also had multisystem injuries requiring treatment by other subspecialists. CONCLUSIONS: Most severely injured patient referrals from level III and IV trauma centers in Western Canada are appropriate. The lack of consistent subspecialty coverage mandates most transfers from level III hospitals. This data will be used to engage rural Alberta physicians in an educational outreach program.