BACKGROUND With the development of percutaneous coronary intervention(PCI),the number of interventional procedures without implantation,such as bioresorbable stents(BRS)and drug-coated balloons,has increased annually....BACKGROUND With the development of percutaneous coronary intervention(PCI),the number of interventional procedures without implantation,such as bioresorbable stents(BRS)and drug-coated balloons,has increased annually.Metal drug-eluting stent unloading is one of the most common clinical complications.Comparatively,BRS detachment is more concealed and harmful,but has yet to be reported in clinical research.In this study,we report a case of BRS unloading and successful rescue.This is a case of a 59-year-old male with the following medical history:“Type 2 diabetes mellitus”for 2 years,maintained with metformin extended-release tablets,1 g PO BID;“hypertension”for 20 years,with long-term use of metoprolol sustained-release tablets,47.5 mg PO QD;“hyperlipidemia”for 20 years,without regular medication.He was admitted to the emergency department of our hospital due to intermittent chest pain lasting 18 hours,on February 20,2022 at 15:35.Electrocardiogram results showed sinus rhythm,ST-segment elevation in leads I and avL,and poor R-wave progression in leads V1–3.High-sensitivity troponin I level was 4.59 ng/mL,indicating an acute high lateral wall myocardial infarction.The patient’s family requested treatment with BRS,without implanta-tion.During PCI,the BRS became unloaded but was successfully rescued.The patient was followed up for 2 years;he had no episodes of angina pectoris and was in generally good condition.CONCLUSION We describe a case of a 59-year-old male experienced BRS unloading and successful rescue.By analyzing images,the causes of BRS unloading and the treatment plan are discussed to provide insights for BRS release operations.We discuss preventive measures for BRS unloading.展开更多
目的本共识的制定旨在为肿瘤重症患者合并呼吸衰竭的临床处理中常见问题提供基于临床证据的推荐意见。方法采用人群、干预、比较和预后(Population,Intervention,Comparison,and Outcome,PICO)原则对肿瘤重症患者呼吸衰竭的诊断和处理提...目的本共识的制定旨在为肿瘤重症患者合并呼吸衰竭的临床处理中常见问题提供基于临床证据的推荐意见。方法采用人群、干预、比较和预后(Population,Intervention,Comparison,and Outcome,PICO)原则对肿瘤重症患者呼吸衰竭的诊断和处理提出6个重要临床问题,基于文献检索和证据整合形成推荐意见。采用推荐意见分级评价、制定与评估(Grading of Recommendation Assessment,Development and Evaluation,GRADE)的方法讨论每个问题并经专家组讨论后形成共识意见。结果共识专家组形成了如下推荐意见。强推荐:(1)宏基因组二代测序可能有助于临床医师快速诊断合并呼吸衰竭的肿瘤重症患者的肺部感染;(2)体外膜肺(Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation,ECMO)不作为合并急性呼吸窘迫综合征的肿瘤重症患者常规挽救方案,多学科会诊后高选择性患者可能受益于ECMO治疗;(3)与标准化疗相比,免疫检查点抑制剂治疗增加肿瘤患者肺毒性的发生率;(4)接受机械通气的肿瘤患者如预计通气时间超过14天,早期气管切开可能使患者获益;(5)高流量氧疗和无创通气可以作为肿瘤合并呼吸衰竭的重症患者的一线氧疗方案。弱推荐:(6)对于癌肿压迫所致呼吸衰竭的肿瘤重症患者,如多学科会诊后考虑肿瘤对于药物潜在敏感,可采用紧急化疗作为挽救治疗。结论基于已有证据形成的推荐意见可指导肿瘤合并呼吸衰竭患者的诊断和治疗并改善预后。展开更多
Background A simple measurement of central venous pressure(CVP)-mean by the digital monitor display has become increasingly popular.However,the agreement between CVP-mean and CVP-end(a standard method of CVP measureme...Background A simple measurement of central venous pressure(CVP)-mean by the digital monitor display has become increasingly popular.However,the agreement between CVP-mean and CVP-end(a standard method of CVP measurement by analyzing the waveform at end-expiration)is not well determined.This study was designed to identify the relationship between CVP-mean and CVP-end in critically ill patients and to introduce a new parameter of CVP amplitude(ΔCVP=CVPmax-CVPmin)during the respiratory period to identify the agreement/disagreement between CVP-mean and CVP-end.Methods In total,291 patients were included in the study.CVP-mean and CVP-end were obtained simultaneously from each patient.CVP measurement difference(|CVP-mean-CVP-end|)was defined as the difference between CVP-mean and CVP-end.TheΔCVP was calculated as the difference between the peak(CVPmax)and the nadir value(CVPmin)during the respiratory cycle,which was automatically recorded on the monitor screen.Subjects with|CVP-mean-CVP-end|≥2 mm Hg were divided into the inconsistent group,while subjects with|CVP-mean-CVP-end|2 mm Hg were divided into the consistent group.ResultsΔCVP was significantly higher in the inconsistent group[7.17(2.77)vs.5.24(2.18),P0.001]than that in the consistent group.There was a significantly positive relationship betweenΔCVP and|CVP-mean-CVP-end|(r=0.283,P 0.0001).Bland-Altman plot showed the bias was-0.61 mm Hg with a wide 95%limit of agreement(-3.34,2.10)of CVP-end and CVP-mean.The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves(AUC)ofΔCVP for predicting|CVP-mean-CVP-end|≥2 mm Hg was 0.709.With a high diagnostic specificity,usingΔCVP3 to detect|CVP-mean-CVP-end|lower than 2mm Hg(consistent measurement)resulted in a sensitivity of 22.37%and a specificity of 93.06%.UsingΔCVP8 to detect|CVP-mean-CVPend|8 mm Hg(inconsistent measurement)resulted in a sensitivity of 31.94%and a specificity of 91.32%.Conclusions CVP-end and CVP-mean have statistical discrepancies in specific clinical scenarios.ΔCVP during the respiratory period is related to the variation of the two CVP methods.A highΔCVP indicates a poor agreement between these two methods,whereas a lowΔCVP indicates a good agreement between these two methods.展开更多
基金Supported by Health Commission of Hunan Province,No.202203014389Chinese Medicine Research Project of Hunan Province,No.A2023051the Natural Science Foundation of Hunan Province,No.2024JJ9414.
文摘BACKGROUND With the development of percutaneous coronary intervention(PCI),the number of interventional procedures without implantation,such as bioresorbable stents(BRS)and drug-coated balloons,has increased annually.Metal drug-eluting stent unloading is one of the most common clinical complications.Comparatively,BRS detachment is more concealed and harmful,but has yet to be reported in clinical research.In this study,we report a case of BRS unloading and successful rescue.This is a case of a 59-year-old male with the following medical history:“Type 2 diabetes mellitus”for 2 years,maintained with metformin extended-release tablets,1 g PO BID;“hypertension”for 20 years,with long-term use of metoprolol sustained-release tablets,47.5 mg PO QD;“hyperlipidemia”for 20 years,without regular medication.He was admitted to the emergency department of our hospital due to intermittent chest pain lasting 18 hours,on February 20,2022 at 15:35.Electrocardiogram results showed sinus rhythm,ST-segment elevation in leads I and avL,and poor R-wave progression in leads V1–3.High-sensitivity troponin I level was 4.59 ng/mL,indicating an acute high lateral wall myocardial infarction.The patient’s family requested treatment with BRS,without implanta-tion.During PCI,the BRS became unloaded but was successfully rescued.The patient was followed up for 2 years;he had no episodes of angina pectoris and was in generally good condition.CONCLUSION We describe a case of a 59-year-old male experienced BRS unloading and successful rescue.By analyzing images,the causes of BRS unloading and the treatment plan are discussed to provide insights for BRS release operations.We discuss preventive measures for BRS unloading.
文摘目的本共识的制定旨在为肿瘤重症患者合并呼吸衰竭的临床处理中常见问题提供基于临床证据的推荐意见。方法采用人群、干预、比较和预后(Population,Intervention,Comparison,and Outcome,PICO)原则对肿瘤重症患者呼吸衰竭的诊断和处理提出6个重要临床问题,基于文献检索和证据整合形成推荐意见。采用推荐意见分级评价、制定与评估(Grading of Recommendation Assessment,Development and Evaluation,GRADE)的方法讨论每个问题并经专家组讨论后形成共识意见。结果共识专家组形成了如下推荐意见。强推荐:(1)宏基因组二代测序可能有助于临床医师快速诊断合并呼吸衰竭的肿瘤重症患者的肺部感染;(2)体外膜肺(Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation,ECMO)不作为合并急性呼吸窘迫综合征的肿瘤重症患者常规挽救方案,多学科会诊后高选择性患者可能受益于ECMO治疗;(3)与标准化疗相比,免疫检查点抑制剂治疗增加肿瘤患者肺毒性的发生率;(4)接受机械通气的肿瘤患者如预计通气时间超过14天,早期气管切开可能使患者获益;(5)高流量氧疗和无创通气可以作为肿瘤合并呼吸衰竭的重症患者的一线氧疗方案。弱推荐:(6)对于癌肿压迫所致呼吸衰竭的肿瘤重症患者,如多学科会诊后考虑肿瘤对于药物潜在敏感,可采用紧急化疗作为挽救治疗。结论基于已有证据形成的推荐意见可指导肿瘤合并呼吸衰竭患者的诊断和治疗并改善预后。
基金Supported by the National High-Level Hospital Clinical Research Funding(2022-PUMCH-B-115,2022-PUMCH-D-005).
文摘Background A simple measurement of central venous pressure(CVP)-mean by the digital monitor display has become increasingly popular.However,the agreement between CVP-mean and CVP-end(a standard method of CVP measurement by analyzing the waveform at end-expiration)is not well determined.This study was designed to identify the relationship between CVP-mean and CVP-end in critically ill patients and to introduce a new parameter of CVP amplitude(ΔCVP=CVPmax-CVPmin)during the respiratory period to identify the agreement/disagreement between CVP-mean and CVP-end.Methods In total,291 patients were included in the study.CVP-mean and CVP-end were obtained simultaneously from each patient.CVP measurement difference(|CVP-mean-CVP-end|)was defined as the difference between CVP-mean and CVP-end.TheΔCVP was calculated as the difference between the peak(CVPmax)and the nadir value(CVPmin)during the respiratory cycle,which was automatically recorded on the monitor screen.Subjects with|CVP-mean-CVP-end|≥2 mm Hg were divided into the inconsistent group,while subjects with|CVP-mean-CVP-end|2 mm Hg were divided into the consistent group.ResultsΔCVP was significantly higher in the inconsistent group[7.17(2.77)vs.5.24(2.18),P0.001]than that in the consistent group.There was a significantly positive relationship betweenΔCVP and|CVP-mean-CVP-end|(r=0.283,P 0.0001).Bland-Altman plot showed the bias was-0.61 mm Hg with a wide 95%limit of agreement(-3.34,2.10)of CVP-end and CVP-mean.The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves(AUC)ofΔCVP for predicting|CVP-mean-CVP-end|≥2 mm Hg was 0.709.With a high diagnostic specificity,usingΔCVP3 to detect|CVP-mean-CVP-end|lower than 2mm Hg(consistent measurement)resulted in a sensitivity of 22.37%and a specificity of 93.06%.UsingΔCVP8 to detect|CVP-mean-CVPend|8 mm Hg(inconsistent measurement)resulted in a sensitivity of 31.94%and a specificity of 91.32%.Conclusions CVP-end and CVP-mean have statistical discrepancies in specific clinical scenarios.ΔCVP during the respiratory period is related to the variation of the two CVP methods.A highΔCVP indicates a poor agreement between these two methods,whereas a lowΔCVP indicates a good agreement between these two methods.
