A survey of recently published cardiovascular, hematological and pneumological original articles in the Brazilian scientific press

Recent original scientific contributions published in selected Brazilian periodicals and classifiable under cardiovascular and pulmonary subject categories cover a wide range of sub specialties, both clinical and exprimental. Because they appear in journals with only recently enhanced visibility, we have decided to highlight a number of specific items appeared in four Brazilian journals, because we understand that this is an important subsidy to keep our readership adequately informed. These papers cover extensive sub-areas in both fields

Estudo multicêntrico de avaliação perioperatória para operações não cardíacas (EMAPO)

INTRODUCTION: The accuracy of perioperative evaluation methods available is better than chance, but their performance is not ideal. OBJECTIVES: To compare a new evaluation method (EMAPO) to the American College of Physicians method for determining the risk of cardiovascular complications in noncardiac surgeries and to look for new influencing variables. METHODS: Evaluations through EMAPO and the American College of Physicians method were employed for 700 patients. Cardiac events and deaths were recorded, the risk variables related to the occurrence of complications were verified, and the models were compared by analyzing the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves. RESULTS: Mortality rate was 3.4%, and the incidence of cardiovascular complications was 5.3%. Renal failure (P = 0.01), major surgery (P = 0.004), and emergency surgery (P = 0.003) were independently related to the occurrence of cardiovascular complications. The two methods produced similar results. CONCLUSION: EMAPO is as good as the American College of Physicians method in determining the risk of cardiovascular complications in noncardiac surgeries. New variables related to surgical risk were identified.INTRODUÇÃO: A precisão dos métodos de avaliação perioperatória disponíveis é melhor que o acaso, porém está longe do ideal. OBJETIVOS: Comparar um novo método de avaliação perioperatória (EMAPO) ao método do American College of Physicians para determinar o risco cardíaco em cirurgias não cardíacas e buscar novas variáveis envolvidas na determinação deste risco. MÉTODOS: O EMAPO e o método do American College of Physicians foram aplicados em 700 pacientes. A ocorrência de eventos cardíacos e de mortes foi documentada, a relação entre as variáveis de risco e as complicações foi estabelecida e os métodos foram comparados analisando as áreas sob a curva ROC. RESULTADOS: A mortalidade foi 3.4% e a incidência de complicações cardiovasculares 5.3%. A presença de insuficiência renal (p=0.01), cirurgia de grande porte (p=0.004) e cirurgia de emergência (p=0.003) se correlacionaram com a ocorrência de complicações cardiovasculares na análise multivariada. Não houve diferença entre os dois métodos. CONCLUSÕES: O EMAPO é tão eficaz quanto o método do American College of Physicians para determinar o risco de complicações cardiovasculares em cirurgias não cardíacas. Novas variáveis relacionadas com o risco perioperatório foram encontradas