Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
1.
Int Wound J ; 20(4): 1276-1291, 2023 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36184849

RESUMO

The objectives were to determine the surgical site infection incidence (including superficial/deep) fter arterial intervention through non-infected groin incisions and identify variables associated with incidence. MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL databases were searched for randomised controlled trials and observational studies of adults undergoing arterial intervention through a groin incision and reported surgical site infection. Infection incidence was examined in subgroups, variables were subjected to meta-regression. One hundred seventeen studies reporting 65 138 groin incisions in 42 347 patients were included. Overall surgical site infection incidence per incision was 8.1% (1730/21 431): 6.3% (804/12 786) were superficial and 1.9% (241/12 863) were deep. Superficial infection incidence was higher in randomised controlled trials (15.8% [278/1762]) compared with observational studies (4.8% [526/11 024]); deep infection incidence was similar (1.7% (30/1762) and 1.9% (211/11 101) respectively). Aneurysmal pathology (ß = -10.229, P < .001) and retrospective observational design (ß = -1.118, P = .002) were associated with lower infection incidence. Surgical site infection being a primary outcome was associated with a higher incidence of surgical site infections (ß = 3.429, P = .017). The three-fold higher incidence of superficial surgical site infection reported in randomised controlled trials may be because of a more robust clinical review of patients. These results should be considered when benchmarking practice and could inform future trial design.


Assuntos
Infecção da Ferida Cirúrgica , Ferida Cirúrgica , Adulto , Humanos , Infecção da Ferida Cirúrgica/epidemiologia , Infecção da Ferida Cirúrgica/etiologia , Virilha/cirurgia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Incidência , Ferida Cirúrgica/complicações
2.
Aorta (Stamford) ; 10(5): 225-234, 2022 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36539114

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: In the United Kingdom, the most common surgical approach for repair of open abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) is transperitoneal (TP). However, retroperitoneal (RP) approach is favored in those with more complex vascular anatomy often requiring a cross-clamp on the aorta superior to the renal arteries. This study compared these approaches in patients matched on all major demographic, comorbid, anatomic, and physiological variables. METHODS: Fifty-seven patients (TP: n = 24; RP: n = 33) unsuitable for endovascular aneurysm repair underwent preoperative cardiopulmonary exercise testing prior to open AAA repair. The surgical approach undertaken was dictated by individual surgeon preference. Postoperative mortality, complications, and length of hospital stay (LoS) were recorded. Patients were further stratified according to infrarenal (IR) or suprarenal/supraceliac (SR/SC) surgical clamping. Systemic inflammation (C-reactive protein) and renal function (serum creatinine and estimated glomerular filtration rate) were recorded. RESULTS: Twenty-three (96%) of TP patients only required an IR clamp compared with 12 (36%) in the RP group. Postoperative systemic inflammation was lower in RP patients (p = 0.002 vs. TP) and fewer reported pulmonary/gastrointestinal complications whereas renal impairment was more marked in those receiving SR/SC clamps (p < 0.001 vs. IR clamp). RP patients were defined by lower LoS (p = 0.001), while mid-/long-term mortality was low/comparable with TP, resulting in considerable cost savings. CONCLUSION: Despite the demands of more complicated vascular anatomy, the clinical and economic benefits highlighted by these findings justify the more routine adoption of the RP approach for complex AAA repair.

3.
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg ; 62(2): 295-303, 2021 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34088614

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Controlling pain after major lower limb amputation (MLLA) is of critical importance to patients and clinicians. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the effect of perineural catheters (PNCs) on post-operative pain, post-operative morphine requirement, in-hospital mortality, long term phantom limb pain, and chronic stump pain. METHODS: A systematic review using PubMed, EMBASE via OVID and the Cochrane library from database inception (1946) to 20 October 2020 was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. Studies involving patients undergoing MLLA which reported on post-operative morphine requirement, pain scores, in-hospital mortality, phantom limb pain (PLP), and chronic stump pain were included. Studies comparing PNC use with epidural or wound site local anaesthetic infusions were excluded. Outcome data were extracted from individual studies and meta-analysis was performed using a random effects (Mantel-Haenszel) model for dichotomous data using an odds ratio (OR) summary statistic with 95% confidence intervals (CI), and with an inverse variance random effects model for continuous data using a standardised mean difference (SMD) summary statistic with 95% CIs. Sensitivity analyses were performed for post-operative pain scores and post-operative morphine requirement. Study quality was assessed using the Downs and Black score, and outcomes were assessed using the GRADE tool. RESULTS: Ten studies reporting on 731 patients were included, with 350 patients receiving a PNC and 381 receiving standard care. PNC use is associated with a reduction in post-operative pain (SMD -0.30, 95% CI -0.58 - -0.01, p = .040, I2 = 54%, GRADE quality of evidence: low) and post-operative morphine requirements (SMD -0.63, 95% CI -1.03 - -0.23, p = .002, I2 = 75%, GRADE quality of evidence: moderate), although the effect of PNC on reduced post-operative morphine requirements is lost on sensitivity analysis of randomised trials only (p = .40). No demonstrable effect was found on in-hospital mortality, PLP, or chronic stump pain (GRADE quality of evidence: low). CONCLUSION: PNC use in amputees is associated with a significant reduction in post-operative pain scores and post-operative morphine requirements, although this latter finding is lost on sensitivity analysis of randomised trials only.


Assuntos
Amputação Cirúrgica/efeitos adversos , Anestésicos Locais/administração & dosagem , Extremidade Inferior/cirurgia , Dor Pós-Operatória/prevenção & controle , Membro Fantasma/prevenção & controle , Cotos de Amputação , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Catéteres , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Humanos , Morfina/uso terapêutico , Medição da Dor , Dor Pós-Operatória/etiologia , Nervos Periféricos
4.
PLoS One ; 15(6): e0234271, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32525925

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: Antiplatelet therapy following peripheral arterial endovascular intervention lacks high quality evidence to guide practice. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of three months of dual antiplatelet therapy on amputation-free survival following peripheral arterial endovascular intervention in patients with chronic limb threatening ischemia. METHODS: A retrospective review of symptomatic patients undergoing primary peripheral arterial endovascular intervention over a seven-year period was performed. The primary outcome measure was amputation-free survival. A sample size calculation based on previous cohort studies suggested that 629 limbs would be required to show a difference between single and dual therapy. Kaplan-Meier estimates and multivariate logistic regression analysis of recorded baseline characteristics was performed to determine predictors of amputation-free survival. Dual antiplatelet therapy was routinely given for 3 months. RESULTS: 754 limbs were treated with primary angioplasty and/or stenting over a 7-year period, 508 of these for chronic limb threatening ischemia. There was no difference in unadjusted amputation-free survival between patients with chronic limb threatening ischaemia taking single vs. dual antiplatelet therapy (69% vs. 74% respectively Log rank Chi2 = 0.1, p = .72). After adjusting for confounders, at 1 year there was also no significant difference in amputation-free survival between patients taking single vs. dual antiplatelet therapy [OR 0.8, 95% CI 0.5-1.2, p = .3]. There was no difference in rates of major bleeding between single and dual antiplatelet therapy. CONCLUSIONS: There was no clear evidence of reduced amputation-free survival in patients with chronic limb threatening ischemia undergoing peripheral arterial endovascular intervention being treated with dual antiplatelet therapy for 3 months. This is at odds with other retrospective case series and highlights the limitations in basing clinical practice on such data. There is a need for an adequately powered, independent randomised trial to definitively answer the question.


Assuntos
Procedimentos Endovasculares , Isquemia/tratamento farmacológico , Isquemia/cirurgia , Extremidade Inferior/irrigação sanguínea , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/farmacologia , Idoso , Estudos de Coortes , Feminino , Humanos , Estimativa de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/uso terapêutico , Estudos Retrospectivos , Análise de Sobrevida
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...