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











Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Medicina (Kaunas) ; 60(5)2024 May 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38792968

RESUMO

Background and Objectives: Thrombosis is a serious complication experienced by some hospitalized patients. While concurrent placement of two catheters (CVCs) in the same central vein offers several benefits in clinical settings, we aimed to investigate the role of this procedure in relation to the risk of thrombosis. Materials and Methods: Over a two-year retrospective analysis, we examined 114 patients with septic shock caused by a pulmonary infection, who underwent the insertion of one or more central lines into a central vein during their ICU stay. Logistic regression models were employed to assess the correlation between the Caprini risk score, the placement of two CVCs in the same vein, COVID-19 infection and the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Results: In total, 53% of the patients underwent the concurrent insertion of two CVCs. The placement of two CVCs in the same vein appears to elevate the VTE risk by 2.5 times (95% CI: 1.03-6.12). Logistic regression analysis indicated that hemodialysis catheters amplify the VTE risk by nearly five times, even when accounting for a series of factors (95% CI: 1.86-12.31). Conclusions: Our study suggests that the elevated risk of VTE is likely associated with the insertion of the hemodialysis catheters rather than solely the presence of two concurrent catheters.


Assuntos
Cateterismo Venoso Central , Cateteres Venosos Centrais , Choque Séptico , Tromboembolia Venosa , Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Estudos Retrospectivos , Tromboembolia Venosa/etiologia , Tromboembolia Venosa/epidemiologia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Choque Séptico/complicações , Idoso , Medição de Risco/métodos , Cateteres Venosos Centrais/efeitos adversos , Cateterismo Venoso Central/efeitos adversos , COVID-19/complicações , Fatores de Risco , Modelos Logísticos , SARS-CoV-2
2.
J Pers Med ; 14(3)2024 Mar 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38541035

RESUMO

Synchronous electrical cardioversion is a relatively common procedure in the emergency department (ED), often performed for unstable supraventricular tachycardia (SVT) or unstable ventricular tachycardia (VT). However, it is also used for stable cases resistant to drug therapy, which carries a risk of deterioration. In addition to the inherent risks linked with procedural sedation, there is a possibility of malignant arrhythmias or bradycardia, which could potentially result in cardiac arrest following this procedure. Here, we present a case of complete heart block unresponsive to transcutaneous pacing and positive inotropic and chronotropic drugs for 90 min, resulting in multiple cardiac arrests. The repositioning of the transcutaneous cardio-stimulation electrodes, one of them placed in the left latero-sternal position and the other at the level of the apex, led to immediate stabilization of the patient. The extubation of the patient was performed the following day, with full recovery and discharge within 7 days after the insertion of a permanent pacemaker.

3.
J Pers Med ; 13(10)2023 Oct 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37888108

RESUMO

Spontaneous pneumothorax and pneumomediastinum (SP-SPM) are relatively rare medical conditions that can occur with or independently of COVID-19. We conducted a retrospective analysis of SP-SPM cases presented to the emergency departments (EDs) of two University-affiliated tertiary hospitals from 1 March 2020 to 31 October 2022. A total of 190 patients were identified: 52 were COVID-19 cases, and 138 were non-COVID-19 cases. The primary outcome we were looking for was in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcomes concerned the disease severity assessed by (a) days of hospitalization; (b) required mechanical ventilation (MV); and (c) required intensive care (IC). All were investigated in the context of the five pandemic waves and the patients' age and comorbidities. The pandemic waves had no significant effect on the outcomes of these patients. Logistic regression found age (OR = 1.043; 95%CI 1.002-1.085), COVID-19 (OR = 6.032; 95%CI 1.757-20.712), number of comorbidities (OR = 1.772; 95%CI 1.046-3.001), and ground-glass opacities over 50% (OR = 5.694; 95%CI 1.169-27.746) as significant risk predictors of in-hospital death while controlling for gender, smoking, the pandemic wave, and the extension of SP-SPM. The model proved good prediction performance (Nagelkerke R-square = 0.524) and would hold the same significant predictors for MV and IC.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA