2,449 research outputs found
Transcatheter valve implantation for patients with aortic stenosis: a position statement from the European Association of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) and the European Society of Cardiology (ESC), in collaboration with the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI)
Aims: To critically review the available transcatheter aortic valve implantation techniques and their results, as well as propose recommendations for their use and development. Methods and results: A committee of experts including European Association of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery and European Society of Cardiology representatives met to reach a consensus based on the analysis of the available data obtained with transcatheter aortic valve implantation and their own experience. The evidence suggests that this technique is feasible and provides haemodynamic and clinical improvement for up to 2 years in patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis at high risk or with contraindications for surgery. Questions remain mainly concerning safety and long-term durability, which have to be assessed. Surgeons and cardiologists working as a team should select candidates, perform the procedure, and assess the results. Today, the use of this technique should be restricted to high-risk patients or those with contraindications for surgery. However, this may be extended to lower risk patients if the initial promise holds to be true after careful evaluation. Conclusion: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation is a promising technique, which may offer an alternative to conventional surgery for high-risk patients with aortic stenosis. Today, careful evaluation is needed to avoid the risk of uncontrolled diffusio
Scottish and Newcastle antiemetic pre-treatment for paracetamol poisoning study (SNAP)
BACKGROUND: Paracetamol (acetaminophen) poisoning remains the commonest cause of acute liver injury in Europe and North America. The intravenous (IV) N-acetylcysteine (NAC) regimen introduced in the 1970s has continued effectively unchanged. This involves 3 different infusion regimens (dose and time) lasting over 20 hours. The same weight-related dose of NAC is used irrespective of paracetamol dose. Complications include frequent nausea and vomiting, anaphylactoid reactions and dosing errors. We designed a randomised controlled study investigating the efficacy of antiemetic pre-treatment (ondansetron) using standard NAC and a modified, shorter, regimen. METHODS/DESIGN: We designed a double-blind trial using a 2 × 2 factorial design involving four parallel groups. Pre-treatment with ondansetron 4 mg IV was compared against placebo on nausea and vomiting following the standard (20.25 h) regimen, or a novel 12 h NAC regimen in paracetamol poisoning. Each delivered 300 mg/kg bodyweight NAC. Randomisation was stratified on: paracetamol dose, perceived risk factors, and time to presentation. The primary outcome was the incidence of nausea and vomiting following NAC. In addition the frequency of anaphylactoid reactions and end of treatment liver function documented. Where clinically necessary further doses of NAC were administered as per standard UK protocols at the end of the first antidote course. DISCUSSION: This study is primarily designed to test the efficacy of prophylactic anti-emetic therapy with ondansetron, but is the first attempt to formally examine new methods of administering IV NAC in paracetamol overdose. We anticipate, from volunteer studies, that nausea and vomiting will be less frequent with the new NAC regimen. In addition as anaphylactoid response appears related to plasma concentrations of both NAC and paracetamol anaphylactoid reactions should be less likely. This study is not powered to assess the relative efficacy of the two NAC regimens, however it will give useful information to power future studies. As the first formal randomised clinical trial in this patient group in over 30 years this study will also provide information to support further studies in patients in paracetamol overdose, particularly, when linked with modern novel biomarkers of liver damage, patients at different toxicity risk. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT number 2009-017800-10, ClinicalTrials.gov IdentifierNCT0105027
Systematic review on the recurrence of postoperative nausea and vomiting after a first episode in the recovery room – implications for the treatment of PONV and related clinical trials
BACKGROUND: Despite the presence of a plethora of publications on the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) only little is known how to treat established symptoms. Besides the high effort of performing these efficacy trials (much more patients must give their consent than are actually included in a study) and ethical concerns, little is known about the rate of re-occurring PONV/vomiting after placebo. As a consequence investigators will have difficulties defining a clinically relevant effect for the new treatment which is crucial for any planning. A quantitative systematic review was performed in order to provide more reliable estimates of the incidence of re-occurring PONV/vomiting after placebo and to help investigators defining a clinically relevant treatment effect. METHODS: A systematic search of the literature was performed using an extended search strategy of a previous review. Data on the recurrence of PONV (any nausea or emetic symptom) and vomiting (retching or vomiting) was extracted from published reports treating PONV with placebo and unpublished results from two observational trials where no treatment was given. A nonlinear random effects model was used to calculate estimates of the recurrence of symptoms and their 95%-confidence intervals (95%-CI). RESULTS: A total of 29 trials (including the unpublished data) were eligible for the calculations. Depending on the length of observation after administering placebo or no treatment the recurrence rate of PONV was between 65% (95%-CI: 53%...75%) and 84% (95%-CI: 73%...91%) and that of vomiting was between 65% (95%-CI: 44%...81%) and 78% (95%-CI: 59%...90%). CONCLUSION: Almost all trials showed a considerable and consistently high rate of recurrence of emetic symptoms after placebo highlighting the need for a consequent antiemetic treatment. Future (placebo) controlled efficacy trials may use the presented empirical estimates for defining clinically relevant effects and for statistical power considerations
Une approche préventive adaptée aux risques réduit l’incidence générale de nausées et de vomissements postopératoires en milieu hospitalier
Treatment of established postoperative nausea and vomiting: a quantitative systematic review
BACKGROUND: The relative efficacy of antiemetics for the treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is poorly understood. METHODS: Systematic search (MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, bibliographies, any language, to 8.2000) for randomised comparisons of antiemetics with any comparator for the treatment of established PONV. Dichotomous data on prevention of further nausea and vomiting, and on side effects were combined using a fixed effect model. RESULTS: In seven trials (1,267 patients), 11 different antiemetics were tested without placebos; these data were not further analysed. Eighteen trials (3,809) had placebo controls. Dolasetron 12.5–100 mg, granisetron 0.1–3 mg, tropisetron 0.5–5 mg, and ondansetron 1–8 mg prevented further vomiting with little evidence of dose-responsiveness; with all regimens, absolute risk reductions compared with placebo were 20%–30%. The anti-nausea effect was less pronounced. Headache was dose-dependent. Results on propofol were contradictory. The NK(1) antagonist GR205171, isopropyl alcohol vapor, metoclopramide, domperidone, and midazolam were tested in one trial each with a limited number of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Of 100 vomiting surgical patients receiving a 5-HT(3) receptor antagonist, 20 to 30 will stop vomiting who would not have done so had they received a placebo; less will profit from the anti-nausea effect. There is a lack of evidence for a clinically relevant dose-response; minimal effective doses may be used. There is a discrepancy between the plethora of trials on prevention of PONV and the paucity of trials on treatment of established symptoms. Valid data on the therapeutic efficacy of classic antiemetics, which have been used for decades, are needed
The effect of crystalloid versus medium molecular weight colloid solution on post-operative nausea and vomiting after ambulatory gynecological surgery - a prospective randomized trial.
UNLABELLED: ABSTRACT:
BACKGROUND: Intravenous fluid is recommended in international guidelines to improve patient post-operative symptoms, particularly nausea and vomiting. The optimum fluid regimen has not been established. This prospective, randomized, blinded study was designed to determine if administration of equivolumes of a colloid (hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.4) reduced post operative nausea and vomiting in healthy volunteers undergoing ambulatory gynecologic laparoscopy surgery compared to a crystalloid solution (Hartmann\u27s Solution).
METHODS: 120 patients were randomized to receive intravenous colloid (N = 60) or crystalloid (N = 60) intra-operatively. The volume of fluid administered was calculated at 1.5 ml.kg-1 per hour of fasting. Patients were interviewed to assess nausea, vomiting, anti-emetic use, dizziness, sore throat, headache and subjective general well being at 30 minutes and 2, 24 and 48 hours post operatively. Pulmonary function testing was performed on a subgroup.
RESULTS: At 2 hours the proportion of patients experiencing nausea (38.2 % vs 17.9%, P = 0.03) and the mean nausea score were increased in the colloid compared to crystalloid group respectively (1.49 ± 0.3 vs 0.68 ± 0.2, P = 0.028). The incidence of vomiting and anti-emetic usage was low and did not differ between the groups. Sore throat, dizziness, headache and general well being were not different between the groups. A comparable reduction on post-operative FVC and FEV-1 and PEFR was observed in both groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Intra-operative administration of colloid increased the incidence of early postoperative nausea and has no advantage over crystalloid for symptom control after gynaecological laparoscopic surgery
Children's vomiting following posterior fossa surgery: A retrospective study
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Nausea and vomiting is a problem for children after neurosurgery and those requiring posterior fossa procedures appear to have a high incidence. This clinical observation has not been quantified nor have risk factors unique to this group of children been elucidated.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A six year retrospective chart audit at two Canadian children's hospitals was conducted. The incidence of nausea and vomiting was extracted. Hierarchical multivariable logistic regression was used to quantify risk and protective factors at 120 hours after surgery and early vs. late vomiting.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The incidence of vomiting over a ten day postoperative period was 76.7%. Documented vomiting ranged from single events to greater than 20 over the same period. In the final multivariable model: adolescents (age 12 to <17) were less likely to vomit by 120 hours after surgery than other age groups; those who received desflurane, when compared to all other volatile anesthetics, were more likely to vomit, yet the use of ondansetron with desflurane decre kelihood. Children who had intraoperative ondansetron were more likely to vomit in the final multivariable model (perhaps because of its use, in the clinical judgment of the anesthesiologist, for children considered at risk). Children who started vomiting in the first 24 hours were more likely to be school age (groups 4 to <7 and 7 to <12) and receive desflurane. Nausea was not well documented and was therefore not analyzed.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The incidence of vomiting in children after posterior fossa surgery is sufficient to consider all children requiring these procedures to be at high risk for POV. Nausea requires better assessment and documentation.</p
Search for new physics with same-sign isolated dilepton events with jets and missing transverse energy
A search for new physics is performed in events with two same-sign isolated
leptons, hadronic jets, and missing transverse energy in the final state. The
analysis is based on a data sample corresponding to an integrated luminosity of
4.98 inverse femtobarns produced in pp collisions at a center-of-mass energy of
7 TeV collected by the CMS experiment at the LHC. This constitutes a factor of
140 increase in integrated luminosity over previously published results. The
observed yields agree with the standard model predictions and thus no evidence
for new physics is found. The observations are used to set upper limits on
possible new physics contributions and to constrain supersymmetric models. To
facilitate the interpretation of the data in a broader range of new physics
scenarios, information on the event selection, detector response, and
efficiencies is provided.Comment: Published in Physical Review Letter
Search for anomalous t t-bar production in the highly-boosted all-hadronic final state
A search is presented for a massive particle, generically referred to as a
Z', decaying into a t t-bar pair. The search focuses on Z' resonances that are
sufficiently massive to produce highly Lorentz-boosted top quarks, which yield
collimated decay products that are partially or fully merged into single jets.
The analysis uses new methods to analyze jet substructure, providing
suppression of the non-top multijet backgrounds. The analysis is based on a
data sample of proton-proton collisions at a center-of-mass energy of 7 TeV,
corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 5 inverse femtobarns. Upper limits
in the range of 1 pb are set on the product of the production cross section and
branching fraction for a topcolor Z' modeled for several widths, as well as for
a Randall--Sundrum Kaluza--Klein gluon. In addition, the results constrain any
enhancement in t t-bar production beyond expectations of the standard model for
t t-bar invariant masses larger than 1 TeV.Comment: Submitted to the Journal of High Energy Physics; this version
includes a minor typo correction that will be submitted as an erratu
Preoperative dexamethasone reduces postoperative pain, nausea and vomiting following mastectomy for breast cancer
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Dexamethasone has been reported to reduce postoperative symptoms after different surgical procedures. We evaluated the efficacy of preoperative dexamethasone in ameliorating postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), and pain after mastectomy.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In this prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, 70 patients scheduled for mastectomy with axillary lymph node dissection were analyzed after randomization to treatment with 8 mg intravenous dexamethasone (<it>n </it>= 35) or placebo (<it>n </it>= 35). All patients underwent standardized procedures for general anesthesia and surgery. Episodes of PONV and pain score were recorded on a visual analogue scale. Analgesic and antiemetic requirements were also recorded.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Demographic and medical variables were similar between groups. The incidence of PONV was lower in the dexamethasone group at the early postoperative evaluation (28.6% <it>vs</it>. 60%; <it>p </it>= 0.02) and at 6 h (17.2% <it>vs</it>. 45.8%; <it>p </it>= 0.03). More patients in the placebo group required additional antiemetic medication (21 <it>vs</it>. 8; <it>p </it>= 0.01). Dexamethasone treatment significantly reduced postoperative pain just after surgery (VAS score, 4.54 ± 1.55 <it>vs</it>. 5.83 ± 2.00; <it>p </it>= 0.004), at 6 h (3.03 ± 1.20 <it>vs</it>. 4.17 ± 1.24; <it>p </it>< 0.0005) and at 12 h (2.09 ± 0.85 <it>vs</it>. 2.54 ± 0.98; <it>p </it>= 0.04). Analgesics were required in more patients of the control group (21 <it>vs</it>. 10; <it>p </it>= 0.008). There were no adverse events, morbidity or mortality.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Preoperative intravenous dexamethasone (8 mg) can significantly reduce the incidence of PONV and pain in patients undergoing mastectomy with axillary dissection for breast cancer.</p> <p>Trial registration number</p> <p>NCT01116713</p
- …