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.
BMC Cardiovasc Disord ; 23(1): 579, 2023 11 24.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37996792

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Inferior vena cava (IVC) diameter variability with respiration measured by ultrasound was found to be useful for the diagnosis of heart failure (HF) in ED patients with acute dyspnea. Its value in identifying HF in acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbation (AECOPD) was not specifically demonstrated. OBJECTIVE: To determine the value of ΔIVC in the diagnosis of HF patients with AECOPD. METHODS: This is a prospective study conducted in the ED of three Tunisian university hospitals including patients with AECOPD. During this period, 401 patients met the inclusion criteria. The final diagnosis of HF is based on the opinion of two emergency experts after consulting the data from clinical examination, cardiac echocardiography, and BNP level. The ΔIVC was calculated by two experienced emergency physicians who were blinded from the patient's clinical and laboratory data. A cut off of 15% was used to define the presence (< 15%) or absence of HF (≥ 15%). Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was also measured. The area under the ROC curve, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated to determine the diagnostic and predictive accuracy of the ΔIVC in predicting HF. RESULTS: The study population included 401 patients with AECOPD, mean age 67.2 years with male (68.9%) predominance. HF was diagnosed in 165 (41.1%) patients (HF group) and in 236 patients (58.9%) HF was excluded (non HF group). The assessment of the performance of the ΔIVC in the diagnosis of HF showed a sensitivity of 37.4% and a specificity of 89.7% using the threshold of 15%. The positive predictive value was 70.9% and the negative predictive value was 66.7%. The area under the ROC curve was 0.71(95%, CI 0.65-0.76). ΔIVC values were not different between HF patients with reduced LVEF and those with preserved LVEF. CONCLUSION: Our results showed that ΔIVC has a good value for ruling out HF in ED patients consulting for AECOPD.


Assuntos
Insuficiência Cardíaca , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica , Humanos , Masculino , Idoso , Volume Sistólico , Veia Cava Inferior/diagnóstico por imagem , Estudos Prospectivos , Função Ventricular Esquerda , Insuficiência Cardíaca/diagnóstico por imagem , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/diagnóstico , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/diagnóstico por imagem
2.
Acad Emerg Med ; 28(2): 155-163, 2021 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33145862

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and acetaminophen (also called paracetamol) are the most frequent analgesics used to relieve posttrauma pain in the emergency department (ED). However, the utility of combining both treatments is still controversial. We sought to explore the benefits of combining an NSAID with acetaminophen compared to acetaminophen alone, or NSAID alone, in the treatment of posttraumatic pain of the extremity after discharge from the ED. METHODS: This is a prospective, randomized controlled trial, carried out in a single ED from March 2017 to November 2018. The included patients were randomly assigned to receive paracetamol alone, high-dose NSAID (piroxicam) alone, or a combination of paracetamol and high-dose NSAID for 7 days after ED discharge. The primary outcome was need for additional oral analgesics. Secondary outcomes included the change of the visual numeric scale (VNS) between ED discharge (VNS D0) and 7 days later (VNS D7), ED revisits for residual pain, side effects, and patient satisfaction as assessed by a Likert satisfaction scale. RESULTS: The need for additional oral analgesics was comparable between the paracetamol-NSAID combination group (9.8%) and the paracetamol group (11.4%; p = 0.43). ED readmission rate was also comparable between the two groups at 5.6 and 5.8%, respectively (p = 0.86). In contrast, need for new analgesics and ED revisit rates were both more frequent in the high-dose NSAID group. Mean VNS decreases on day 7 compared to day 0 were 66, 63, and 67%, respectively, in the paracetamol, NSAID, and paracetamol-NSAID combination groups (p = 0.32). Frequency of dissatisfaction was higher in the NSAID group. Side effects were more frequent in the NSAID and paracetamol-NSAID combination groups. CONCLUSION: This study found that the combination of a high-dose NSAID with paracetamol does not increase the analgesic effect compared to paracetamol alone. We also found that paracetamol alone is superior to high-dose NSAID alone for posttraumatic extremity pain.


Assuntos
Analgésicos não Narcóticos , Preparações Farmacêuticas , Acetaminofen , Analgésicos , Anti-Inflamatórios não Esteroides , Humanos , Estudos Prospectivos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...