6 research outputs found

    REVERSE PDA - LESS COMMON TYPE OF PATENT DUCTUS ARTERIOSUS -CASE REPORT

    Get PDF
    Introduction: PDA represents one of the most frequently diagnosed type of congenital heart disease. Ductus arteriosus is a normal structure in foetal life, which permits shunting of oxygenated blood from the pulmonary artery into the aorta. Failure of sealing after birth is an abnormal condition and is called patent ductus arteriosus. In normal PDA, due to fact that systemic pressure is fivefold higher than pulmonary circulation, blood is shunted from the aorta into the pulmonary artery. In reverse PDA, pulmonary artery pressure does not drop after birth, and blood will be shunted form right to left. Aims: We want to evaluate clinical, haematological, ECG and echocardiographic changes in case of reverse PDA. Materials and Methods: Two-year old female Bichon Frise was referred to our clinic with signs of effort intolerance and dyspnoea for more than a year. ECG was performed in the right lateral recumbency using a digital device and echocardiography was done with Esaote MyLab40 Vet with a phased array transducer matched with the size of the dog (7.5 MHz). Results: We identified a dog with a good body score, quite alert and without any sign of illness. Haematological investigation underlined polycythaemia and very high PCV. The ECG revealed a normal sinus rhythm with a deep S wave, changes consistent with right ventricle enlargement.  Right atrial dilation and right ventricle hypertrophy were found on cardiac ultrasonography. The right ventricle free wall was hypertrophied and interventricular septum was flattened, changes consistent with increased pressure on the right side of the heart. The left heart was small. Positive diagnosis was done, performing ñ€Ɠbubble studyñ€ and identification of contrast bubble within the abdominal aorta.   Conclusion: Reverse PDA is a rarely diagnosed congenital heart disease. Polycythaemia in young dogs could raise the suspicion of reverse PDA.  For positive diagnosis, echocardiography and bubble study are required. ECG is not a sensitive tool for diagnosis

    COVID-19 Inflammatory Markers and Vitamin D Relationship in Pediatric Patients

    No full text
    Background: Biomarkers play an important role in COVID-19, and more research in this regard is needed, especially in the case of children. This study aimed to look for a link between the C reactive protein (CRP), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), creatine kinase (CK), vitamin D and COVID-19 in pediatric patients. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study, performed on children diagnosed positively with COVID-19 at a children’s hospital in western Romania. Available CRP, LDH, CK vitamin D and clinical severity were recorded. For each biomarker, groups were formed by patients’ age. Mean/median group differences were assessed using Student’s t test or Mann–Whitney and Kruskal–Wallis with Dunn’s post hoc tests. Association was assessed using the chi2 test, while correlation was assessed using Spearman’s rank correlation. Results: 181 positive children were studied between 1 August 2021 and 1 February 2022. Average age was 8.76 years (SD = 3.93). There were 94 (51.93%) males and 87 (48.07%) females. The cases were: 62 asymptomatic (34.25%), 107 mild (59.12%), 9 moderate (4.97%), 3 severe (1.66%). Regarding CRP, a significant difference between older and younger patients was observed (p = 0.0034). Clinical severity was associated with CRP (p = 0.0281), LDH (p = 0.0410) and vitamin D (p = 0.0444). Regarding CK, no differences or associations proved significant. Correlation testing was conducted for CRP, LDH, vitamin D and clinical signs. With the exception of LDH-CRP and LDH-vitamin D, all relationships proved statistically significant. Conclusions: CRP, LDH and vitamin D levels are important biomarkers for COVID-19-positive pediatric patients, while CK was mostly within normal ranges

    Surgeons’ practice and preferences for the anal fissure treatment: results from an international survey

    No full text
    The best nonoperative or operative anal fissure (AF) treatment is not yet established, and several options have been proposed. Aim is to report the surgeons' practice for the AF treatment. Thirty-four multiple-choice questions were developed. Seven questions were about to participants' demographics and, 27 questions about their clinical practice. Based on the specialty (general surgeon and colorectal surgeon), obtained data were divided and compared between two groups. Five-hundred surgeons were included (321 general and 179 colorectal surgeons). For both groups, duration of symptoms for at least 6 weeks is the most important factor for AF diagnosis (30.6%). Type of AF (acute vs chronic) is the most important factor which guide the therapeutic plan (44.4%). The first treatment of choice for acute AF is ointment application for both groups (59.6%). For the treatment of chronic AF, this data is confirmed by colorectal surgeons (57%), but not by the general surgeons who prefer the lateral internal sphincterotomy (LIS) (31.8%) (p = 0.0001). Botulin toxin injection is most performed by colorectal surgeons (58.7%) in comparison to general surgeons (20.9%) (p = 0.0001). Anal flap is mostly performed by colorectal surgeons (37.4%) in comparison to general surgeons (28.3%) (p = 0.0001). Fissurectomy alone is statistically significantly most performed by general surgeons in comparison to colorectal surgeons (57.9% and 43.6%, respectively) (p = 0.0020). This analysis provides useful information about the clinical practice for the management of a debated topic such as AF treatment. Shared guidelines and consensus especially focused on operative management are required to standardize the treatment and to improve postoperative results

    SARS-CoV-2 vaccination modelling for safe surgery to save lives: data from an international prospective cohort study

    No full text
    Background Preoperative SARS-CoV-2 vaccination could support safer elective surgery. Vaccine numbers are limited so this study aimed to inform their prioritization by modelling. Methods The primary outcome was the number needed to vaccinate (NNV) to prevent one COVID-19-related death in 1 year. NNVs were based on postoperative SARS-CoV-2 rates and mortality in an international cohort study (surgical patients), and community SARS-CoV-2 incidence and case fatality data (general population). NNV estimates were stratified by age (18-49, 50-69, 70 or more years) and type of surgery. Best- and worst-case scenarios were used to describe uncertainty. Results NNVs were more favourable in surgical patients than the general population. The most favourable NNVs were in patients aged 70 years or more needing cancer surgery (351; best case 196, worst case 816) or non-cancer surgery (733; best case 407, worst case 1664). Both exceeded the NNV in the general population (1840; best case 1196, worst case 3066). NNVs for surgical patients remained favourable at a range of SARS-CoV-2 incidence rates in sensitivity analysis modelling. Globally, prioritizing preoperative vaccination of patients needing elective surgery ahead of the general population could prevent an additional 58 687 (best case 115 007, worst case 20 177) COVID-19-related deaths in 1 year. Conclusion As global roll out of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination proceeds, patients needing elective surgery should be prioritized ahead of the general population.The aim of this study was to inform vaccination prioritization by modelling the impact of vaccination on elective inpatient surgery. The study found that patients aged at least 70 years needing elective surgery should be prioritized alongside other high-risk groups during early vaccination programmes. Once vaccines are rolled out to younger populations, prioritizing surgical patients is advantageous

    Evaluation of a quality improvement intervention to reduce anastomotic leak following right colectomy (EAGLE): pragmatic, batched stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized trial in 64 countries

    No full text
    Background Anastomotic leak affects 8 per cent of patients after right colectomy with a 10-fold increased risk of postoperative death. The EAGLE study aimed to develop and test whether an international, standardized quality improvement intervention could reduce anastomotic leaks. Methods The internationally intended protocol, iteratively co-developed by a multistage Delphi process, comprised an online educational module introducing risk stratification, an intraoperative checklist, and harmonized surgical techniques. Clusters (hospital teams) were randomized to one of three arms with varied sequences of intervention/data collection by a derived stepped-wedge batch design (at least 18 hospital teams per batch). Patients were blinded to the study allocation. Low- and middle-income country enrolment was encouraged. The primary outcome (assessed by intention to treat) was anastomotic leak rate, and subgroup analyses by module completion (at least 80 per cent of surgeons, high engagement; less than 50 per cent, low engagement) were preplanned. Results A total 355 hospital teams registered, with 332 from 64 countries (39.2 per cent low and middle income) included in the final analysis. The online modules were completed by half of the surgeons (2143 of 4411). The primary analysis included 3039 of the 3268 patients recruited (206 patients had no anastomosis and 23 were lost to follow-up), with anastomotic leaks arising before and after the intervention in 10.1 and 9.6 per cent respectively (adjusted OR 0.87, 95 per cent c.i. 0.59 to 1.30; P = 0.498). The proportion of surgeons completing the educational modules was an influence: the leak rate decreased from 12.2 per cent (61 of 500) before intervention to 5.1 per cent (24 of 473) after intervention in high-engagement centres (adjusted OR 0.36, 0.20 to 0.64; P < 0.001), but this was not observed in low-engagement hospitals (8.3 per cent (59 of 714) and 13.8 per cent (61 of 443) respectively; adjusted OR 2.09, 1.31 to 3.31). Conclusion Completion of globally available digital training by engaged teams can alter anastomotic leak rates. Registration number: NCT04270721 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov)
    corecore