RESUMO
PURPOSE:: To compare the fixation of the central venous catheter (CVC) using two suture techniques. METHODS:: A clinical, analytical, interventional, longitudinal, prospective, controlled, single-blind and randomized study in adult, intensive care unit (ICU) patients. After admission and indication of CVC use, the patients were allocated to the Wing group (n = 35, catheter fixation with clamping wings and retainers) or Shoelace group (n = 35, catheter fixation using shoelace cross-tied sutures around the device). Displacement, kinking, fixation failure, hyperemia at the insertion site, purulent secretion, loss of the device, psychomotor agitation, mental confusion, and bacterial growth at the insertion site were evaluated. RESULTS:: Compared with the Wing group, the Shoelace group had a lower occurrence of catheter displacement (n=0 versus n =4; p = 0.04), kinking (n=0 versus n=8; p=0.001), and fixation failure (n=2 versus n=8; p=0.018). No significant difference was found in bacterial growth (n=20 versus n=14; p=0.267) between groups. CONCLUSION:: The Shoelace fixation technique presented fewer adverse events than the Wing fixation technique.
Assuntos
Cateterismo Venoso Central/métodos , Cateteres Venosos Centrais , Técnicas de Sutura/instrumentação , Suturas , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Cateterismo Venoso Central/efeitos adversos , Cateterismo Venoso Central/instrumentação , Feminino , Humanos , Unidades de Terapia Intensiva , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Prospectivos , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Fatores de Risco , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Distribuição por Sexo , Método Simples-Cego , Estatísticas não Paramétricas , Técnicas de Sutura/efeitos adversos , Suturas/microbiologia , Fatores de TempoRESUMO
PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical applicability of Pozzolana Biologic Silva cement (PBS(r)) in endodontic surgery. METHODS: Persistent apical periodontitis was diagnosed in 30 teeth of 12 patients by cone-beam computed tomography (CT). All patients had 2 or 4 affected teeth and underwent endodontic surgery with root-end filling. Patients with 2 affected teeth had one tooth (control) treated with mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA-Angelus(r)) as a root-end filling material, and the other tooth treated with PBS (experiment). When the patient had four affected teeth, two of them were treated with MTA and two with PBS. Six months after surgery, all patients were assessed by CT scan. Between-group comparisons of measurements were performed using the Wilcoxon test. RESULTS: Periradicular tissue regeneration was observed in all cases. Significant within-group differences in long axes of the lesion were found in the bucco-palatal direction (PBS group, p=0.0012; MTA group, p=0.024) and coronal-apical direction (PBS group, p=0.0007; MTA group, p=0.0015) between pre- and postoperative measurements. CONCLUSIONS: Pozzolana Biologic Silva cement can be used in the treatment of persistent periradicular lesions. The clinical use of PBS as a root-end filling material may be an alternative to MTA. PBS has additives, which provide enhanced strength.