Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Rev Esp Enferm Dig ; 2024 Mar 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38450479

RESUMO

Primary follicular lymphoma of the duodenum (FLD) is a rare variant of follicular lymphoma (FL), which represents only 1-4% of gastrointestinal non-hodgkin lymphomas (NHL). It usually appears in the second portion of the duodenum as micronodular lesions and the diagnosis is often incidental. Unlike other NHLs, the prognosis is excellent and the treatment ranges from "watch and wait" to rituximab-based immunochemotherapy regimens, depending on the symptoms and the presence of systemic involvement.

2.
Rev. esp. enferm. dig ; 110(4): 240-245, abr. 2018. tab, ilus
Artigo em Espanhol | IBECS | ID: ibc-174598

RESUMO

Introducción: existe controversia sobre quién debe responsabilizarse de la sedación en endoscopia digestiva, sobre todo en los procedimientos avanzados que exigen sedación profunda. La enteroscopia es uno de ellos. El objetivo del trabajo es valorar la viabilidad de la sedación controlada por endoscopista durante la enteroscopia de monobalón. Material y método: estudio prospectivo observacional de una serie de enteroscopias consecutivas. Personal dedicado: endoscopista, enfermera instrumentista y enfermera encargada de monitorización y administración de sedantes. Monitorización: pulsioximetría, tensión arterial cada cinco minutos, registro electrocardiográfico y frecuencia respiratoria. Administración continua de oxígeno. Insuflación con CO2. Posición del paciente: decúbito izquierdo. Control fluoroscópico. Resultados: cuarenta y cuatro exploraciones en 39 pacientes (24 hombres, 15 mujeres). Edad 74 (18-89). Grado ASA: I-12, II-23, III-9. Comorbilidades en el 68% de los casos. Fármacos empleados: propofol, 23 casos; propofol y midazolam, diez casos; propofol, midazolam y fentanilo, dos casos; propofol y fentanilo, dos casos; y midazolam y fentanilo, siete casos. Procedimientos completados: 100%. Tiempo de exploración: 52 minutos (20-120). Hallazgos diagnósticos en el 65,9% de los casos; maniobras terapéuticas en el 47,7%. Complicaciones graves: ninguna. Complicaciones menores derivadas de la sedación: 22,7%. Conclusión: la sedación controlada por endoscopista es eficaz y segura en la realización de enteroscopia con monobalón. Son convenientes estudios multicéntricos y con mayor número de casos para una mejor valoración de la eficacia, seguridad y eficiencia de la sedación por no anestesista en endoscopia avanzada en nuestro medio


Introduction: there is a lot of controversy with regard to who should be responsible for sedation during digestive endoscopy, particularly in advanced procedures that require deep sedation such as enteroscopy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the endoscopist-directed sedation viability during single balloon enteroscopy. Material and method: this was a prospective, observational study of a series of consecutive enteroscopies. The clinical staff included an endoscopist, scrub nurse and a nurse in charge of monitoring and sedative administration. The following parameters were monitored: pulse oximetry, blood pressure (every five minutes), electrocardiogram and respiratory rate. There was continuous supplemental oxygen and CO2 insufflation. The patient was in the left lateral decubitus position and a fluoroscopic control was used. Results: forty-four explorations were performed in 39 patients, 24 were male and 15 female. The median age was 74 (18-89) and the ASA score was I in 12 cases, II in 23 cases and III in nine cases. Comorbidities were present in 68% of cases. The drugs used included propofol in 23 cases, propofol and midazolam in ten cases, propofol/midazolam/fentanyl in two cases, propofol and fentanyl in two cases, and midazolam/fentanyl in seven cases. All procedures were complete. The length of the procedure was 52 minutes (20-120). There were diagnostic findings in 65.9% of cases and therapeutic measures in 47.7%. There were no severe complications and the rate of complications derived from sedation was 22.7%. Conclusion: endoscopist-directed sedation is effective and safe for single balloon enteroscopy. Multi-center and wider studies are needed in order to better assess the efficacy, safety and efficiency of sedation controlled by a non-anesthetist during advanced endoscopy in this field


Assuntos
Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Adolescente , Adulto Jovem , Adulto , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Estudo Observacional , Sedação Consciente/métodos , Enteroscopia de Balão Único/métodos , Estudos de Viabilidade , Sedação Consciente/efeitos adversos , Hipnóticos e Sedativos/administração & dosagem , Hipnóticos e Sedativos/efeitos adversos , Monitorização Fisiológica , Estudos Prospectivos , Enteroscopia de Balão Único/efeitos adversos , Enteroscopia de Balão Único/enfermagem
3.
Rev Esp Enferm Dig ; 110(4): 240-245, 2018 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29465247

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: there is a lot of controversy with regard to who should be responsible for sedation during digestive endoscopy, particularly in advanced procedures that require deep sedation such as enteroscopy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the endoscopist-directed sedation viability during single balloon enteroscopy. MATERIAL AND METHOD: this was a prospective, observational study of a series of consecutive enteroscopies. The clinical staff included an endoscopist, scrub nurse and a nurse in charge of monitoring and sedative administration. The following parameters were monitored: pulse oximetry, blood pressure (every five minutes), electrocardiogram and respiratory rate. There was continuous supplemental oxygen and CO2 insufflation. The patient was in the left lateral decubitus position and a fluoroscopic control was used. RESULTS: forty-four explorations were performed in 39 patients, 24 were male and 15 female. The median age was 74 (18-89) and the ASA score was I in 12 cases, II in 23 cases and III in nine cases. Comorbidities were present in 68% of cases. The drugs used included propofol in 23 cases, propofol and midazolam in ten cases, propofol/midazolam/fentanyl in two cases, propofol and fentanyl in two cases, and midazolam/fentanyl in seven cases. All procedures were complete. The length of the procedure was 52 minutes (20-120). There were diagnostic findings in 65.9% of cases and therapeutic measures in 47.7%. There were no severe complications and the rate of complications derived from sedation was 22.7%. CONCLUSION: endoscopist-directed sedation is effective and safe for single balloon enteroscopy. Multi-center and wider studies are needed in order to better assess the efficacy, safety and efficiency of sedation controlled by a non-anesthetist during advanced endoscopy in this field.


Assuntos
Sedação Consciente/métodos , Enteroscopia de Balão Único/métodos , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Sedação Consciente/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Humanos , Hipnóticos e Sedativos/administração & dosagem , Hipnóticos e Sedativos/efeitos adversos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Monitorização Fisiológica , Enfermeiras e Enfermeiros , Estudos Prospectivos , Enteroscopia de Balão Único/efeitos adversos , Adulto Jovem
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...