BackgroundDespite decreasing sheath diameter, access site bleeding and vascular complications are still a major concern in transfemoral aortic valve implantation (TAVI), and may increase morbidity and even increase mortality. The aim was to compare safety of arterial closure in transfemoral TAVI with two different principles, pre-suture with ProGlide and collagen plug closure with Manta.ResultsSeventy-six patients treated with ProGlide and 75 with Manta were analysed. The endpoints were 1: access site vascular complications and 2: non-planned vascular or endovascular surgery at the puncture site. Complications occurred in 2 (2.7%) ProGlide and in 8 (10.7%) Manta cases, p = 0.047. During the learning phase there were no significant differences. In the established phase there was one event (2%) in the ProGlide group, compared to 6 endpoints (12.0%), p = 0.047, in the Manta group.Unplanned surgery or intervention was seen in two (2.7%) ProGlide and in 7 (9.3%) Manta patients, p = ns. There were no significant differences during the learning phase. In established use, endpoints occurred more frequently in patients treated with the Manta device (12%), than in patients treated with the ProGlide (2%), p = 0.047.ConclusionThe ProGlide presuture closure device was associated with significantly lower rates of vascular complications and lower rates of surgery and interventions compared to the collagen plug Manta system.Trial registrationThe data were collected from Internal quality control registry on treatment of patients with valvular heart disease with or without coronary artery disease, No 2014/17280, Oslo University Hospital, Ullevål.
Pain (cold pressor test) reduces tissue oxygen saturation in all measurement sites (except cerebral) and perfusion index. In the presence of pain, tissue oxygen saturation and perfusion index are further reduced by hypovolemia (lower body negative pressure, -60 mm Hg). Thus, pain must be considered when evaluating tissue oxygen saturation and perfusion index as markers of hypovolemia in trauma patients.
The arterial pressure-based variables had moderate predictive values before valve replacement, but it predicted fluid responsiveness well postoperatively. Pleth variability index did not predict fluid responsiveness preoperatively, and it had a moderate predictive value postoperatively. These results indicate that arterial pressure-based dynamic variables have limited potential to guide fluid therapy in patients with aortic stenosis. Their ability to guide fluid therapy after aortic valve replacement seems better.
Aim: To compare the outcomes in patients with refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) fulfilling the criteria for extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ECPR) before and after implementation of an ECPR protocol, whether the patient received ECPR or not. Methods:We compared cardiac arrest registry data before (2014À2015) and after (2016À2019) implementation of the ECPR protocol. The ECPR criteria were presumed cardiac origin, witnessed arrest with ventricular fibrillation, bystander CPR, age 18À65, advanced life support (ALS) within 15 min and ALS > 10 min without return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). The primary outcome was 30-day survival; the secondary outcomes were sustained ROSC, neurological outcome and the proportion of patients transported with ongoing ALS.Results: There were 1086 and 3135 patients in the pre-and post-implementation sample; 48 (4%) and 100 (3%) met the ECPR criteria, respectively. Of these, 21 (44%) vs. 37 (37%) were alive after 30 days, p = 0.4, and 30 (63%) vs. 50 (50%) achieved sustained ROSC, p = 0.2. All survivors in the preimplementation sample had cerebral performance category 1À2 vs. 30 (81%) in the post-implementation sample, p = 0.03. Of the patients fulfilling the ECPR criteria, 7 (15%) and 26 (26%), p = 0.1, were transported with ongoing ALS in the pre-and post-implementation sample, respectively.Conclusions: There were no differences in 30-day survival or prehospital ROSC in patients with refractory OHCA before and after initiation of an ECPR protocol.
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 © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.