Background:The prevalence of chronic postoperative pain after cardiac surgery has been reported from 17% to 56%.Objectives:We aimed to compare the prevalence of postoperative pain between patients who had undergone CABG using the internal mammary artery (IMA) and those who had undergone other cardiac surgeries including CABG using the saphenous vein or cardiac valvular surgeries.Patients and Methods:In this cohort study, medical records of 188 patients were evaluated and divided into two equal groups (94 in each group); patients who had undergone CABG using the IMA (IMA group) and those who had undergone other cardiac surgeries using the saphenous vein or other cardiac valvular surgeries (non-IMA group). The patients' data were recorded in a self-structured questionnaire and then phone interviews were performed 3 months after the operations regarding the rate of postoperative pain. The severity of chronic pain was rated based on the numerical rating pain scale.Results:The two groups differed significantly regarding the prevalence of pain (P = 0.023). In the IMA group, 83 (88.3%) patients experienced pain lasting for more than three months compared to 71 (75.5%) patients in non-IMA group. The two groups differed significantly with respect to the severity of chronic pain after cardiac surgery via sternotomy (P = 0.001). The groups did not differ significantly regarding the effects of chronic pain on their sleep, referral to a physician, and drug consumption to alleviate their pain. The IMA group experienced more complications at work and during their occupational activity.Conclusions:The rate and severity of chronic pain after cardiac surgery via sternotomy was higher in patients undergoing CABG with separation of IMA for revascularization.
Compared to the Mallampati Class test, our method of analyzing the lateral X-ray, although not as easy and universally applicable as Mallampati Class test, proved to be a suitable method for predicting difficult intubation.
BackgroundChest radiography after central venous catheter (CVC) insertion is the main method of verifying the catheter location. Despite the widespread use of radiography for detecting catheter position, x-ray may not always be readily available, especially in the operating room.ObjectivesWe aimed to compare contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) and chest radiography for detecting the correct location of CVCs.MethodsOne hundred sixteen consecutive patients with indications for CVC before cardiac surgery were enrolled in this observational study. After catheter insertion, CEUS was performed. Portable radiography was obtained postoperatively in the intensive care unit. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were determined by comparing the ultrasonography results with radiographic findings as a reference standard.ResultsChest radiography revealed 16 CVC misplacements: two cases of intravascular and 14 cases of right atrium (RA) misplacement. CEUS detected 11 true catheter malpositionings in the RA, while it could not recognize seven catheter placements correctly. CEUS showed two false RA misplacements and five falsely correct CVC positions. A sensitivity of 98% and specificity of 69% were achieved for CEUS in detecting CVC misplacements. Positive and negative predictive values were 95% and 85%, respectively. The interrater agreement (kappa) between CEUS and radiography was 0.72 (P < 0.001).ConclusionsDespite close concordance between ultrasonography and chest radiography, CEUS is not a suitable alternative for standard chest radiography in detecting CVC location; however, considering its high sensitivity and acceptable specificity in our study, its usefulness as a triage method for detecting CVC location on a real-time basis in the operating room cannot be ignored.
A B S T R A C TBackground: Although some investigations have shown higher rates of successful first attempt and fewer attempts by using ultrasound-guided Internal Jugular Vein (IJV) catheterization, arterial puncture is still common. Objectives: The present study aimed to investigate US-guided catheterization of the right IJV via medial-oblique technique and also compare this technique to short-axis technique in open-heart surgery patients. Patients and Methods: In this randomized clinical trial, 80 patients referred to cardiac operating room of Namazi hospital, Shiraz, Iran from March to July 2014 were selected using census method. Block randomization with website was also done. Then, the patients were divided into two groups of 40, Short Axis Group (SAG) and Medial-Oblique Group (M-OG). For short-axis technique, patient's head was positioned at zero degree angulation with his trunk. For medial-oblique technique, on the other hand, patient's head was tilted to left to 45 degrees between the head and trunk. Sex, age, Body Mass Index (BMI), access time, guidewire time, cannulation time, total attempts for catheterization, first, second, and third attempt success, arterial puncture, hematoma, bleeding, and catheter malposition were recorded. The overlap between the carotid artery and IJV in zero-and 45-degree angulation was estimated through ultrasound print. After all, Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was used to assess normal distribution of the data. Then, the data were analyzed through Student's t-test, Mann-Whitney U test, and chi-square test. P < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant. Results:The results showed no significant differences between the two groups regarding the duration of different catheterization steps (P = 0.376). In all the cases in both groups, accessing the vein was successful with three attempts or less. There were no clinical complications of catheterization in the two groups. The mean of overlap was 23.60 ± 33.47 in zero-degree angulation between the head and trunk and 32.72 ± 36.38 in 45-degree angulation and this difference was statistically significant (P = 0.001). Conclusions:The results of the present study showed that both US-guided techniques under investigation had the same duration in different catheterization steps, total success rate, and primary mechanical complications, and could be used in clinics.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.