21 research outputs found

    A systematic review of ICD complications in randomised controlled trials versus registries: is our 'real-world' data an underestimation?

    Get PDF
    Implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation carries a significant risk of complications, however published estimates appear inconsistent. We aimed to present a contemporary systematic review using meta-analysis methods of ICD complications in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and compare it to recent data from the largest international ICD registry, the US National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR). PubMed was searched for any RCTs involving ICD implantation published 1999-2013; 18 were identified for analysis including 6433 patients, mean follow-up 3 months-5.6 years. Exclusion criteria were studies of children, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, congenital heart disease, resynchronisation therapy and generator changes. Total pooled complication rate from the RCTs (excluding inappropriate shocks) was 9.1%, including displacement 3.1%, pneumothorax 1.1% and haematoma 1.2%. Infection rate was 1.5%.There were no predictors of complications but longer follow-up showed a trend to higher complication rates (p=0.07). In contrast, data from the NCDR ICD, reporting on 356 515 implants (2006-2010) showed a statistically significant threefold lower total major complication rate of 3.08% with lead displacement 1.02%, haematoma 0.86% and pneumothorax 0.44%. The overall ICD complication rate in our meta-analysis is 9.1% over 16 months. The ICD complication reported in the NCDR ICD registry is significantly lower despite a similar population. This may reflect under-reporting of complications in registries. Reporting of ICD complications in RCTs and registries is very variable and there is a need to standardise classification of complications internationally

    Influence of dosing times on cisplatin-induced peripheral neuropathy in rats

    Get PDF
    Background: Although cis-diamminedichloro-platinum (CDDP) exhibits strong therapeutic effects in cancer chemotherapy, its adverse effects such as peripheral neuropathy, nephropathy, and vomiting are dose-limiting factors. Previous studies reported that chronotherapy decreased CDDP-induced nephropathy and vomiting. In the present study, we investigated the influence of dosing times on CDDP-induced peripheral neuropathy in rats. Methods: CDDP (4 mg/kg) was administered intravenously at 5:00 or 17:00 every 7 days for 4 weeks to male Sprague-Dawley rats, and saline was given to the control group. To assess the dosing time dependency of peripheral neuropathy, von-Frey test and hot-plate test were performed. Results: In order to estimate hypoalgesia, the hot-plate test was performed in rats administered CDDP weekly for 4 weeks. On day 28, the withdrawal latency to thermal stimulation was significantly prolonged in the 17:00-treated group than in the control and 5:00-treated groups. When the von-Frey test was performed to assess mechanical allodynia, the withdrawal threshold was significantly lower in the 5:00 and 17:00-treated groups than in the control group on day 6 after the first CDDP dose. The 5:00-treated group maintained allodynia throughout the experiment with the repeated administration of CDDP, whereas the 17:00-treated group deteriorated from allodynia to hypoalgesia. Conclusions: It was revealed that the severe of CDDP-induced peripheral neuropathy was inhibited in the 5:00-treated group, whereas CDDP-treated groups exhibited mechanical allodynia. These results suggested that the selection of an optimal dosing time ameliorated CDDP-induced peripheral neuropathy

    International Consensus Statement on Rhinology and Allergy: Rhinosinusitis

    Get PDF
    Background: The 5 years since the publication of the first International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Rhinosinusitis (ICAR‐RS) has witnessed foundational progress in our understanding and treatment of rhinologic disease. These advances are reflected within the more than 40 new topics covered within the ICAR‐RS‐2021 as well as updates to the original 140 topics. This executive summary consolidates the evidence‐based findings of the document. Methods: ICAR‐RS presents over 180 topics in the forms of evidence‐based reviews with recommendations (EBRRs), evidence‐based reviews, and literature reviews. The highest grade structured recommendations of the EBRR sections are summarized in this executive summary. Results: ICAR‐RS‐2021 covers 22 topics regarding the medical management of RS, which are grade A/B and are presented in the executive summary. Additionally, 4 topics regarding the surgical management of RS are grade A/B and are presented in the executive summary. Finally, a comprehensive evidence‐based management algorithm is provided. Conclusion: This ICAR‐RS‐2021 executive summary provides a compilation of the evidence‐based recommendations for medical and surgical treatment of the most common forms of RS

    Inter-Rater Reliability and Downstream Financial Implications of Electrocardiography Screening in Young Athletes.

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: Preparticipation screening for cardiovascular disease in young athletes with electrocardiography is endorsed by the European Society of Cardiology and several major sporting organizations. One of the concerns of the ECG as a screening test in young athletes relates to the potential for variation in interpretation. We investigated the degree of variation in ECG interpretation in athletes and its financial impact among cardiologists of differing experience. METHODS AND RESULTS: Eight cardiologists (4 with experience in screening athletes) each reported 400 ECGs of consecutively screened young athletes according to the 2010 European Society of Cardiology recommendations, Seattle criteria, and refined criteria. Cohen Îș coefficient was used to calculate interobserver reliability. Cardiologists proposed secondary investigations after ECG interpretation, the costs of which were based on the UK National Health Service tariffs. Inexperienced cardiologists were more likely to classify an ECG as abnormal compared with experienced cardiologists (odds ratio, 1.44; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-2.02). Modification of ECG interpretation criteria improved interobserver reliability for categorizing an ECG as abnormal from poor (2010 European Society of Cardiology recommendations; Îș=0.15) to moderate (refined criteria; Îș=0.41) among inexperienced cardiologists; however, interobserver reliability was moderate for all 3 criteria among experienced cardiologists (Îș=0.40-0.53). Inexperienced cardiologists were more likely to refer athletes for further evaluation compared with experienced cardiologists (odds ratio, 4.74; 95% confidence interval, 3.50-6.43) with poorer interobserver reliability (Îș=0.22 versus Îș=0.47). Interobserver reliability for secondary investigations after ECG interpretation ranged from poor to fair among inexperienced cardiologists (Îș=0.15-0.30) and fair to moderate among experienced cardiologists (Îș=0.21-0.46). The cost of cardiovascular evaluation per athlete was 175(95175 (95% confidence interval, 142-228)and228) and 101 (95% confidence interval, 83−83-131) for inexperienced and experienced cardiologists, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Interpretation of the ECG in athletes and the resultant cascade of investigations are highly physician dependent even in experienced hands with important downstream financial implications, emphasizing the need for formal training and standardized diagnostic pathways
    corecore