| 1. |
- Tabiri, S, et al.
(författare)
-
- 2021
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 2. |
- Bravo, L, et al.
(författare)
-
- 2021
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Glasbey, JC, et al.
(författare)
-
- 2021
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Feldheiser, A., et al.
(författare)
-
Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) for gastrointestinal surgery, part 2 : consensus statement for anaesthesia practice
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica. - : Wiley-Blackwell. - 0001-5172 .- 1399-6576. ; 60:3, s. 289-334
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: The present interdisciplinary consensus review proposes clinical considerations and recommendations for anaesthetic practice in patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery with an Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) programme.Methods: Studies were selected with particular attention being paid to meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials and large prospective cohort studies. For each item of the perioperative treatment pathway, available English-language literature was examined and reviewed. The group reached a consensus recommendation after critical appraisal of the literature.Results: This consensus statement demonstrates that anaesthesiologists control several preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative ERAS elements. Further research is needed to verify the strength of these recommendations.Conclusions: Based on the evidence available for each element of perioperative care pathways, the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS ((R))) Society presents a comprehensive consensus review, clinical considerations and recommendations for anaesthesia care in patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery within an ERAS programme. This unified protocol facilitates involvement of anaesthesiologists in the implementation of the ERAS programmes and allows for comparison between centres and it eventually might facilitate the design of multi-institutional prospective and adequately powered randomized trials.
|
|
| 10. |
- Ahn, J. M., et al.
(författare)
-
Microcirculatory Resistance Predicts Allograft Rejection and Cardiac Events After Heart Transplantation
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Journal of the American College of Cardiology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0735-1097. ; 78:24, s. 2425-2435
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Single-center data suggest that the index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR) measured early after heart transplantation predicts subsequent acute rejection. OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to validate whether IMR measured early after transplantation can predict subsequent acute rejection and long-term outcome in a large multicenter cohort. METHODS: From 5 international cohorts, 237 patients who underwent IMR measurement early after transplantation were enrolled. The primary outcome was acute allograft rejection (AAR) within 1 year after transplantation. A key secondary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (the composite of death, re-transplantation, myocardial infarction, stroke, graft dysfunction, and readmission) at 10 years. RESULTS: IMR was measured at a median of 7 weeks (interquartile range: 3-10 weeks) post-transplantation. At 1 year, the incidence of AAR was 14.4%. IMR was associated proportionally with the risk of AAR (per increase of 1-U IMR; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02-1.06; p < 0.001). The incidence of AAR in patients with an IMR >= 18 was 23.8%, whereas the incidence of AAR in those with an IMR <18 was 6.3% (aHR: 3.93; 95% CI: 1.77-8.73; P = 0.001). At 10 years, MACE occurred in 86 (36.3%) patients. IMR was significantly associated with the risk of MACE (per increase of 1-U IMR; aHR: 1.02; 95% CI: 1.01-1.04; P = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: IMR measured early after heart transplantation is associated with subsequent AAR at 1 year and clinical events at 10 years. Early IMR measurement after transplantation identifies patients at higher risk and may guide personalized posttransplantation management. Published by Elsevier on behalf of the American College of Cardiology Foundation.
|
|
