Effectiveness and Adverse Events of Early Laparoscopic Therapy versus Conservative Treatment for Tubo-Ovarian or Pelvic Abscess: A Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study

2019 ◽  
Vol 84 (4) ◽  
pp. 334-342 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lei Chu ◽  
Hanbo Ma ◽  
Junhua Liang ◽  
Li Li ◽  
Aiqun Shen ◽  
...  
Cells ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 441
Author(s):  
Bas J. M. Peters ◽  
Anish Bhatoe ◽  
Adriane D. M. Vorselaars ◽  
Marcel Veltkamp

The effect of switching from originator infliximab to biosimilar infliximab in patients with sarcoidosis is unknown. The objective of this study is to investigate the effect of switching from Remicade® or Inflectra® to Flixabi® in patients with severe refractory sarcoidosis. This single center retrospective cohort study was performed at St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, The Netherlands. All patients diagnosed with severe refractory sarcoidosis receiving Remicade® or Inflectra® switched to Flixabi®. The primary outcome was infliximab discontinuation within 6 months of switching. Secondary endpoints included adverse events and loss of clinical, functional, or inflammatory response. Out of 86 patients who switched to Flixabi®, 79 patients had complete data. None of the 79 patients discontinued infliximab during the first 6 months after switching. Five patients reported an adverse event related to Flixabi® treatment. We found no change from baseline in FVC, FEV1, DLCOc, 6MWT, and infliximab trough levels 26 weeks after switching. An improvement in physical functioning of 7.3 ± 13.4 points (p = 0.002) with RAND/SF36 and in biomarker sIL-2R (−475.58 ± 1452.39; p = 0.005) was observed. Switching from originator infliximab Remicade® or biosimilar infliximab Inflectra® to biosimilar infliximab Flixabi® did not result in treatment discontinuation or loss of clinical/functional/inflammatory remission.


2021 ◽  
pp. 039139882110160
Author(s):  
Kelsey L Browder ◽  
Ayesha Ather ◽  
Komal A Pandya

The objective of this study was to determine if propofol administration to veno-venous (VV) extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) patients was associated with more incidents of oxygenator failure when compared to patients who did not receive propofol. This was a single center, retrospective cohort study. The primary outcome of the study is oxygenator exchanges per ECMO day in patients who received propofol versus those who did not receive propofol. Patients were 18 years or older on VV-ECMO support between January 1, 2015 and January 31, 2018. Patients were excluded if they required ECMO support for less than 48 h or greater than 21 days. There were five patients in the propofol arm that required oxygenator exchanges and seven patients in the control arm. The total number of oxygenator exchanges per ECMO day was not significantly different between groups ( p = 0.50). When comparing those who required an oxygenator exchange and those who did not, there was no difference in the cumulative dose of propofol received per ECMO hour (0.64 mg/kg/h vs 0.96 mg/kg/h; p = 0.16). Propofol use in patients on VV-ECMO does not appear to increase the number of oxygenator exchanges.


2019 ◽  
Vol 09 (01) ◽  
pp. 045-050
Author(s):  
Alicia May Lim ◽  
Siew Le Chong ◽  
Yong Hong Ng ◽  
Yoke Hwee Chan ◽  
Jan Hau Lee

AbstractMost children who present with hypertensive crisis have a secondary cause for hypertension. This study describes the epidemiology and management of children with hypertensive crisis. A retrospective cohort study was done in a tertiary pediatric hospital from 2009 to 2015. Thirty-seven patients were treated for hypertensive crisis. Twelve (32.4%) patients were treated for hypertensive emergency. The majority of our patients (33 [89.1%]) had a secondary cause of hypertension. The most common identifiable cause of hypertension was a renal pathology (18/37 [48.6%]). Oral nifedipine (23 [62.1%]) was the most frequently used antihypertensive, followed by intravenous labetalol (8 [21.6%]). There were no mortalities or morbidities. Hypertensive crisis in children is likely secondary in nature. Oral nifedipine and intravenous labetalol are both effective treatments.


2010 ◽  
Vol 22 (5) ◽  
pp. 380-385 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mondher Letaief ◽  
Sana El Mhamdi ◽  
Riham El-Asady ◽  
Sameen Siddiqi ◽  
Ahmed Abdullatif

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document