RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: To compare outcomes between different strategies of perioperative cerebral and hemodynamic monitoring during carotid endarterectomy. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases were searched. METHODS: This review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and prospectively registered in the international prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42021241891). The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to describe the methodological quality of the studies and certainty of the evidence. The primary outcome was 30-day stroke rate. Secondary outcomes measures are 30-day ipsilateral stroke, 30-day mortality, shunt rate, and complication rates. RESULTS: The search identified 3,460 articles. Seventeen randomized controlled trials (RCTs), three prospective observational studies and seven registries were included, reporting on 236,983 patients. The overall pooled 30-day stroke rate is 1.8% (95% CI 1.4-2.2%), ranging from 0 to 12.6%. In RCT's the pooled 30-day stroke rate is 2.7% (95% CI 1.6-3.7%) compared to 1.3% (95% CI 0.8-1.8%) in the registries. The overall stroke risk decreased from 3.7% before the year 2000 to 1.6% after 2000. No significant differences could be identified between different monitoring and shunting strategies, although a trend to higher stroke rates in routine no shunting arms of RCTs was observed. Overall, 30-day mortality, myocardial infarction and nerve injury rates are 0.6% (95% CI 0.4-0.8), 0.8% (95% CI 0.6-1.0) and 1.3% (95% CI 0.4-2.2), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: No significant differences between the compared shunting and monitoring strategies are found. However, routine no shunting is not recommended. The available data are too limited to prefer 1 method of neuromonitoring over another method when selective shunting is applied.
Asunto(s)
Endarterectomía Carotidea , Monitorización Hemodinámica , Infarto del Miocardio , Accidente Cerebrovascular , Humanos , Monitorización Hemodinámica/efectos adversos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Accidente Cerebrovascular/etiología , Estudios Observacionales como AsuntoRESUMEN
In addition to the respiratory compromise typical for COVID-19 many papers reported on the thromboembolic complications in these often critically ill patients. In this report, three cases of patients that developed spontaneous major bleeding following treatment with therapeutic anticoagulation for thromboembolic complications of COVID-19 were described. Two cases were treated with coil-embolization and one patient could be treated conservatively. These cases illustrate the presence of a relevant bleeding risk against the background of the well-known thromboembolic complications associated with COVID-19. The increased risks of thromboembolic complications in COVID-19 warrant adequate prophylactic anticoagulation. The optimal dose to obtain a significant risk reduction without a significant increase in the incidence of major bleeding requires further research.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2 , Hemorragia/etiología , Hemorragia/terapia , Coagulación Sanguínea , Anticoagulantes/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
AIM AND OBJECTIVE: The aim and objective of this study was to determine whether the occurrence of pressure ulcers following cardiothoracic surgery increases the length of hospitalisation. BACKGROUND: Literature suggests that a pressure ulcer extends the length of hospital stay. The impact of pressure ulcers on length of hospital stay after cardiothoracic surgery is yet undetermined. DESIGN: Prospective follow-up study. METHODS: Two hundred and four patients admitted for elective cardiothoracic surgery and with an intensive care unit stay of >48 hours were included in a prospective cohort study. The course of the skin condition in relation to pressure ulcers was monitored during their stay in a teaching hospital. Length of hospital stay was compared between the group with and without pressure ulcers. RESULTS: Hospital stay for cardiothoracic patients with and without pressure ulcers did not differ significantly (p = 0.23). Patients that developed pressure ulcers had a median hospital stay of 13 days (interquartile range: 9-19) vs. 12 days (interquartile range: 7-15) for patients without pressure ulcers. However, we observed that length of stay in the intensive care unit was significantly (p = 0.005) longer for patients with pressure ulcers. This was not associated with the occurrence of complications. However, the occurrence of pressure ulcers was significantly correlated with length of intensive care support in postoperative care. CONCLUSION: Non-complicated pressure ulcers in postsurgery patients do not significantly increase the length of total hospital stay. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Health professionals need to recognise that patients who have undergone major surgery (such as cardiothoracic surgery) are prone to develop pressure ulcers. Despite the fact that pressure ulcers do not necessarily extend hospital stay, monitoring the skin condition remains of crucial importance for prevention and early detection as well as treatment of pressure ulcers and to minimise patient discomfort. Moreover, as pressure ulcers often originate in the operating room, prevention in the operating room should receive more attention.
Asunto(s)
Tiempo de Internación , Úlcera por Presión/epidemiología , Cirugía Torácica , Anciano , Estudios de Cohortes , Cuidados Críticos , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Úlcera por Presión/enfermería , Estudios ProspectivosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Review of the literature concerning pressure ulcers in the intensive care setting. DATA SOURCE AND STUDY SELECTIONS: Computerized databases (Medline from 1980 until 1999 and CINAHL from 1982 until 1999). The indexing terms for article retrieval were: "pressure ulcers", "pressure sores", "decubitus", and "intensive care". Nineteen articles met the selection criteria, and seven more were found from the references of these articles. One thesis was also analyzed. RESULTS: Data on prevention, incidence, and costs of pressure ulcers in ICU patients are scarce. Overall there are no conclusive studies on the identification of pressure ulcer risk factors. None of the existing risk-assessment scales was developed especially for use in ICU patients. It is highly questionable to what extent these scales can be used in this setting as they are not even reliable in "standard care". The following risk factors might play a role in pressure ulcer development: duration of surgery and number of operations, fecal incontinence and/or diarrhea, low preoperative protein and albumin concentrations, disturbed sensory perception, moisture of the skin, impaired circulation, use of inotropic drugs, diabetes mellitus, too unstable to turn, decreased mobility, and high APACHE II score. The number of patients per study ranged from 5 from 638. The definition of "pressure ulcer" varied widely between authors or was not mentioned. CONCLUSIONS: Meaningful comparison cannot be made between the various studies because of the use of different grading systems for pressure ulcers, different methods of data collection, different (or lack of) population characteristics, unreported preventive measures, and the use of different inclusion and exclusion criteria. There is a need for well-conducted studies covering all these aspects.