30 research outputs found

    Variation in thromboembolic complications among patients undergoing commonly performed cancer operations

    Get PDF
    ObjectiveThere is widespread evidence that cancer confers an increased risk of deep venous thrombosis (DVT). This risk is thought to vary among different cancer types. The purpose of this study is to better define the incidence of thrombotic complications among patients undergoing surgical treatment for a spectrum of prevalent cancer diagnoses in contemporary practice.MethodsAll patients undergoing one of 11 cancer surgical operations (breast resection, hysterectomy, prostatectomy, colectomy, gastrectomy, lung resection, hepatectomy, pancreatectomy, cystectomy, esophagectomy, and nephrectomy) were identified by Current Procedural Terminology and International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (2007-2009). The study endpoints were DVT, pulmonary embolism (PE), and overall postoperative venous thromboembolic events (VTE) within 1 month of the index procedure. Multivariate logistic regression was utilized to calculate adjusted odds ratios for each endpoint.ResultsOver the study interval, 43,808 of the selected cancer operations were performed. The incidence of DVT, PE, and total VTE within 1 month following surgery varied widely across a spectrum of cancer diagnoses, ranging from 0.19%, 0.12%, and 0.28% for breast resection to 6.1%, 2.4%, and 7.3%, respectively, for esophagectomy. Compared with breast cancer, the incidence of VTE ranged from a 1.31-fold increase in VTE associated with gastrectomy (95% confidence interval, 0.73-2.37; P = .4) to a 2.68-fold increase associated with hysterectomy (95% confidence interval, 1.43-5.01; P = .002). Multivariate logistic regression revealed that inpatient status, steroid use, advanced age (≥60 years), morbid obesity (body mass index ≥35), blood transfusion, reintubation, cardiac arrest, postoperative infectious complications, and prolonged hospitalization were independently associated with increased risk of VTE.ConclusionsThe incidence of VTE and thromboembolic complications associated with cancer surgery varies substantially. These findings suggest that both tumor type and resection magnitude may impact VTE risk. Accordingly, such data support diagnosis and procedural-specific guidelines for perioperative VTE prophylaxis and can be used to anticipate the risk of potentially preventable morbidity

    An evaluation of prefilled insulin pens: a focus on the Next Generation FlexPen®

    No full text
    Estella M Davis, Emily L Sexson, Mikayla L Spangler, Pamela A ForalDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, Creighton University School of Pharmacy and Health Professions, Omaha, Nebraska, USAAbstract: Insulin pen delivery systems are preferred by patients over the traditional vial and syringe method for insulin delivery because they are simple and easy to use, improve confidence in dosing insulin, and have less interference with activities and improved discretion with use. Insulin manufacturers have made numerous improvements to their first marketed pen devices and are now introducing their next generation of devices. Design modifications to the newest generation of prefilled insulin pen devices are intended to improve the ease of use and safety and continue to positively impact adherence to insulin. This review focuses on the Next Generation FlexPen® with regard to design considerations to reduce injection force, improve accuracy and ease of use, and evaluate the preference of patient and health-care provider compared with other disposable, prefilled insulin pen devices.Keywords: diabetes, dose accuracy, injection force, patient preference, insulin pen devic

    Outcomes of carotid endarterectomy versus stenting in comparable medical risk patients

    Get PDF
    OBJECTIVE: In medically high-risk patients the choice between carotid artery stenting (CAS) and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) can be difficult. The purpose of this study was to compare risk-stratified outcomes of CAS and CEA. METHODS: Patients who underwent isolated primary CEA (n = 11,336) or primary CAS (n = 544) at 29 centers in the Vascular Study Group of New England were analyzed (2003-2013); patients with previous ipsilateral CEA or CAS, or concomitant coronary artery bypass graft were excluded. A medical risk score based on predicted 5-year mortality was developed for each patient using a Cox proportional hazards model. Patients in the highest risk score quartile were termed high-risk (vs normal-risk for the other three quartiles). Medically high-risk patients had a 5-year survival of 65% and comprised 23% of CEA and 25% of CAS patients. Risk-stratified outcomes were compared within neurologically symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. RESULTS: Among asymptomatic patients, rates of in-hospital stroke and/or death were not different between CAS and CEA in normal and high-risk cohorts, ranging from 0.7% in normal-risk CEA patients to 1.6% in high-risk CAS patients. In symptomatic patients, significantly worse outcomes were seen with CAS compared with CEA in normal-risk and high-risk patients. Normal-risk symptomatic patients had a stroke or death rate of 1.3% with CEA, but 5.2% with CAS (P \u3c .01). In high-risk symptomatic patients, the stroke or death rate was 1.5% with CEA and 9.3% with CAS (P \u3c .01). No significant differences were seen between asymptomatic CEA and CAS within risk strata across secondary outcome measures of stroke, death, or myocardial infarction, and ipsilateral stroke, major stroke, or death. However, symptomatic high-risk CAS patients had significantly greater rates of all secondary outcomes compared with CEA except death, and symptomatic normal-risk CAS patients had only significantly greater rates of death and stroke, death, or myocardial infarction. CONCLUSIONS: In the Vascular Study Group of New England, asymptomatic normal- and high-risk patients do equally well after CEA or CAS. However, normal- and high-risk symptomatic patients have substantially worse outcomes with CAS compared with CEA. High medical risk alone might be an insufficient indication for CAS in symptomatic patients. rights reserved

    Feasibility and pilot efficacy of a brief smoking cessation intervention delivered by vascular surgeons in the Vascular Physician Offer and Report (VAPOR) Trial

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: This study determined the feasibility and potential efficacy of an evidence-based standardized smoking cessation intervention delivered by vascular surgeons to smokers with peripheral arterial disease. METHODS: We performed a cluster-randomized trial of current adult smokers referred to eight vascular surgery practices from September 1, 2014, to July 31, 2015. A three-component smoking cessation intervention (physician advice, nicotine replacement therapy, and telephone-based quitline referral) was compared with usual care. The primary outcome was smoking cessation for 7 days, assessed 3 months after the intervention. Secondary outcomes were patients\u27 nicotine dependence and health expectancies of smoking assessed using Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS; RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif). RESULTS: We enrolled 156 patients (65 in four intervention practices, 91 in four control practices), and 141 (90.3%) completed follow-up. Patients in the intervention and control practices were similar in age (mean, 61 years), sex (68% male), cigarettes per day (mean, 14), and prior quit attempts (77%). All three components of the intervention were delivered to 75% of patients in intervention practices vs to 7% of patients at control practices (P \u3c .001). At 3 months, 23 of 57 patients (40.3%) in the intervention group quit smoking (23 of 56 patients quit who completed follow-up, plus 1 death included in the analysis in the denominator as a smoker), and 26 of 84 patients (30.9%) In the control group quit smoking (26 patients of 84 who completed follow-up, including 2 deaths included in the denominator as smokers). This difference (40.3% quit rate in intervention, 31% quit rate in control; P = .250) was not statistically significant in crude analyses (P = .250) or analyses adjusted for clustering (P = .470). Multivariable analysis showed factors associated with smoking cessation were receipt of physician advice (odds ratio for cessation, 1.96; 95% confidence interval, 1.28-3.02; P \u3c .002) and nicotine replacement therapy (odds ratio, 1.92; 95% confidence interval, 1.43-2.56; P \u3c .001). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a brief, surgeon-delivered smoking cessation intervention is feasible for patients with peripheral arterial disease. A larger trial will be necessary to determine whether this is effective for smoking cessation
    corecore