Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ) ; 42(6): 267-70, 2013 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23805420

RESUMO

Anticoagulation after spine surgery confers the unique risk of epidural hematoma. We sought to determine the incidence of and patient risk factors for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) after spine surgery. We retrospectively reviewed the charts of 1485 patients who had spine surgery at a single tertiary-care center between 2002 and 2009. DVT and PE incidence were recorded along with pertinent patient history information. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed on the data. VTE incidence was 1.1% (DVTs, 0.7%; PEs, 0.4%). Univariate analysis demonstrated that VTEs had 9 positive risk factors: active malignancy, prior DVT or PE, estrogen replacement therapy, discharge to a rehabilitation facility, hypertension, major depressive disorder, renal disease, congestive heart failure, and benign prostatic hyperplasia (P<.05). Multivariate analysis demonstrated 4 independent risk factors: prior DVT or PE, estrogen replacement therapy, discharge to a rehabilitation facility, and major depressive disorder (P>.05). Surgeons with an improved understanding of VTE after spine surgery can balance the risks and benefits of postoperative anticoagulation.


Assuntos
Artroplastia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Embolia Pulmonar/epidemiologia , Fusão Vertebral , Trombose Venosa/epidemiologia , Anticoagulantes/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Incidência , Cifoplastia , Análise Multivariada , Embolia Pulmonar/prevenção & controle , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Risco , Fusão Vertebral/métodos , Coluna Vertebral/cirurgia , Trombose Venosa/prevenção & controle
2.
Pain Manag ; 3(1): 67-79, 2013 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24645933

RESUMO

SUMMARY The objective of this article was to perform a narrative review regarding the treatment of myofascial pain syndrome and to provide clinicians with treatment recommendations. This paper reviews the efficacy of various myofascial pain syndrome treatment modalities, including pharmacological therapy, injection-based therapies and physical therapy interventions. Outcomes evaluated included pain (visual analog scale), pain pressure threshold and range of motion. The evidence found significant benefit with multiple treatments, including diclofenac patch, thiocolchicoside and lidocaine patches. Trigger point injections, ischemic compression therapy, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, spray and stretch, and myofascial release were also efficacious. The authors recommend focusing on treating underlying pathologies, including spinal conditions, postural abnormalities and underlying behavioral issues. To achieve maximum pain reduction and improve function, we recommend physicians approach myofascial pain syndrome with a multimodal plan, which includes a combination of pharmacologic therapies, various physical therapeutic modalities and injection therapies.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...