24 research outputs found

    Influence of the Interposition of a Nonhollow Probe during Cannula Extraction on Sclerotomy Vitreous Incarceration in Sutureless Vitrectomy

    Get PDF
    PURPOSE. To evaluate the effect of the cannula removal technique on postoperative vitreous incarceration using an experimental model of vitrectomized eye. METHODS. In a prospective, experimental, randomized, and observer-masked study, 118 cadaveric pig eyes were vitrectomized through 23-gauge transconjunctival sclerotomies. Once vitrectomy was finished, one of the superior cannulas was extracted with the illumination probe inserted through it, and the other cannula was removed with a cannula plug inserted. Postoperative incisional vitreous entrapment was evaluated by direct visualization. No vitreous incarceration was classified as grade 0 (G0), thin vitreous entrapment was classified as grade 1 (G1), and thick vitreous strands as grade 2 (G2). RESULTS. Considering the sclerotomies whose cannulas were extracted with the light probe inside, vitreous incarceration was detected in 93.2% (73.7% G1, 19.5% G2) of the incisions. In turn, vitreous entrapment was observed in 95.8% (43.2% G1, 52.6% G2) of the entry sites whose cannulas were extracted with the plug inserted. Statistical analysis showed significant differences when comparing postvitrectomy vitreous incarceration grades in sclerotomies according to the cannula extraction technique (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS. Interposing the light probe through the cannula during its removal reduces vitreous incarceration grade in our experimental model. This simple maneuver may decrease complications related to vitreous entrapment, such as peripheral retinal tears and acute endophthalmitis. (Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2012;53:7322-7326

    Risk profiles and one-year outcomes of patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation in India: Insights from the GARFIELD-AF Registry.

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: The Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF) is an ongoing prospective noninterventional registry, which is providing important information on the baseline characteristics, treatment patterns, and 1-year outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). This report describes data from Indian patients recruited in this registry. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 52,014 patients with newly diagnosed AF were enrolled globally; of these, 1388 patients were recruited from 26 sites within India (2012-2016). In India, the mean age was 65.8 years at diagnosis of NVAF. Hypertension was the most prevalent risk factor for AF, present in 68.5% of patients from India and in 76.3% of patients globally (P < 0.001). Diabetes and coronary artery disease (CAD) were prevalent in 36.2% and 28.1% of patients as compared with global prevalence of 22.2% and 21.6%, respectively (P < 0.001 for both). Antiplatelet therapy was the most common antithrombotic treatment in India. With increasing stroke risk, however, patients were more likely to receive oral anticoagulant therapy [mainly vitamin K antagonist (VKA)], but average international normalized ratio (INR) was lower among Indian patients [median INR value 1.6 (interquartile range {IQR}: 1.3-2.3) versus 2.3 (IQR 1.8-2.8) (P < 0.001)]. Compared with other countries, patients from India had markedly higher rates of all-cause mortality [7.68 per 100 person-years (95% confidence interval 6.32-9.35) vs 4.34 (4.16-4.53), P < 0.0001], while rates of stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding were lower after 1 year of follow-up. CONCLUSION: Compared to previously published registries from India, the GARFIELD-AF registry describes clinical profiles and outcomes in Indian patients with AF of a different etiology. The registry data show that compared to the rest of the world, Indian AF patients are younger in age and have more diabetes and CAD. Patients with a higher stroke risk are more likely to receive anticoagulation therapy with VKA but are underdosed compared with the global average in the GARFIELD-AF. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION-URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01090362

    Literaturverzeichnis

    No full text

    International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis

    No full text
    Critical examination of the quality and validity of available allergic rhinitis (AR) literature is necessary to improve understanding and to appropriately translate this knowledge to clinical care of the AR patient. To evaluate the existing AR literature, international multidisciplinary experts with an interest in AR have produced the International Consensus statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Allergic Rhinitis (ICAR:AR). Using previously described methodology, specific topics were developed relating to AR. Each topic was assigned a literature review, evidence-based review (EBR), or evidence-based review with recommendations (EBRR) format as dictated by available evidence and purpose within the ICAR:AR document. Following iterative reviews of each topic, the ICAR:AR document was synthesized and reviewed by all authors for consensus. The ICAR:AR document addresses over 100 individual topics related to AR, including diagnosis, pathophysiology, epidemiology, disease burden, risk factors for the development of AR, allergy testing modalities, treatment, and other conditions/comorbidities associated with AR. This critical review of the AR literature has identified several strengths; providers can be confident that treatment decisions are supported by rigorous studies. However, there are also substantial gaps in the AR literature. These knowledge gaps should be viewed as opportunities for improvement, as often the things that we teach and the medicine that we practice are not based on the best quality evidence. This document aims to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of the AR literature to identify areas for future AR research and improved understandin
    corecore