Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 6 de 6
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth ; 31(2): 719-730, 2017 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27693206

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Of the 230 million patients undergoing major surgical procedures every year, more than 1 million will die within 30 days. Thus, any nonsurgical interventions that help reduce perioperative mortality might save thousands of lives. The authors have updated a previous consensus process to identify all the nonsurgical interventions, supported by randomized evidence, that may help reduce perioperative mortality. DESIGN AND SETTING: A web-based international consensus conference. PARTICIPANTS: The study comprised 500 clinicians from 61 countries. INTERVENTIONS: A systematic literature search was performed to identify published literature about nonsurgical interventions, supported by randomized evidence, showing a statistically significant impact on mortality. A consensus conference of experts discussed eligible papers. The interventions identified by the conference then were submitted to colleagues worldwide through a web-based survey. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The authors identified 11 interventions contributing to increased survival (perioperative hemodynamic optimization, neuraxial anesthesia, noninvasive ventilation, tranexamic acid, selective decontamination of the gastrointestinal tract, insulin for tight glycemic control, preoperative intra-aortic balloon pump, leuko-depleted red blood cells transfusion, levosimendan, volatile agents, and remote ischemic preconditioning) and 2 interventions showing increased mortality (beta-blocker therapy and aprotinin). Interventions then were voted on by participating clinicians. Percentages of agreement among clinicians in different countries differed significantly for 6 interventions, and a variable gap between evidence and clinical practice was noted. CONCLUSIONS: The authors identified 13 nonsurgical interventions that may decrease or increase perioperative mortality, with variable agreement by clinicians. Such interventions may be optimal candidates for investigation in high-quality trials and discussion in international guidelines to reduce perioperative mortality.


Assuntos
Consenso , Assistência Perioperatória/mortalidade , Assistência Perioperatória/métodos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/mortalidade , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto/métodos , Congressos como Assunto , Humanos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/prevenção & controle
2.
J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth ; 31(2): 719-730, 2017.
Artigo em Inglês | Sec. Est. Saúde SP, SESSP-IDPCPROD, Sec. Est. Saúde SP | ID: ses-34731

RESUMO

Objective: Out of the 230 million patients undergoing major surgical procedure every year, morethan 1 million will die within 30 days. Thus, any nonsurgical interventions that help reduce perioperative mortality might save thousands of lives. We decided to update a previous consensus process to identify all the nonsurgical interventions, supported by randomized evidence, that may help reduce perioperative mortality. Design and Setting: A web-based international consensus conference. Participants: 500 hundred clinicians from 61 countries. Interventions: A systematic literature search was performed to identify published literature aboutnonsurgical interventions, supported by randomized evidence showing a statistically significant impact on mortality. Eligible papers were discussed by a Consensus Conference of experts. The interventions identified by the conference were then submitted to colleagues worldwide through aweb-based survey...(AU)


Assuntos
Assistência Perioperatória , Mortalidade , Anestesia , Consenso , Cuidados Críticos
3.
J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth ; 31(2): 719-730, 2017.
Artigo em Inglês | Sec. Est. Saúde SP, SESSP-IDPCPROD, Sec. Est. Saúde SP | ID: ses-37195

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE:Of the 230 million patients undergoing major surgical procedures every year, more than 1 million will die within 30 days. Thus, any nonsurgical interventions that help reduce perioperative mortality might save thousands of lives. The authors have updated a previous consensus process to identify all the nonsurgical interventions, supported by randomized evidence, that may help reduce perioperative mortality. (AU)


Assuntos
Humanos , Anestesia , Mortalidade
4.
Biomedica ; 36(4): 564-571, 2016 Dec 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27992983

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: An estimated 6.8-8.9 million people are infected with hepatitis C virus in Latin America, of which less than 1% receives antiviral treatment. Studies so far in Colombia have attempted to determine the prevalence of the disease in some risk groups, thus preventing the identification of other factors potentially involved in the spread of the infection. OBJECTIVES: To identify traditional and non-traditional risk factors for chronic hepatitis C in the Colombian Caribbean coast. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a case-control study (1:3) matched by health care provider and age (± 10 years) conducted at the primary care level of gastroenterology and hepatology outpatient services. All patients with a positive ELISA underwent a confirmatory viral load test. A multivariate logistic regression analysis identified the independent predictors of infection. RESULTS: Blood transfusion (OR=159.2; 95% CI: 35.4-715; p<0.001) and history of hospitalization before 1994 (OR=4.7; 95% CI: 1.3-17.1; p=0.018) were identified as the only two independent predictors of infection. CONCLUSION: It is necessary to check the reproducibility of these results and to conduct cost-effectiveness studies before recommending their use in the design of new screening strategies.


Assuntos
Hepatite C/epidemiologia , Idoso , Transfusão de Sangue , Região do Caribe/epidemiologia , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Colômbia/epidemiologia , Feminino , Gastroenterologia , Hepatite C/transmissão , Hospitalização/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Ambulatório Hospitalar/estatística & dados numéricos , Fatores de Risco , Reação Transfusional , Carga Viral , Viremia/epidemiologia , Viremia/transmissão
5.
J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth ; 30(5): 1386-95, 2016 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27499346

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: Democracy-based medicine is a combination of evidence-based medicine (systematic review), expert assessment, and worldwide voting by physicians to express their opinions and self-reported practice via the Internet. The authors applied democracy-based medicine to key trials in critical care medicine. DESIGN AND SETTING: A systematic review of literature followed by web-based voting on findings of a consensus conference. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 555 clinicians from 61 countries. INTERVENTIONS: The authors performed a systematic literature review (via searching MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, and Embase) and selected all multicenter randomized clinical trials in critical care that reported a significant effect on survival and were endorsed by expert clinicians. Then they solicited voting and self-reported practice on such evidence via an interactive Internet questionnaire. Relationships among trial sample size, design, and respondents' agreement were investigated. The gap between agreement and use/avoidance and the influence of country origin on physicians' approach to interventions also were investigated. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: According to 24 multicenter randomized controlled trials, 15 interventions affecting mortality were identified. Wide variabilities in both the level of agreement and reported practice among different interventions and countries were found. Moreover, agreement and reported practice often did not coincide. Finally, a positive correlation among agreement, trial sample size, and number of included centers was found. On the contrary, trial design did not influence clinicians' agreement. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians' clinical practice and agreement with the literature vary among different interventions and countries. The role of these interventions in affecting survival should be further investigated to reduce both the gap between evidence and clinical practice and transnational differences.


Assuntos
Cuidados Críticos/métodos , Medicina Baseada em Evidências/métodos , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Internacionalidade , Estudos Multicêntricos como Assunto/estatística & dados numéricos , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto/estatística & dados numéricos , Estado Terminal , Humanos , Médicos
6.
Am Heart J ; 177: 66-73, 2016 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27297851

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Patients undergoing cardiac surgery are at risk of perioperative low cardiac output syndrome due to postoperative myocardial dysfunction. Myocardial dysfunction in patients undergoing cardiac surgery is a potential indication for the use of levosimendan, a calcium sensitizer with 3 beneficial cardiovascular effects (inotropic, vasodilatory, and anti-inflammatory), which appears effective in improving clinically relevant outcomes. DESIGN: Double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter randomized trial. SETTING: Tertiary care hospitals. INTERVENTIONS: Cardiac surgery patients (n = 1,000) with postoperative myocardial dysfunction (defined as patients with intraaortic balloon pump and/or high-dose standard inotropic support) will be randomized to receive a continuous infusion of either levosimendan (0.05-0.2 µg/[kg min]) or placebo for 24-48 hours. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary end point will be 30-day mortality. Secondary end points will be mortality at 1 year, time on mechanical ventilation, acute kidney injury, decision to stop the study drug due to adverse events or to start open-label levosimendan, and length of intensive care unit and hospital stay. We will test the hypothesis that levosimendan reduces 30-day mortality in cardiac surgery patients with postoperative myocardial dysfunction. CONCLUSIONS: This trial is planned to determine whether levosimendan could improve survival in patients with postoperative low cardiac output syndrome. The results of this double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial may provide important insights into the management of low cardiac output in cardiac surgery.


Assuntos
Baixo Débito Cardíaco/terapia , Cardiotônicos/uso terapêutico , Hidrazonas/uso terapêutico , Balão Intra-Aórtico , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/terapia , Piridazinas/uso terapêutico , Lesão Renal Aguda/epidemiologia , Baixo Débito Cardíaco/mortalidade , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Cardíacos/mortalidade , Método Duplo-Cego , Humanos , Infusões Intravenosas , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva , Tempo de Internação/estatística & dados numéricos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/mortalidade , Respiração Artificial , Simendana
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA