Vocabolario dantesco o Dizionario critico e ragionato della Divina commedia di Dante Alighieri

XIV, 464 p

Anesthesia and perioperative pain management during cardiac electronic device implantation

Marina Biocic,1 Dijana Vidosevic,2 Matija Boric,1,3 Teo Boric,4 Lovel Giunio,2 Damir Fabijanic,2 Livia Puljak1,5 1Laboratory for Pain Research, University of Split School of Medicine, 2Department of Cardiology, 3Department of Abdominal Surgery, 4Department of Vascular Surgery, University Hospital Split, Split, 5Department for Development, Research and Health Technology Assessment, Agency for Quality and Accreditation in Health Care and Social Welfare, Zagreb, Croatia Background: The degree of pain caused by the implantation of cardiac electronic devices (CEDs) and the type of anesthesia or perioperative pain management used with the procedure have been insufficiently studied. The aim of this study was to analyze perioperative pain management, as well as intensity and location of pain among patients undergoing implantation of CED, and to compare the practice with published guidelines. Patients and methods: This was a combined retrospective and prospective study conducted at the tertiary hospital, University Hospital Split, Croatia. The sample included 372 patients who underwent CED implantation. Perioperative pain management was analyzed retrospectively in 321 patients who underwent CED implantation during 2014. In a prospective study, intensity and location of pain before, during, and after the procedure were measured by using a numerical rating scale (NRS) ranging from 0 to 10 in 51 patients at the same institution from November 2014 to August 2015. Results: A quarter of patients received analgesia or sedation before surgery. All the patients received local lidocaine anesthesia. After surgery, 31% of patients received pain medication or sedation. The highest pain intensity was observed during CED implantation with the highest NRS pain score being 8. Some patients reported severe pain (NRS >5) also at 1, 3, 6, 8, and 24 hours after surgery. The most common pain locations were surgical site, shoulder, and chest. Adherence to guidelines for acute perioperative pain management was insufficient. Conclusion: Patients may experience severe pain during and after CED implantation. Perioperative pain management was suboptimal, and higher doses of sedation and intensive analgesia are required. Guidelines for acute perioperative pain management and anesthesia during CED implantation should be developed. Keywords: cardiac electronic devices, perioperative pain management, postoperative pain, analgesics, pain intensity, guideline

Interventional treatment in diabetics in the era of drugeluting stents and compliance to the ESC guidelines: Lessons learned from the Euro Heart Survey Programme

Aims: The objective of the study is to determine the demographics and the in-hospital outcome of diabetic and non-diabetic patients treated with percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in Europe, to report the type of equipment and technology used for PCI procedures in diabetics and to clarify whether the treatment of diabetic patients complies with current European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines. Methods and results: A total of 14,458 patients treated with PCI were enrolled from 29 member countries of the ESC between June 2005 and January 2006. Data were collected on patient characteristics and treatment, using new Cardiology Audit and Registration Data standards. In total, 3,603 patients (24.9%) were diabetic. Diabetics were older, more often female and had a higher body mass index than non-diabetics. Diabetics had higher rates of hypercholesterolaemia and hypertension, while current smokers were more frequent in the non-diabetics. Diabetics also had significantly higher rates of previous cardiovascular events. Clopidogrel was administered only in 48.1% of diabetic patients before PCI, while IIb/IIIa inhibitors were 22.9% during PCI. At discharge, there was a major adjustment of treatment with increases in the use of Beta-blocker (80.4%), angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI, 71.3%) and statins (89.8%) compared with on admission (Beta-blocker 60.9%, ACEI 55.0%, statin 63.1%). Inhospital mortality was higher in diabetics (1.8% vs 1.2%) although the in-hospital MACCE rate was not significantly different (3.6% vs 3.0%, p=0.09). Conclusions: Diabetic patients treated with PCI were older with more comorbidity. According to ESC guideline, the under-usage of clopidogrel, GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors should be improved. PCI is now taken as a good opportunity to adjust the use of appropriate medication. © Europa Edition. All rights reserved