Impacto de la angiografía coronaria rotacional en la cantidad total de contraste administrado y la exposición a las radiaciones ionizantes en pacientes en los que se realizan procedimientos coronarios invasivos: revisión sistemática y metaanálisis / Impact of rotational coronary angiography in the amount of iodinated contrast and the exposure to ionising radiations in patients undergoing invasive coronary procedures: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Resumen Antecedentes: Los procedimientos coronarios invasivos conllevan la administración de contraste y la exposición a radiaciones ionizantes, comportando un incremento de la morbimortalidad. La angiografía coronaria rotacional (ACR) permite adquirir múltiples proyecciones con una inyección de contraste. Hasta la fecha, no hay metaanálisis específicos comparando la ACR y la angiografía coronaria convencional (ACC) en pacientes en los que se realizan procedimientos coronarios invasivos, tanto diagnósticos como diagnósticos y terapéuticos. El objetivo de este metaanálisis es evaluar el impacto de la ACR en la cantidad de contraste, y la radiación ionizante en procedimientos coronarios invasivos. Métodos: Se realizó una búsqueda en las bases de datos PubMed y Ovid para identificar estudios tanto diagnósticos como diagnósticos y terapéuticos que comparasen ACR y ACC. Los estudios fueron evaluados sobre la calidad y los sesgos, y fueron incluidos si contemplaban alguna de las siguientes variables de valoración: volumen de contraste, radiación ionizante medida como producto dosis-área, Kerma-aire o tiempo de fluoroscopia. Resultados: Dieciséis estudios, totalizando 2,327 pacientes, fueron incluidos en el análisis final (1,146 pacientes recibieron ACR y 1,181, ACC), objetivándose diferencias significativas en volumen de contraste (diferencia estándar de medias (intervalo de confianza al 95%) −1.887 (−2.472 a −1.302); p < 0.001), producto dosis-área (−0.726 (−1.034 a −0.418); p < 0.001), Kerma-aire (−0.842 (−1.104 a −0.581); p < 0.001) y tiempo de fluoroscopia (0.263 (−0.496 a −0.030); p = 0.027). Conclusiones: La ACR permite reducir el volumen de contraste y la radiación, evaluada como producto dosis-área, Kerma-aire y tiempo de fluoroscopia en pacientes a los que se les realizan procedimientos coronarios invasivos.

Abstract Background: Invasive coronary procedures involve the administration of iodinated contrast and the exposure to ionising radiations, increasing morbidity and mortality. The rotational coronary angiography (RCA) allows acquiring multiple projections with a unique injection of iodinated contrast. To date, there are no meta-analyses specifically comparing RCA and conventional coronary angiography (CCA) in patients undergoing invasive coronary procedures, whether diagnostic or diagnostic and therapeutic. The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess the impact of RCA on the amount of iodinated contrast and the exposure to ionising radiations during invasive coronary procedures. Methods: A search in PubMed and Ovid databases was conducted to identify studies, including diagnostic and diagnostic and therapeutic studies, comparing RCA and CCA. The manuscripts were evaluated on quality and biases, and were included if they analysed any of the following endpoints: volume of contrast and exposure to ionising radiations measured as dose-area product, and Kerma-air or fluoroscopy time. Results: Sixteen studies, with a total of 2,327 patients, were included in the final analysis (1,146 patients underwent RCA and 1,181 patients underwent CCA), with significant differences being detected in volume of contrast (standard difference in means (95% confidence interval) −1.887 (−2.472 to −1.302); P < .001), dose-area product (−0.726 (−1.034 to −0.418); P < .001), Kerma-air (−0.842 (−1.104 to −0.581); P < .001), and fluoroscopy time (0.263 (−0.496 to −0.030); P = .027). Conclusions: RCA reduces the volume of contrast and the exposure to radiation, evaluated as dose-area product, Kerma-air, and fluoroscopy time, in patients undergoing invasive coronary procedures.

[Impact of rotational coronary angiography in the amount of iodinated contrast and the exposure to ionising radiations in patients undergoing invasive coronary procedures: A systematic review and meta-analysis]. / Impacto de la angiografía coronaria rotacional en la cantidad total de contraste administrado y la exposición a las radiaciones ionizantes en pacientes en los que se realizan procedimientos coronarios invasivos: revisión sistemática y metaanálisis.

BACKGROUND: Invasive coronary procedures involve the administration of iodinated contrast and the exposure to ionising radiations, increasing morbidity and mortality. The rotational coronary angiography (RCA) allows acquiring multiple projections with a unique injection of iodinated contrast. To date, there are no meta-analyses specifically comparing RCA and conventional coronary angiography (CCA) in patients undergoing invasive coronary procedures, whether diagnostic or diagnostic and therapeutic. The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess the impact of RCA on the amount of iodinated contrast and the exposure to ionising radiations during invasive coronary procedures. METHODS: A search in PubMed and Ovid databases was conducted to identify studies, including diagnostic and diagnostic and therapeutic studies, comparing RCA and CCA. The manuscripts were evaluated on quality and biases, and were included if they analysed any of the following endpoints: volume of contrast and exposure to ionising radiations measured as dose-area product, and Kerma-air or fluoroscopy time. RESULTS: Sixteen studies, with a total of 2,327 patients, were included in the final analysis (1,146 patients underwent RCA and 1,181 patients underwent CCA), with significant differences being detected in volume of contrast (standard difference in means [95% confidence interval] -1.887 [-2.472 to -1.302]; P<.001), dose-area product (-0.726 [-1.034 to -0.418]; P<.001), Kerma-air (-0.842 [-1.104 to -0.581]; P<.001), and fluoroscopy time (0.263 [-0.496 to -0.030]; P=.027). CONCLUSIONS: RCA reduces the volume of contrast and the exposure to radiation, evaluated as dose-area product, Kerma-air, and fluoroscopy time, in patients undergoing invasive coronary procedures.

[Use of topic iodine in acute wounds]. / Uso de iodóforo tópico em feridas agudas.

The purpose of this study was to carry out a systematic review of the literature regarding the use of topic iodine and/or compounds in the treatment of acute wounds. The clinical trials were searched at the Cochrane's database using the following descriptors: iodine, acute wound, treatment, healing, infection, surgery, surgical. Twenty studies (52.6%) out of 38 met the criteria for inclusion. The articles were analyzed regarding journal and study characteristics and classified into five groups: iodine versus other topic agents (4/20%); iodine versus types of dressings (1/5%); iodine versus saline solution (5/25%); iodine versus no iodine (8/40%); and iodine at different concentrations (2/10%). Favorable results for the use of iodine and/or compounds occurred in 45% of the studies. Three out of 5 studies showed favorable results for healing and prevention of infection and 9 out of 15 studies were not favorable when only infection prevention was investigated.

Uso de iodóforo tópico em feridas agudas: [revisão] / Use of topic iodine in acute wounds: [review]

Esta pesquisa objetivou realizar revisão sistemática da literatura relacionada ao uso de iodóforos tópicos no tratamento de feridas agudas. Os ensaios clínicos foram localizados por meio da Base de Dados Cochrane, utilizando-se os seguintes descritores: iodine, acute wound, treatment, healing, infection, surgery, surgical. Vinte (52,6 por cento), dentre 38 artigos, enquadraramse nos critérios de inclusão, sendo analisados quanto às características dos periódicos e dos estudos e classificados em: iodóforo versus outros agentes tópicos (4/ 20 por cento); iodóforo versus coberturas (1/ 5 por cento); iodóforo versus soro fisiológico (5/ 25 por cento); iodóforo versus sem iodóforo (8/ 40 por cento) e iodóforos em diferentes concentrações (2/ 10 por cento). Resultados favoráveis para os iodóforos ocorreram em 45 por cento dos artigos. Quanto às tendências dos resultados, três dentre cinco artigos mostraram-se favoráveis para a cicatrização de feridas e prevenção de infecção e nove dentre 15 artigos foram desfavoráveis ao uso de iodóforos tópicos quando somente a prevenção de infecção foi investigada.

The purpose of this study was to carry out a systematic review of the literature regarding the use of topic iodine and/or compounds in the treatment of acute wounds. The clinical trials were searched at the Cochrane's database using the following descriptors: iodine, acute wound, treatment, healing, infection, surgery, surgical. Twenty studies (52.6 percent) out of 38 met the criteria for inclusion. The articles were analyzed regarding journal and study characteristics and classified into five groups: iodine versus other topic agents (4/ 20 percent); iodine versus types of dressings (1/ 5 percent); iodine versus saline solution (5/ 25 percent); iodine versus no iodine (8/ 40 percent); and iodine at different concentrations (2/ 10 percent). Favorable results for the use of iodine and/or compounds occurred in 45 percent of the studies. Three out of 5 studies showed favorable results for healing and prevention of infection and 9 out of 15 studies were not favorable when only infection prevention was investigated.

En esta investigación se tuvo como objetivo realizar una revisión sistemática de la literatura respecto a la utilización del yodo tópico y/o compuestos en el tratamiento de las heridas agudas. Los ensayos clínicos fueron localizados por medio de la Base de Datos Cochrane, utilizándose los siguientes descriptores: iodine, acute wound, treatment, healing, infection, surgery, surgical. Veinte (52,6 por ciento), de 38 artículos, se encuadraron en los criterios de inclusión, siendo analizados en cuanto a las características de los periódicos y de los estudios y clasificados en: yodo versus otros agentes tópicos (4/ 20 por ciento); yodo versus apósitos (1/ 5 por ciento); yodo versus solución fisiológica (5/ 25 por ciento); yodo versus sin yodo (8/ 40 por ciento) y yodo en diferentes concentraciones (2/ 10 por ciento). Resultados favorables para el yodo se obtuvieron en el 45 por ciento de los artículos. En cuanto a las tendencias de los resultados, tres de cinco artículos se mostraron favorables para la cicatrización de heridas y prevención de infección y nueve de 15 artículos fueron desfavorables al uso del yodo tópico cuando sólo la prevención de infección fue investigada.