Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 8 de 8
Filter
2.
Anesth Analg ; 134(2): 303-311, 2022 02 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1928240

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Oxytocin administration during cesarean delivery is the first-line therapy for the prevention of uterine atony. Patients with preeclampsia may receive magnesium sulfate, a drug with known tocolytic effects, for seizure prophylaxis. However, no study has evaluated the minimum effective dose of oxytocin during cesarean delivery in women with preeclampsia. METHODS: This study compared the effective dose in 90% population (ED90) of oxytocin infusion for achieving satisfactory uterine tone during cesarean delivery in nonlaboring patients with preeclampsia who were receiving magnesium sulfate treatment with a control group of normotensives who were not receiving magnesium sulfate. This prospective dual-arm dose-finding study was based on a 9:1 biased sequential allocation design. Oxytocin infusion was initiated at 13 IU/h, on clamping of the umbilical cord, in the first patient of each group. Uterine tone was graded as satisfactory or unsatisfactory by the obstetrician at 4 minutes after initiation of oxytocin infusion. The dose of oxytocin infusion for subsequent patients was decided according to the response exhibited by the previous patient in the group; it was increased by 2 IU/h after unsatisfactory response or decreased by 2 IU/h or maintained at the same level after satisfactory response, in a ratio of 1:9. Oxytocin-associated side effects were also evaluated. Dose-response data for the groups were evaluated using a log-logistic function and ED90 estimates were derived from fitted equations using the delta method. RESULTS: The ED90 of oxytocin was significantly greater for the preeclampsia group (n = 27) than for the normotensive group (n = 40) (24.9 IU/h [95% confidence interval {CI}, 22.4-27.5] and 13.9 IU/h [95% CI, 12.4-15.5], respectively); the difference in dose requirement was 10.9 IU/h (95% CI, 7.9-14.0; P < .001). The number of patients with oxytocin-related hypotension, defined as a decrease in systolic blood pressure >20% from baseline or to <90 mm Hg, was significantly greater in the preeclampsia group (92.6% vs 62.5%; P = .030), while other side effects such as ST-T depression, nausea/vomiting, headache, and flushing, were not significantly different. There was no significant difference in the need for additional uterotonic or uterine massage, estimated blood loss, and need for re-exploration for uncontrolled bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with preeclampsia receiving preoperative magnesium therapy need a greater intraoperative dose of oxytocin to achieve satisfactory contraction of the uterus after fetal delivery, as compared to normotensives.


Subject(s)
Analgesics/administration & dosage , Cesarean Section/methods , Magnesium Sulfate/administration & dosage , Oxytocin/administration & dosage , Pre-Eclampsia/drug therapy , Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis/methods , Adult , Blood Pressure/drug effects , Blood Pressure/physiology , Cesarean Section/adverse effects , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Female , Humans , Infusions, Intravenous , Pre-Eclampsia/diagnosis , Pre-Eclampsia/epidemiology , Pregnancy , Prospective Studies , Treatment Outcome , Young Adult
3.
Rev Bras Ter Intensiva ; 33(1): 48-67, 2021.
Article in Spanish, English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1197640

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To propose agile strategies for a comprehensive approach to analgesia, sedation, delirium, early mobility and family engagement for patients with COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome, considering the high risk of infection among health workers, the humanitarian treatment that we must provide to patients and the inclusion of patients' families, in a context lacking specific therapeutic strategies against the virus globally available to date and a potential lack of health resources. METHODS: A nonsystematic review of the scientific evidence in the main bibliographic databases was carried out, together with national and international clinical experience and judgment. Finally, a consensus of recommendations was made among the members of the Committee for Analgesia, Sedation and Delirium of the Sociedad Argentina de Terapia Intensiva. RESULTS: Recommendations were agreed upon, and tools were developed to ensure a comprehensive approach to analgesia, sedation, delirium, early mobility and family engagement for adult patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome due to COVID-19. DISCUSSION: Given the new order generated in intensive therapies due to the advancing COVID-19 pandemic, we propose to not leave aside the usual good practices but to adapt them to the particular context generated. Our consensus is supported by scientific evidence and national and international experience and will be an attractive consultation tool in intensive therapies.


OBJETIVO: Proponer estrategias agile para este abordaje integral de la analgesia, sedación, delirium, implementación de movilidad temprana e inclusión familiar del paciente con síndrome de dificultad respiratoria aguda por COVID-19, considerando el alto riesgo de infección que existe entre los trabajadores de salud, el tratamiento humanitario que debemos brindar al paciente y su familia, en un contexto de falta estrategias terapéuticas específicas contra el virus globalmente disponibles a la fecha y una potencial falta de recursos sanitarios. METODOS: Se llevó a cabo una revision no sistemática de la evidencia científica en las principales bases de datos bibliográficos, sumada a la experiencia y juicio clínico nacional e internacional. Finalmente, se realizó un consenso de recomendaciones entre los integrantes del Comité de Analgesia, Sedación y Delirium de la Sociedad Argentina de Terapia Intensiva. RESULTADOS: Se acordaron recomendaciones y se desarrollaron herramientas para asegurar un abordaje integral de analgesia, sedación, delirium, implementación de movilidad temprana e inclusión familiar del paciente adulto con síndrome de dificultad respiratoria aguda por COVID-19. DISCUSIÓN: Ante el nuevo orden generado en las terapias intensivas por la progresión de la pandemia de COVID-19, proponemos no dejar atrás las buenas prácticas habituales, sino adaptarlas al contexto particular generado. Nuestro consenso está respaldado en la evidencia científica, la experiencia nacional e internacional, y será una herramienta de consulta atractiva en las terapias intensivas.


Subject(s)
Analgesia/standards , COVID-19/complications , Consensus , Delirium/therapy , Pain Management/standards , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/therapy , Analgesia/methods , Analgesics/administration & dosage , Checklist , Delirium/diagnosis , Early Ambulation , Family , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Intubation, Intratracheal/methods , Neuromuscular Blockade/methods , Neuromuscular Blockade/standards , Pain Management/methods , Pain Measurement/methods , Pain Measurement/standards , Psychomotor Agitation/therapy , COVID-19 Drug Treatment
4.
Urologia ; 88(3): 232-236, 2021 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-999439

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 is a challenge for both patients and physicians in emergency department (ED). This study was aimed to report the impacts of the COVID-19 outbreak on visits and treatments for patients with ureteral stones in a general hospital ED. METHODS: The patients with ureteral stones were collected from 24 January to 24 March 2020 during the COVID-19 outbreak in Beijing. Two periods were divided for study: 24 January to 24 February (Period 1) and 25 February to 24 March (Period 2). Data on patients' characteristics, attendance, visual analog scale (VAS) scores, stone features, and final treatment choices were retrieved from the computer and compared with the data in the same periods in 2019. RESULTS: The study included 376 patients with ureteral stones during the COVID-19 outbreak periods in 2020 and 343 patients during the same periods in 2019. Compared with the same periods in 2019, the number of patients with ureteral stones was less in Period 1 (137 vs 163) but had a rebound phenomenon in Period 2 (239 vs 180). The visit frequency was significantly reduced (2.6 ± 0.4 vs 3.6 ± 0.8, p < 0.01) and the VAS scores and the onset time increased (7.7 ± 1.3 vs 5.5 ± 1.6, p < 0.01; 7.4 ± 1.8 vs 8.2 ± 1.5, p < 0.01, respectively) in Period 1. More patients chose oral analgesics medication to release from renal colic in the COVID-19 outbreak period instead of ESWL and intravenous analgesics medication (Period 1, 54.0% vs 20.2%, p < 0.01; Period 2, 20.9% vs 13.3%, p = 0.044; respectively). However, the percentage of patients underwent endoscopy surgery in outbreak period showed no significant difference compared with that in 2019. CONCLUSION: These results showed that the COVID-19 outbreak can directly affect the visits and final treatment choices for patients with ureteral stones.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Emergency Service, Hospital/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals, General/statistics & numerical data , Hospitals, Urban/statistics & numerical data , Patient Acceptance of Health Care , SARS-CoV-2 , Ureteral Calculi/epidemiology , Administration, Oral , Adult , Analgesics/administration & dosage , Analgesics/therapeutic use , China/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Decision Making, Shared , Female , Humans , Injections, Intravenous , Lithotripsy/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Procedures and Techniques Utilization , Renal Colic/drug therapy , Renal Colic/etiology , Ureteral Calculi/complications , Ureteral Calculi/therapy , Ureteroscopy/statistics & numerical data , Young Adult
6.
Semin Respir Crit Care Med ; 42(1): 98-111, 2021 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-780096

ABSTRACT

In the critically ill patient, optimal pain and sedation management remains the cornerstone of achieving comfort, safety, and to facilitate complex life support interventions. Pain relief, using multimodal analgesia, is an integral component of any orchestrated approach to achieve clinically appropriate goals in critically ill patients. Sedative management, however, remains a significant challenge. Subsequent studies including most recent randomized trials have failed to provide strong evidence in favor of a sedative agent, a mode of sedation or ancillary protocols such as sedative interruption and sedative minimization. In addition, clinical practice guidelines, despite a comprehensive evaluation of relevant literature, have limitations when applied to individual patients. These limitations have been most apparent during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. As such, there is a need for a mindset shift to a practical and achievable sedation strategy, driven by patients' characteristics and individual patient needs, rather than one cocktail for all patients. In this review, we present key principles to achieve patient-and symptom-oriented optimal analgesia and sedation in the critically ill patients. Sedative intensity should be proportionate to care complexity with due consideration to an individual patient's modifiers. The use of multimodal analgesics, sedatives, and antipsychotics agents-that are easily titratable-reduces the overall quantum of sedatives and opioids, and reduces the risk of adverse events while maximizing clinical benefits. In addition, critical considerations regarding the choice of sedative agents should be given to factors such as age, medical versus operative diagnosis, and cardiovascular status. Specific populations such as trauma, neurological injury, and pregnancy should also be taken into account to maximize efficacy and reduce adverse events.


Subject(s)
Analgesia/methods , Hypnotics and Sedatives/administration & dosage , Pain Management/methods , Analgesics/administration & dosage , COVID-19 , Critical Illness , Humans , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
7.
BMJ Case Rep ; 13(7)2020 Jul 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-639125

ABSTRACT

Erythema nodosum (EN) is a common dermatological manifestation with many different aetiologies. Often however, the aetiology remains unidentified. We present here a 42-year-old male patient with an EN that is due to an acute COVID-19 infection. Most of the usual aetiologies were excluded by laboratory testing and imaging studies. This case is, to our knowledge, the first report of this cutaneous manifestation in the context of a COVID-19 infection. The EN was successfully treated with the disappearance of the COVID-19 infection and topical corticosteroids.


Subject(s)
Analgesics/administration & dosage , Coronavirus Infections , Erythema Nodosum , Glucocorticoids/administration & dosage , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/methods , Adult , Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , COVID-19 , COVID-19 Testing , Clinical Laboratory Techniques/methods , Coronavirus Infections/complications , Coronavirus Infections/diagnosis , Coronavirus Infections/physiopathology , Diagnosis, Differential , Erythema Nodosum/diagnosis , Erythema Nodosum/etiology , Erythema Nodosum/therapy , Humans , Male , Pneumonia, Viral/complications , Pneumonia, Viral/diagnosis , Pneumonia, Viral/physiopathology , Radiography, Thoracic/methods , SARS-CoV-2 , Skin Cream/administration & dosage , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL