Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Can J Cardiol ; 33(2): 199-208, 2017 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28043739

ABSTRACT

Congenital heart disease is the most common congenital malformation and approximately 3 in 1000 newborns have critical congenital heart disease (CCHD). Timely diagnosis affects morbidity, mortality, and disability, and newborn pulse oximetry screening has been studied to enhance detection of CCHD. In this position statement we present an evaluation of the literature for pulse oximetry screening. Current detection strategies including prenatal ultrasound examination and newborn physical examination are limited by low diagnostic sensitivity. Pulse oximetry screening is safe, noninvasive, easy to perform, and widely available with a high specificity (99.9%) and moderately high sensitivity (76.5%). When an abnormal saturation is obtained, the likelihood of having CCHD is 5.5 times greater than when a normal result is obtained. The use of pulse oximetry combined with current strategies has shown sensitivities of up to 92% for detecting CCHD. False positive results can be minimized by screening after 24 hours, and testing the right hand and either foot might further increase sensitivity. Newborns with abnormal screening results should undergo a comprehensive assessment and echocardiography performed if a cardiac cause cannot be excluded. Screening has been studied to be cost neutral to cost effective. We recommend that pulse oximetry screening should be routinely performed in all healthy newborns to enhance the detection of CCHD in Canada.


Subject(s)
Cardiology , Consensus , Heart Defects, Congenital/diagnosis , Neonatal Screening/methods , Oximetry/standards , Societies, Medical , Canada , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Neonatal Screening/standards
2.
Can J Cardiol ; 31(12): 1497.e23-8, 2015 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26319967

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Compliance with the April 2007 American Heart Association (AHA) infective endocarditis (IE) guidelines is not well described. We sought to evaluate the impact of these guidelines on the clinical practices of pediatric and adult congenital cardiologists. METHODS: We conducted a 2-centre retrospective cohort study, including patients who had at least 1 outpatient cardiology visit after April 1, 2008 and had 1 of 11 prespecified high- or low-risk congenital cardiac lesions. High-risk lesions required prophylaxis per the AHA guidelines; low-risk patients no longer required prophylaxis. Cardiology clinic letters were reviewed to determine if antibiotic prophylaxis and oral hygiene were addressed and whether prophylaxis was recommended. Comparisons were made before April 2007 vs at least 1 year after guideline publication. RESULTS: We included 238 high-risk and 201 low-risk patients. IE prophylaxis was recommended for all study patients before April 2007. After April 2008, IE prophylaxis recommendations were reduced by 44.9% for low-risk patients (P < 0.0001) and 9.3% for high-risk patients (P = 0.0156). IE prophylaxis recommendations were documented in the medical record of 92% of patients (95% confidence interval, 88%-95%) before April 2007 vs 81% (77%-84%) after April 2008. Oral hygiene was emphasized for only 44% and 28% of patients before and after guideline revision (P = 0.0005). CONCLUSIONS: The 2007 AHA guidelines resulted in significantly fewer recommendations for IE prophylaxis in low-risk patients. However, cardiologists continue to recommend prophylaxis for some low-risk patients and advise some high-risk patients against prophylaxis. These findings suggest disagreement or uncertainty within the cardiology community regarding current IE guidelines.


Subject(s)
Antibiotic Prophylaxis , Endocarditis/prevention & control , Guideline Adherence , Heart Defects, Congenital/complications , Oral Hygiene , Practice Patterns, Physicians' , Adult , Alberta , Child , Cohort Studies , Combined Modality Therapy , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors
3.
Paediatr Child Health ; 17(1): 21-3, 2012 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23277749
4.
Cardiol Young ; 21(3): 241-51, 2011 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21272427

ABSTRACT

Paediatric myocarditis remains challenging from the perspectives of diagnosis and management. Multiple aetiologies exist and the majority of cases appear to be related to viral illnesses. Enteroviruses are believed to be the most common cause, although cases related to adenovirus may be more frequent than suspected. The clinical presentation is extremely varied, ranging from asymptomatic to sudden unexpected death. A high index of suspicion is crucial. There is emerging evidence to support investigations such as serum N-terminal B-type natriuretic peptide levels, as well as cardiac magnetic resonance imaging as adjuncts to the clinical diagnosis. In the future, these may reduce the necessity for invasive methods, such as endomyocardial biopsy, which remain the gold standard. Management generally includes supportive care, consisting of cardiac failure medical management, with the potential for mechanical support and cardiac transplantation. Treatments aimed at immunosuppression remain controversial. The paediatric literature is extremely limited with no conclusive evidence to support or refute these strategies. This article summarises the current literature regarding aetiology, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and management of myocarditis in paediatric patients.


Subject(s)
Myocarditis , Biomarkers/blood , Humans , Myocarditis/diagnosis , Myocarditis/etiology , Myocarditis/therapy , Pediatrics , Prognosis , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...