Chronic pain after surgery is recognised as an important post-operative complication; recent studies have shown up to 30% of patients reporting persistent pain following mastectomy and inguinal hernia repair. No large-scale studies have investigated the epidemiology of chronic pain at two operative sites following coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). This paper reports the follow-up of a cohort of 1348 patients who underwent cardiac surgery between 1996 and 2000 at one cardiothoracic unit in northeast Scotland. Chronic pain was defined as pain in the location of surgery, different from that suffered pre-operatively, arising post-operatively and persisting beyond 3 months. The survey questionnaire consisted of the short-form-36 (SF-36), Rose angina questionnaire, McGill pain questionnaire and the University of California and San Francisco (UCSF) pain service questionnaire. Of the 1080 responders, 130 reported chronic chest pain, 100 chronic post-saphenectomy pain and 194 reported pain at both surgical sites. The cumulative prevalence of post-cardiac surgery pain was 39.3% (CI(95) 36.4-42.2%) and mean time of 28 months since surgery (SD 15.3 months). Patients who reported pain at both sites had lower quality of life scores across all eight health domains compared to patients with pain at one site only and those who were pain-free. Prevalence of chronic pain decreased with age, from 55% in those aged under 60 years to 34% in patients over 70 years. Patients with pre-operative angina and those who were overweight or obese (BMI>/=25) at the time of surgery were more likely to report chronic pain. Chronic pain following median sternotomy and saphenous vein harvesting is more common than hitherto reported and that patients undergoing CABG should be warned of this possibility.
Measurement of blood cTnl levels may be a useful aid in the diagnosis of dogs with suspected heart disease and in indicating the severity of heart failure.
Background— Patients undergoing aortic valve replacement for critical aortic stenosis often have significant left ventricular hypertrophy. Left ventricular hypertrophy has been identified as an independent predictor of poor outcome after aortic valve replacement as a result of a combination of maladaptive myocardial changes and inadequate myocardial protection at the time of surgery. Glucose-insulin-potassium (GIK) is a potentially useful adjunct to myocardial protection. This study was designed to evaluate the effects of GIK infusion in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement surgery. Methods and Results— Patients undergoing aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis with evidence of left ventricular hypertrophy were randomly assigned to GIK or placebo. The trial was double-blind and conducted at a single center. The primary outcome was the incidence of low cardiac output syndrome. Left ventricular biopsies were analyzed to assess changes in 5′ adenosine monophosphate–activated protein kinase (AMPK), Akt phosphorylation, and protein O-linked β- N -acetylglucosamination (O-GlcNAcylation). Over a 4-year period, 217 patients were randomized (107 control, 110 GIK). GIK treatment was associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of low cardiac output state (odds ratio, 0.22; 95% confidence interval, 0.10 to 0.47; P =0.0001) and a significant reduction in inotrope use 6 to 12 hours postoperatively (odds ratio, 0.30; 95% confidence interval, 0.15 to 0.60; P =0.0007). These changes were associated with a substantial increase in AMPK and Akt phosphorylation and a significant increase in the O-GlcNAcylation of selected protein bands. Conclusions— Perioperative treatment with GIK was associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of low cardiac output state and the need for inotropic support. This benefit was associated with increased signaling protein phosphorylation and O-GlcNAcylation. Multicenter studies and late follow-up will determine whether routine use of GIK improves patient prognosis. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.controlled-trials.com . Reference number: ISRCTN 05758301.
Objectives To determine whether preoperative dexamethasone reduces postoperative vomiting in patients undergoing elective bowel surgery and whether it is associated with other measurable benefits during recovery from surgery, including quicker return to oral diet and reduced length of stay. Design Pragmatic two arm parallel group randomised trial with blinded postoperative care and outcome assessment. Setting 45 UK hospitals. Participants 1350 patients aged 18 or over undergoing elective open or laparoscopic bowel surgery for malignant or benign pathology. Interventions Addition of a single dose of 8 mg intravenous dexamethasone at induction of anaesthesia compared with standard care. Main outcome measures Primary outcome: reported vomiting within 24 hours reported by patient or clinician. Secondary outcomes: vomiting with 72 and 120 hours reported by patient or clinician; use of antiemetics and postoperative nausea and vomiting at 24, 72, and 120 hours rated by patient; fatigue and quality of life at 120 hours or discharge and at 30 days; time to return to fluid and food intake; length of hospital stay; adverse events. Results 1350 participants were recruited and randomly allocated to additional dexamethasone (n=674) or standard care (n=676) at induction of anaesthesia. Vomiting within 24 hours of surgery occurred in 172 (25.5%) participants in the dexamethasone arm and 223 (33.0%) allocated standard care (number needed to treat (NNT) 13, 95% confidence interval 5 to 22; P=0.003). Additional postoperative antiemetics were given (on demand) to 265 (39.3%) participants allocated dexamethasone and 351 (51.9%) allocated standard care (NNT 8, 5 to 11; P<0.001). Reduction in on demand antiemetics remained up to 72 hours. There was no increase in complications. Conclusions Addition of a single dose of 8 mg intravenous dexamethasone at induction of anaesthesia significantly reduces both the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting at 24 hours and the need for rescue antiemetics for up to 72 hours in patients undergoing large and small bowel surgery, with no increase in adverse events. Trial registration EudraCT (2010-022894-32) and ISRCTN (ISRCTN21973627).
Aims: To determine the level of competence and confidence in general practice in relation to the management of familial cancers and to determine the impact of providing genetic educational outreach on confidence and competence. Methods: Confidence and competence in dealing with familial cancers was measured using a postal questionnaire sent to all general practitioners and practice nurses in 4 geographical areas in central England. In 2 areas, genetic educational outreach was provided to 10 randomly selected practices and a matched analysis of questionnaire responses before and after intervention was done to determine the impact of the intervention. Results: Respondents were more confident in dealing with patient queries around familial breast cancer risk than those around bowel cancer. This was inconsistent with the ability to correctly assign familial risk, with 48% incorrectly assigning a high-risk categorisation to a low-risk breast cancer scenario. Respondents who had taken part in the intervention reported more confidence in dealing with issues related to the management of patient queries around bowel cancer. Following intervention, participants were more likely to report feeling confident in knowing the relevant family history to collect (72.4% of respondents from participating practices compared to 56.1% from non-participating practices; OR 2.39, p = 0.02, 95% CI 1.14–5.00) and in making a basic assessment of risk (72.4% compared to 38.9%; OR 3.65, p = 0.01, 95% CI 1.38–9.61). Conclusions: Providing genetic educational outreach has a positive impact upon how confident primary care staff feel in dealing with patient queries over familial cancers, particularly in relation to bowel cancer. Further research is needed to explore the impact of providing this service on other relevant outcomes such as appropriateness of referrals to genetic services.
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.