Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Surg Infect (Larchmt) ; 21(2): 122-129, 2020 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31553271

ABSTRACT

Background: Because of the everincreasing costs and the complexity of institutional medical reimbursement policies, the necessity for extensive laboratory work-up of potentially infected patients has come into question. We hypothesized that intensivists are able to differentiate between infected and non-infected patients clinically, without the need to pan-culture, and are able to identify the location of the infection clinically in order to administer timely and appropriate treatment. Methods: Data collected prospectively on critically ill patients suspected of having an infection in the surgical intensive care unit (SICU) was obtained over a six-month period in a single tertiary academic medical center. Objective evidence of infection derived from laboratory or imaging data was compared with the subjective answers of the three most senior physicians' clinical diagnoses. Results: Thirty-nine critically ill surgical patients received 52 work-ups for suspected infections on the basis of signs and symptoms (e.g., fever, altered mental status). Thirty patients were found to be infected. Clinical diagnosis differentiated infected and non-infected patients with only 61.5% accuracy (sensitivity 60.3%; specificity 64.4%; p = 0.0049). Concordance between physicians was poor (κ = 0.33). Providers were able to predict the infectious source correctly only 60% of the time. Utilization of culture/objective data and SICU antibiotic protocols led to overall 78% appropriate initiation of antibiotics compared with 48% when treatment was based on clinical evaluation alone. Conclusion: Clinical diagnosis of infection is difficult, inaccurate, and unreliable in the absence of culture and sensitivity data. Infection suspected on the basis of signs and symptoms should be confirmed via objective and thorough work-up.


Subject(s)
Critical Illness/epidemiology , Cross Infection/diagnosis , Intensive Care Units/statistics & numerical data , Microbiological Techniques/standards , Physicians/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Sensitivity and Specificity
2.
Endocr Pract ; 26(3): 299-304, 2020 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31682519

ABSTRACT

Objective: To assess the evolving standards of care for hyperparathyroidism in kidney transplant candidates. Methods: An 11-question, Institutional Review Board-approved survey was designed and reviewed by multiple institutions. The questionnaire was made available to the American Society of Transplantation's Kidney Pancreas Community of Practice membership via their online hub from April through July 2019. Results: Twenty percent (n = 41) of kidney transplant centers responded out of 202 programs in the United States. Forty-one percent (n = 17) of respondents believed medical literature supports the concept that a serum parathyroid hormone level greater than 800 pg/mL could endanger the survival of a transplanted kidney and therefore makes transplantation in an affected patient relatively or absolutely contraindicated. Sixty-six percent (n = 27) said they occasionally recommend parathyroidectomy for secondary hyperparathyroidism prior to transplantation, and 66% (n = 27) recommend parathyroidectomy after transplantation based on persistent, unsatisfactory posttransplantation parathyroid hormone levels. Forty-six percent (n = 19) prefer subtotal parathyroidectomy as their choice; 44% (n = 18) had no standard preference. Endocrine surgery and otolaryngology were the most common surgical specialties consulted to perform parathyroidectomy in kidney transplant candidates. The majority of respondents (71%, n = 29) do not involve endocrinologists in the management of kidney transplantation candidates. Conclusion: Our survey shows wide divergence of clinical practice in the area of surgical management of kidney transplantation candidates with hyperparathyroidism. We suggest that medical/surgical societies involved in the transplantation care spectrum convene a multidisciplinary group of experts to create a new section in the kidney transplantation guidelines addressing the collaborative management of parathyroid disease in transplantation candidates. Abbreviations: AACE = American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists; AAES = American Association of Endocrine Surgeons; AHNS = American Head and Neck Society; CKD = chronic kidney disease; CKD-MBD = chronic kidney disease-mineral and bone disorder; ESRD = end-stage renal disease; HPT = hyperparathyroidism; KDIGO = Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes; KT = kidney transplantation; KTC = kidney transplant candidate; PTH = parathyroid hormone; PTX = parathyroidectomy; US = ultrasonography.


Subject(s)
Hyperparathyroidism, Secondary , Kidney Transplantation , Consensus , Humans , Hyperparathyroidism, Secondary/surgery , Kidney Failure, Chronic , Parathyroid Hormone , Parathyroidectomy
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...