Membrana de oxigenación extracorpórea (ECMO) y ventilación mecánica ultraprotectora en el estatus asmático casi fatal / Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and ultraprotective mechanical ventilation for near-fatal status asthmaticus

No disponible

Soporte con membrana de oxigenación extracorpórea en paciente con miocardiopatía de estrés secundaria a feocromocitoma / Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support in a patient with pheochromocytoma stress myocardyopathy

No disponible

Postoperative Care in Kidney Transplantation: A Comparison Between Controlled and Uncontrolled Donation After Circulatory Death.

Recent research in kidney transplantation has revealed differences in the evolution of renal function among patients transplanted from 2 alternative programs for donation after circulatory death (DCD). A retrospective, observational, single-center study was carried out from 2013 to 2016 at a level III hospital intensive care unit (ICU) to assess the progression of kidney recipients after transplants from uncontrolled DCD (uDCD) or controlled DCD (cDCD). The following variables were collected for data analysis: demographics, comorbidities, type of donation, lactate, hemoglobin and glucose levels at ICU admission, creatinine concentration at ICU admission, at-hospital ward transfer, at-hospital discharge, radioisotope imaging results, ICU and in-hospital length of stay, and mortality. There were 87 patients eligible for analysis, 42.5% of which were uDCD recipients. Improvement in kidney function was significantly delayed after uDCD compared with cDCD. A multivariate analysis showed that both uDCD and lactate levels at ICU admission increase the risk of poor outcome after renal transplantation. No deaths were registered in either patient group. Our results suggest that kidney transplantation recipients from uDCD recover renal function at a slower rate than patients transplanted from cDCD, a factor that does not affect mortality.

Results of Controlled Donation After Circulatory Death in a Third-Level Hospital.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the characteristics and evolution of controlled donation after circulatory death (DCD) type III. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Observational and retrospective study of controlled DCD type III of donors conducted from 2014 to 2016. Clinical data, intensive care unit (ICU) stay, cause of death, warm ischemia time, and total time were collected. Delayed graft function (DGF) and survival of renal transplant were also registered. Qualitative variables are described as frequencies and absolute values and quantitative variables as medians and interquartile ranges. RESULTS: A total of 21 donors were collected; 71% (15) were males, median age was 55 years (interquartile range [IR] 48-72), and median ICU stay was 7 days (IR 4-12). The main cause of death was anoxic encephalopathy (57%, 12), followed by intracerebral hemorrhage (28%, 6). In 48%, withdrawal of life support occurred in the operating room, and 98% of donors were preserved by abdominal super-rapid cannulation technique. Average warm ischemia time was 20 minutes (IR 16-24), and total ischemia time was 26 minutes (IR 23-34). Of the donations, 57% were livers and 90% were kidneys. Out of 42 kidneys donated, 54% (23) of them were valid. Median renal transplant hospital stay was 18 days (IR 6-24), and 46% develop DGF. Survival at discharge was 100%. CONCLUSION: DCD type III ensures a source of organs. The main cause of death was anoxic encephalopathy. Most donors were able to donate some solid organ.

Living Donor in Renal Transplantation: Minimizing Risks.

In recent years, the broadening of indications for renal transplantation, together with the progressive reduction of donations following brain stem death, has led to living donation being considered in increasing numbers of cases for renal transplantation. To investigate this further, it is necessary to assess the impact it has on the postoperative outcomes in the intensive care unit (ICU). Our group conducted a retrospective, observational, single-center study from 2013 to 2016 to evaluate differences in outcomes between living and cadaveric kidney donation both during ICU admission and total hospitalization. We compared differences in characteristics between living and deceased graft recipients including demographics, comorbidities, analytical data, radioisotope imaging test results, complications, ICU and hospital ward length of stay, and mortality. In all, 387 patients were eligible for analysis, and 13% received living donor grafts. Our results demonstrate that this group had significantly fewer complications, shorter length of hospital stay, and reduced mortality in comparison with recipients of cadaveric donor grafts. The better postoperative outcomes from living donor grafts could result from careful selection of the donor and less inflammatory injury, minimizing risk in the postoperative period.

Orthotopic Liver Transplantation: Preliminary Analysis of Complications With Grafts From Elderly Donors.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine if donor grafts of patients older than 65 years develop more post-transplantation complications than those of younger patients. DESIGN: This is a retrospective, observational study of liver transplant recipients during 12 months in Virgen del Rocio University Hospital. We compare incidence rates of reperfusion syndrome, acute kidney injury, and need for intra- and postoperative red blood cell transfusions in two donor age groups in which group A is <65 years old and group B is ≥65 years old. RESULTS: Sixty cases were included. Reperfusion syndrome, acute kidney injury, and both intra- and postoperative red blood cell transfusion were more frequent in group A than group B (11.4% vs. 4%, P = .390; 44% vs. 32%, P = .423; 68.8% vs. 48%, P = .120; and 70.6% vs. 64%, P = .779, respectively). Six recipients (17.1%) died at 12 months from group A whereas there were no deaths register in group B during that time (P = .036). CONCLUSION: Our results showed that including elderly donors does not aggravate incidence of complications, emphasizing that advanced age should not be an exclusion criteria for liver transplantation.