Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 7 de 7
Filter
1.
J. bras. nefrol ; 46(3): e20230029, July-Sept. 2024. tab, graf
Article in English | LILACS-Express | LILACS | ID: biblio-1550504

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT Introduction: Lung diseases are common in patients with end stage kidney disease (ESKD), making differential diagnosis with COVID-19 a challenge. This study describes pulmonary chest tomography (CT) findings in hospitalized ESKD patients on renal replacement therapy (RRT) with clinical suspicion of COVID-19. Methods: ESKD individuals referred to emergency department older than 18 years with clinical suspicion of COVID-19 were recruited. Epidemiological baseline clinical information was extracted from electronic health records. Pulmonary CT was classified as typical, indeterminate, atypical or negative. We then compared the CT findings of positive and negative COVID-19 patients. Results: We recruited 109 patients (62.3% COVID-19-positive) between March and December 2020, mean age 60 ± 12.5 years, 43% female. The most common etiology of ESKD was diabetes. Median time on dialysis was 36 months, interquartile range = 12-84. The most common pulmonary lesion on CT was ground glass opacities. Typical CT pattern was more common in COVID-19 patients (40 (61%) vs 0 (0%) in non-COVID-19 patients, p < 0.001). Sensitivity was 60.61% (40/66) and specificity was 100% (40/40). Positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 100% and 62.3%, respectively. Atypical CT pattern was more frequent in COVID-19-negative patients (9 (14%) vs 24 (56%) in COVID-19-positive, p < 0.001), while the indeterminate pattern was similar in both groups (13 (20%) vs 6 (14%), p = 0.606), and negative pattern was more common in COVID-19-negative patients (4 (6%) vs 12 (28%), p = 0.002). Conclusions: In hospitalized ESKD patients on RRT, atypical chest CT pattern cannot adequately rule out the diagnosis of COVID-19.


RESUMO Introdução: Doenças pulmonares são comuns em pacientes com doença renal em estágio terminal (DRET), dificultando o diagnóstico diferencial com COVID-19. Este estudo descreve achados de tomografia computadorizada de tórax (TC) em pacientes com DRET em terapia renal substitutiva (TRS) hospitalizados com suspeita de COVID-19. Métodos: Indivíduos maiores de 18 anos com DRET, encaminhados ao pronto-socorro com suspeita de COVID-19 foram incluídos. Dados clínicos e epidemiológicos foram extraídos de registros eletrônicos de saúde. A TC foi classificada como típica, indeterminada, atípica, negativa. Comparamos achados tomográficos de pacientes com COVID-19 positivos e negativos. Resultados: Recrutamos 109 pacientes (62,3% COVID-19-positivos) entre março e dezembro de 2020, idade média de 60 ± 12,5 anos, 43% mulheres. A etiologia mais comum da DRET foi diabetes. Tempo médio em diálise foi 36 meses, intervalo interquartil = 12-84. A lesão pulmonar mais comum foi opacidades em vidro fosco. O padrão típico de TC foi mais comum em pacientes com COVID-19 (40 (61%) vs. 0 (0%) em pacientes sem COVID-19, p < 0,001). Sensibilidade 60,61% (40/66), especificidade 100% (40/40). Valores preditivos positivos e negativos foram 100% e 62,3%, respectivamente. Padrão atípico de TC foi mais frequente em pacientes COVID-19-negativos (9 (14%) vs. 24 (56%) em COVID-19-positivos, p < 0,001), enquanto padrão indeterminado foi semelhante em ambos os grupos (13 (20%) vs. 6 (14%), p = 0,606), e padrão negativo foi mais comum em pacientes COVID-19-negativos (4 (6%) vs. 12 (28%), p = 0,002). Conclusões: Em pacientes com DRET em TRS hospitalizados, um padrão atípico de TC de tórax não pode excluir adequadamente o diagnóstico de COVID-19.

2.
J Bras Nefrol ; 46(3): e20230029, 2024.
Article in English, Portuguese | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38502952

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Lung diseases are common in patients with end stage kidney disease (ESKD), making differential diagnosis with COVID-19 a challenge. This study describes pulmonary chest tomography (CT) findings in hospitalized ESKD patients on renal replacement therapy (RRT) with clinical suspicion of COVID-19. METHODS: ESKD individuals referred to emergency department older than 18 years with clinical suspicion of COVID-19 were recruited. Epidemiological baseline clinical information was extracted from electronic health records. Pulmonary CT was classified as typical, indeterminate, atypical or negative. We then compared the CT findings of positive and negative COVID-19 patients. RESULTS: We recruited 109 patients (62.3% COVID-19-positive) between March and December 2020, mean age 60 ± 12.5 years, 43% female. The most common etiology of ESKD was diabetes. Median time on dialysis was 36 months, interquartile range = 12-84. The most common pulmonary lesion on CT was ground glass opacities. Typical CT pattern was more common in COVID-19 patients (40 (61%) vs 0 (0%) in non-COVID-19 patients, p < 0.001). Sensitivity was 60.61% (40/66) and specificity was 100% (40/40). Positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 100% and 62.3%, respectively. Atypical CT pattern was more frequent in COVID-19-negative patients (9 (14%) vs 24 (56%) in COVID-19-positive, p < 0.001), while the indeterminate pattern was similar in both groups (13 (20%) vs 6 (14%), p = 0.606), and negative pattern was more common in COVID-19-negative patients (4 (6%) vs 12 (28%), p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: In hospitalized ESKD patients on RRT, atypical chest CT pattern cannot adequately rule out the diagnosis of COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Kidney Failure, Chronic , Humans , Female , Middle Aged , Aged , Male , SARS-CoV-2 , Renal Dialysis , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/methods , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Kidney Failure, Chronic/complications , Kidney Failure, Chronic/therapy , Retrospective Studies
3.
Headache ; 63(7): 872-879, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37326359

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To translate, culturally adapt, and validate a version of the ID Migraine into Latin American Spanish. BACKGROUND: Although still considered a common diagnosis, half of the patients with migraine in Latin America experience diagnostic delay. The ID Migraine is a test developed in 2003 as a valuable tool for the early diagnosis of migraine at the primary care level; however, there is no validated Spanish or culturally adapted version for the Spanish-speaking population. METHODS: This is an analytical, translation, and test-validation study. We performed back translation and cross-cultural adaptation. The Latin American Spanish version ID Migraine MX was applied to headache clinic patients from March 2021 to January 2022 to perform a validation process against the gold standard: blinded expert diagnosis according to the International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition (ICHD-3), criteria. RESULTS: One hundred seventeen patients from the headache clinic of the National Institute of Neurology and Neurosurgery of Mexico City were screened. We found 62/117 (53%) patients positive for screening with ID Migraine MX, and 47/117 (40%) positive for migraine according to ICHD-3 criteria. A sensitivity (95% CI) of 0.91 (0.80-0.97), specificity of 0.73 (0.61-0.82), positive predictive value of 0.694 (0.57-0.794), and negative predictive value of 0.93 (0.83-0.97) were obtained. The positive likelihood ratio was 3.38 (2.27-4.99), and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.12 (0.04-0.30). After calling the patients 1 month after the first interview, the calculated Kappa test-retest was 0.75 (p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: A translated and cross-culturally adapted version into Spanish of the ID Migraine was obtained, with a diagnostic performance similar to the original instrument. Clinicians may use this test at the first level of care to reduce the rate of misdiagnosis and the time from onset of symptoms to diagnosis and treatment of migraine.


Subject(s)
Cross-Cultural Comparison , Migraine Disorders , Humans , Latin America , Delayed Diagnosis , Surveys and Questionnaires , Migraine Disorders/diagnosis , Migraine Disorders/epidemiology , Headache , Reproducibility of Results
5.
Front Med (Lausanne) ; 9: 904795, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35755074

ABSTRACT

Background: Kidney transplantation is the best treatment option for patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) with a superiority of graft survival after living kidney donation (LKD) compared to deceased donation. However, a large part of potential donors and recipients are ineligible for LKD. Here, we analyze the leading causes for disqualification of potential living donor-recipient pairs from the LKD program and the health-related consequences for ESKD patients excluded from the LKD program in a German transplant center. Methods: In this single-center retrospective cohort study we evaluated all candidates (potential donors and recipients) presenting for assessment of LKD from 2012 to 2020 at our transplant center. Thereby we focused on candidates excluded from the LKD program. Main reasons for disqualification were categorized as medical (donor-related), psychosocial, immunological, recipient-related, and unknown. Results: Overall, 601 donor-recipient pairs were referred to our transplant center for LKD assessment during the observation time. Out of those, 326 (54.2%) discontinued the program with 52 (8.7%) dropouts and 274 (45.6%) donor-recipient pairs being ineligible for LKD. Donor-related medical contraindications were the main reason for disqualification [139 out of 274 (50.7%) potential donors] followed by recipient-related contraindications [60 out of 274 (21.9%) of potential donor-recipient pairs]. Only 77 out of 257 (29.9%) potential recipients excluded from the LKD program received a kidney transplant afterward with a median waiting time of 2 (IQR: 1.0-4.0) years. Overall, 18 (7.0%) ESKD patients initially declined for LKD died in this period. Conclusion: A large percentage of donor-recipient pairs are disqualified from the German LKD program, mostly due to medical reasons related to the donor and with partly severe consequences for the potential recipients. For these, alternative solutions that promptly enable kidney transplantation are essential for improving patient quality of life and survival.

6.
Int J Med Educ ; 12: 101-124, 2021 May 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34053914

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To describe the published literature on EBM curricula for physicians in training and barriers during curriculum implementation. METHODS: We performed a systematic search and review of the medical literature on PubMed, Embase, ERIC, Scopus and Web of Science from the earliest available date until September 4, 2019. RESULTS: We screened 9,042 references and included 29 full-text studies and 14 meeting abstracts. Eighteen studies had moderate validity, and 6 had high validity. The EBM curricular structure proved highly variable in between studies. The majority of the EBM curricula was longitudinal with different lengths. Only five studies reported using Kern's six-step approach for curriculum development. Twenty-one articles reported on EBM skills and knowledge, and only 5/29 full-text articles used a validated assessment tool. Time was the main barrier to EBM curriculum implementation. All the included studies and abstracts, independent of the EBM curriculum structure or evaluation method used, found an improvement in the residents' attitudes and/or EBM skills and knowledge. CONCLUSIONS: The current body of literature available to guide educators in EBM curriculum development is enough to constitute a strong scaffold for developing any EBM curriculum. Given the amount of time and resources needed to develop and implement an EBM curriculum, it is very important to follow the curriculum development steps and use validated assessment tools.


Subject(s)
Internship and Residency , Physicians , Attitude , Curriculum , Evidence-Based Medicine/education , Humans
7.
Clin Cardiol ; 44(5): 708-714, 2021 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33760247

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter mitral valve repair (TMVR) has shown to improve symptoms and functional capacity in patients with severe mitral valve regurgitation (MR). Novel device developments provide the technology to treat patients with complex anatomies and large coaptation gaps. Nevertheless, the question of superiority of one device remains unanswered. We aimed to compare the MitraClip XTR and MitraClip NTR system in a real world setting. HYPOTHESIS: TMVR with the MitraClip XTR system is equally effective, but associated with a higher risk of leaflet injury. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed peri-procedural and mid-term clinical and echocardiographic outcomes of 113 patients treated for severe MR between March 2018 and August 2019 at the University Hospital of Munich. RESULTS: Postprocedural MR reduction to ≤2+ was comparable in both groups (XTR: 96.1% vs. NTR: 97.6%, p = .38). There was a significant difference in a composite safety endpoint of periprocedural Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) including leaflet injury between groups (XTR 14.6% vs. NTR 1.7%, 95% CI [2.7, 24.6], p = .012). After a median follow-up of 8.5 (4.4, 14.0) months, durable reduction of MR was confirmed (XTR: in 91.9% vs. NTR: 96.8%, p = .31) and clinical and symptomatic improvement was comparable in both groups accordingly. CONCLUSION: While efficacy was comparable in both treatment groups, patients treated with the MitraClip XTR systems showed more events of acute leaflet tear and single leaflet device attachment (SLDA). A detailed echocardiographic assessment should be done to identify risk candidates for acute leaflet injury.


Subject(s)
Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation , Mitral Valve Insufficiency , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , Aged , Cardiac Catheterization/adverse effects , Female , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation/adverse effects , Humans , Male , Mitral Valve/diagnostic imaging , Mitral Valve/surgery , Mitral Valve Insufficiency/diagnostic imaging , Mitral Valve Insufficiency/surgery , Retrospective Studies , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...